Headers

 

Driving Case Files / Attachments

 

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.

1 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.27.2013_RE RE Simon Cordell Court case

27/02/2013

/ Page Numbers: 1,2

 

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.

1 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.27.2013_RE RE Simon Cordell Court case

27/02/2013

/ Page Numbers: 1,2

1,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:22 '

To: gl-thamesmcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:19

To: gl-thames.mcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

2,

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

2.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 2

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.06.2013_Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the c

06/05/2013

/ Page Numbers: 3,4,5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27

 

 

2.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 2

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.06.2013_Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the c

06/05/2013

/ Page Numbers: 3,4,5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27

--

3,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   06 May 2013 17:26

To: gl-thamesmcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Cc: eastgroupcpo@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case

Attachments: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

RE: Simon Cordell Court case

RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case.

RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

RE: Simon Cordell Court case

RE: Simon Cordell Court case; S Cordell Docs._GE_.pdf

Dear Sir or Madam

I have emailed your court on a number of occasions regarding my conviction and sentence for no insurance. I am making this request to have my case listed in order that I can do the following: -

1. Application to set aside the conviction

2. Re-open the case

Application to set aside the conviction: -

On 22nd July 2012 I was stopped and given a producer by the police as they did not believe that I held a valid policy of insurance. I attended the police station and I was advised that my case would be going to court and I would be summonsed in due course. I never received any summons in relation to this matter and I only became aware that the case had been dealt with in my absence when I received a letter from the DVLA advising me that I had to send in my driving licence. I disputed with the DVLA the points, but I was given an ultimatum that if I did not send in my licence it would be revoked. I therefore had no choice but to send in my licence. I immediately contacted the Court by telephone, and I was advised to send an email. I sent in a number of emails and I have been given a number of emails, but I have not received any confirmation from the court.

I forwarded a copy of my insurance policy to the court and again this was ignored. The offence of no insurance was allegedly committed on 22nd July 2012. I had a valid policy of insurance from 23rd March 2012 and this policy was valid until 22nd February 2013. The company insuring me was Tradex Insurance Company Limited. I am the named policy holder, Mr. Simon Cordell and my policy number are L/WST/MTP/0192359.

I have points on my licence which I should not have. Can you please as a matter of urgency email me back on this matter so that I can have a date so that the conviction can be set aside and my case heard in order that I can show the court my insurance and the PLO can make the necessary enquiries. Once this has happened, I would be grateful if the court could email the DVLA to advise them that the points have been issued in error and the fine be set aside also.

This matter is urgent and is dragging on. I cannot resolve this matter until the case is listed before either a District Judge or Magistrates so I would appreciate your cooperation. I am very disappointed that you have ignored all my emails. This is causing me stress. Can you now please resolve this legal mater by listing the case for an application to set aside the conviction? I can then forward my documents to the relevant prosecuting authority.

I await hearing from you in relation to this matter and I thank you in advance for your anticipated co=operation in this matter.

Yours faithfully

Simon Cordell

4,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->S Cordell Docs._GE_.pdf

Insurance Company Ltd

Mr Simon Cordell 109, Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

03 April 2012

Dear Mr Cordell,

Policy Number: L/WST/MTP/0192359 Reference: Motor Trade Policy

We have pleasure in enclosing your policy documents.

These have been issued in accordance with your instructions however we recommend that you thoroughly check the enclosed and advise us immediately should any amendments be required.

Thank you for entrusting your business with us.

Yours sincerely,

Emma Guard (UW)

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London. E14 9GL DX551740, Isle of Dogs 5 Tel 020 7001 9200 Fax 020 7068 7730 www.tradex.com

Tradex Insurance Company Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (no. 202917)          

FSA

Registered in England and Wales no. 2983873 at Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London E14 9GL (Doc version 11.6.11)

5,

Premium Advice Note

TRADEX

Insurance Company Ltd

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

03 April 2012

 

Dear Mr Cordell,

Policyholder: Mr Simon Cordell,

Policy Number:

L/WST/MTP/0192359 - 8

Policy Type:

Road Risks

Inception Date:

23 March 2012

Reason for Issue:

Policy Adjustment

Effective Date:

23 March 2012

Parts / Sections Applicable

Premium Due

Insurance Premium Tax (6%)

Total Premium Due

Policy Total

Ł 0.00

Ł 0.00

Ł 0.00

 

Finance Charges: Document Charges: Service Charges: Total Amount Due:

Ł 0.00 Ł 0.00 Ł 0.00 Ł 0.00

Collection Method: Broker Collected

Emma Goard (UW)

Tradex Insurance Company Limited.

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London. E14 9GL DX551740, Isle of Dogs 5 Tel 020 7001 9200 Fax 020 7068 7730 www.tradex.com

Tradex Insurance Company Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (no. 202917)

Registered in England and Wales no. 2983873 at Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London E14 9GL (Doc version 1.11.11)

6,

Insurance Company Ltd

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield

EN3 7JQ

3 April 2012

Dear Mr Cordell,

Re: Your Motor Trade Policy

Policy Number: L/WST/MTP/0192359

I refer to the above-mentioned policy number and your recent communication.

I enclose a copy of the vehicles declared to Tradex and the Motor Insurance Database.

Please check the schedule of vehicles carefully to ensure all of the information is correct and if amendments are required, please advise us as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Emma Goard (UW)

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London. E14 9GL DX551740, Isle of Dogs 5 Tel 020 7001 9200 Fax 020 7068 7730 www.tradex.com

Tradex Insurance Company Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (no. 202917)

FSA

Registered in England and Wales no. 2983873 at Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London E14 9GL (Doc version 15.6.11)

7,

Motor Trade Vehicle Schedule

TRADEX

Insurance Company Ltd

Policy Number:

L/WST/MTP/0192359 Date of Issue: 03 April 2012

Policyholder:

Simon Cordell Agent: 23664 Westminster - Broadsure Direct

Occupation/Profession:

Address:

Effective: 16:53 (24Hrs) 23 March 2012

Mechanical Servicing Overhaul

Expiry: 12:00 (24Hrs) 22 February 2013

109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

Make/Model:

CC/GVW/KW/h: Reg. No: Value: YOM: Customer Loan: Security Reg: Date Added:

RENAULT CLIO RIPCURL

1149 NA57LDY Ł0 2007 No A 23-Mar-12

Security Required Codes:

A: Manufacturers Standard    B: Thatcham Cat 1 Alarm & Immobiliser      C: Tracking Device     D: Alarm, Immobiliser and Tracking Device

Reason for Issue: Policy Adjustment

Page 6 of 15

8,

Certificate of Motor Insurance

TRADEX

Insurance Company Ltd

Policy No.: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Name of Policyholder: Mr Simon Cordell

Motor Trade Business: Buying and Selling, Mechanical / Servicing / Overhauls

Description of Vehicles:

· Any vehicle owned, leased or on hire purchase to Mr Simon Cordell

· Any vehicle (mechanically propelled or otherwise) attached to a motor vehicle described in 1 for the purpose of being towed.

· Any other motor vehicle held in trust or in the custody or control of Mr Simon Cordell for the purposes of their declared motor trade business. But excluding any:

Steam driven vehicles.

Motor vehicle transporters which, inclusive of trailer(s), have a carrying capacity of more than 2 vehicles.

Vehicles owned by Directors, Partners or their Spouses and more specifically insured elsewhere.

Commercial vehicles with a gross vehicle weight in excess of 3.5 tonnes.

Coaches and Minibuses other than for sale, service, or repair.

Motorcycle. Quad Bikes.

Effective time and date of commencement for the purposes of the relevant Road Traffic Acts.

Operative Date: 16:53 (24hrs) 23 March 2012

Operative Until: 12:00 (24hrs) 22 February 2013

PERSONS ENTITLED TO DRIVE AND LIMITATIONS AS TO USE:

Name: Date of Birth: Use:     DOV:

Simon Cordell 26/01/1981 MT / SD&P Not Allowed

Provided that the person holds a licence to drive the vehicle or has held and is not disqualified from holding or obtaining such a licence. DEMONSTRATION: Demonstration of a vehicle to any other person provided that person is driving with the permission of the Policyholder and is accompanied by any driver named above who is entitled to drive for motor trade purposes.

LIMITATIONS AS TO USE:

MT: Use in connection with the declared motor trade business.

SD&P: Social Domestic and Pleasure use including journeys between the home address and the permanent place of business.

PBU: Personal Business use in connection with other additional occupation(s).

DOV: Where shown as allowed, the drivers named above may also drive any other vehicle for social domestic and pleasure purposes only provided they have the permission of the owner to do so and the vehicle is taxed, registered and insured in the owner's name.

Use by any other person provided that such person is driving with the permission of the Policyholder and is accompanied by any person entitled to drive as described above for the purpose of demonstration only.

Excluding:

1. Use for hire and reward other than in connection with the motor trade, racing, pace making, competitions, rallies, track days, trials or speed tests whether on a road, track, off-road, land prepared for such use or the Nürburgring Northcliffe and whether the event is officially organised or informally arranged.

2. Use to secure the release of any motor vehicle which has been seized by or on behalf of any government or public authority which was not the property of or in the custody or control of the Policyholder at the time of seizure.

I hereby certify Ireland, the Isle Pleasure use in

that the policy to which this Certificate relates satisfies the requirements of the relevant law applicable in Great Britain, Northern of Man, the Isle of Jersey, the Isle of Guernsey, and the Isle of Alderney. Please see reverse of Certificate for Social, Domestic and Europe.

Registered Office: Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, Isle of Dogs, London E14 9GL Registered in England, Ireland, and Wales No: 0293873

Tradex Insurance Company Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (no. 202917)

Advice to Third Parties: Nothing in this Certificate affects your right as a Third Party to make a claim.

MID Compliance Enquiries: 020 7959 7542 Windscreen Cover - Not Included

Chief Executive Officer

Tradex Insurance Company Limited

Authorised Insurers

9,

Parts / Sections Applicable

Covered / Not Covered

Premium Due

Insurance Premium Tax (6%)

Total Premium Due

Road Risks

Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Vehicles at the Trade Premises

Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Public Liability

Not Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Product Liability

Sales and Service Indemnity

Not Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Employers Liability

Not Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Goods in Transit

Not Covered

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Legal Expenses

Covered

Ł

Included

Ł

Included

Ł

Included

Totals

 

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Ł

0.00

Your premium and policy terms are based on the following activities and vehicle types. Should there be significant changes during the period of insurance you must tell us.

BUSINESS ACTIVITIES

Declared Business Activities             Vehicles Traded or Handled

Buying and Selling:

25

%

Standard Vehicles:

100

%

Importing and Exporting:

0

%

Sports Vehicles:

0

%

Sale / Repair of Salvage Vehicles:

0

%

Imported Vehicles:

0

%

Mechanical / Servicing / Overhauls / MOT:

75

%

Classic Cars:

0

%

Crash Body Repairs / Spraying:

0

%

Kit Cars / Modified Vehicles:

0

%

Sale / Fitting of Motor Accessories:

0

%

Motorcycles:

0

%

Valeting / Steam Cleaning:

0

%

American / Canadian Vehicles:

0

%

Windscreen Replacement:

0

%

Commercial Vehicles over 3.5t:

0

%

Exhaust / Tyre Replacement:

0

%

Car Transporters more than 2 Vehicles:

0

%

Recovery Agent:

0

%

Quad Bikes:

0

%

Repossession Agents:

0

%

Coaches / Minibuses:

0

%

Other:

0

%

 

 

 

 

100

%

 

100

%

No Claims Bonus is currently 6 Years protected.

Date: 03/04/2012       

Page 9 Of 15 

Policy Number: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Tradex Insurance Company Ltd Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London. E14 9GL DX551740, Isle of Dogs 5 Tel 020 7001 9200 Fax 020 7068 7730 www.tradex.com

Tradex Insurance Company Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (no. 202917)

Registered in England and Wales no. 2983873 at Victory House, 7 Selsdon Way, London E14 9GL (Doc version 1.11.11)

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

To be read in conjunction with your

Policy Booklet insurance Company Ltd

Policyholder: Simon Cordell Broker / Agent: Westminster-Broadsure Direct

Correspondence 109 Burncroft Avenue

Address: Enfield

Address: Street

EN3 7JQ

Correspondence 4th Floor Argyle Centre York

Ramsgate

Kent

CT11 9DS

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359     

Date of Issue: 03 April 2012

Reason for Issue: Policy Adjustment

Period of Insurance:

Operative From: 16:53 (24 hrs) 23 March 2012

Operative Until: 12:00 (24 hrs) 22 February 2013

10,

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder:  Simon Cordell

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

ROAD RISKS

Cover: Comprehensive

Operative Sections

Section 1: Third Party Liability

Limit of Indemnity: Third Party Death or Bodily Injury - Unlimited

Third Party Property Damage - Ł2,000,000 Section 2 - Vehicles: Road Risks A, B, C, D, E.

Limits of Indemnity:   Own Vehicles* - Ł7,500 The vehicle limits stated are the

Customer vehicles - Ł15,000  maximum indemnity payable for any

‘Includes permanently owned and stock vehicles. one vehicle or claim. They win be

automatically reinstated up to four times in any one period of insurance.

Vehicles Insured:

1. Any vehicle owned, leased or on hire purchase to the Policyholder.

2. Any vehicle (mechanically propelled or otherwise) attached to a motor vehicle described in 1 & 4 for the purposes of being towed.

3. Any other motor vehicle held in trust or in the custody or control of the Policyholder for the purposes of their declared motor trade business.

4. Personally, owned vehicles which have been declared to us for inclusion on the Motor Insurance Database.

But Excluding:

Steam driven vehicles.

Any vehicle transporter which, inclusive of trailer(s), has a carrying capacity of more than 2 vehicles.

Vehicles owned by Directors, Partners or their Spouses and more specifically insured elsewhere.

Commercial vehicles with a gross vehicle weight in excess of 3.5 tonnes.

Coaches and Minibuses other than for sale, service, or repair.

Motorcycles.

Quad Bikes.

Customer Vehicles (mechanically propelled or otherwise) attached to a motor vehicle described in 1 & 4 above for the purpose of being towed other than for cover provided under Section 1 - Third Party Liability.

EXCESS AMOUNTS:

Section 1 - Third Party Liability.

Łnil

This will not be applied where an excess has been deducted from a claim under Section 2

Section 2 - Vehicles, Road Risks A, B, C, D, E.

Ł500 or 10% of the claim whichever is the greater.

Date: 03/04/2012       

Page 10 of 15 

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

11,

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder:  Simon Cordell

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

PERSONS ENTITLED TO DRIVE

Named Driver:           

Date of Birth: 

Usage: DOV:  Personally

Owned Vehicle:

Simon Cordell 26/01/1981     

MT / SD&P     Not Covered   Covered

LIMITATIONS AS TO USE

MT:    Use in connection with the declared motor trade business.

SD&P: Social Domestic and Pleasure use including journeys between the home address and the permanent place of business.

PBU:   Personal Business use in connection with declared additional occupation(s).

DOV:  Driving Other Vehicles.

Provided that the person holds a licence to drive the vehicle or has held and is not disqualified from holding or obtaining such a licence.

This Policy Excludes:

1. Use for racing, pace making, competitions, rallies, track days, trials, or speed tests whether on a road, track, off-road, land prepared for such use or the Nürburgring Northcliffe and whether the event is officially organised or informally arranged.

2. Use to secure the release of any motor vehicle which has been seized by or on behalf of any government or public authority which was not the property of or in the custody or control of the Policyholder at the time of seizure.

Date: 03/04/2012       

Page 11 of 15 

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

12,

Date: 03/04/2012

Page 12 of 15

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder:  Simon Cordell

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

PERMANENTLY OWNED VEHICLES

Note: to comply with Motor Insurance Database (MID) requirements you must advise us immediately when you acquire or dispose of a vehicle.

Security Required       A: Manufacturers        B: Thatcham Cat 1 C: Tracking Device D: Alarm, Immobiliser

Codes: Standard

Alarm & Immobiliser and Tracking Device

Make/ Model: CC / GVW

Reg No:

YOM:

Value:

Customer Security

Date

/ KW/h: Loan:           

Req:

Added:

RENAULT CLIO RIPCURL 1149 NA57LDY 2007 Trade No A 23/03/2012

13,

Limits of Indemnity:

Ł

7,500

For any one owned vehicle. *

‘includes permanently owned and stock vehicles.

 

Ł

15,000

For any one customer vehicle.

Excess:            Excess Ł500 for each and every loss.

Endorsements Applicable to this Section: None

Storage Information

Alarmed Building:

0

%

Non-Alarmed Building:

0

%

Locked Yard Under 24hr Guard:

0

%

Locked Yard:

0

%

Open Site:

0

%

Home Address:

100

%

Date: 03/04/2012

Page 13 of 15

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder:   Simon Cordell Policy  No:      L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

EXTENSIONS TO ROAD RISKS

1. Driving Other Vehicles - Not Covered.

2. Windscreen - Not Covered.

3. Demonstration - Driving by unnamed prospective purchasers - Third Party Only Accompanied.

4. Customer Loan Vehicles - Not Covered.

5. Loss of use of customer’s vehicles - Not Covered.

6. Vehicles in the custody or control of Subcontractors - Not Covered.

VEHICLES AT THE TRADE PREMISES

Risk Address: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

Location:         Home Address

Cover: All Risks

Operative Sections

Section 2 - Vehicles: B - Trade Premises A, B, C, D & E

14,

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder:   Simon Cordell Policy No:       L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

LEGAL LIABILITIES

Declared Motor Trade Business:

Buying and Selling, Mechanical / Servicing / Overhauls /

 

MOT

Declared Wages:

Ł Not Declared

Declared Turnover:

Ł Not Declared

Date: 03/04/2012

Page 14 of 15

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

PUBLIC LIABILITY including costs and expenses: Not Requested

Limit of Indemnity:    Ł0        Any one occurrence and         unlimited in

any one period of insurance.

Excess Ł500 each and every loss for damage to third party property.

Optional extensions:

1. Extension of territorial limits. Not Requested

2. Damage to leased or rented premises. Not Requested

3. Tools of trade. Not Requested

4. Application of heat at the trade premises. Not Requested

5. Use of spray-painting equipment at the trade premises. Not Requested

6. Application of heat away from the trade premises. Not Requested

PRODUCT LIABILITY AND SALES AND SERVICE K1 .0

INDEMNITY: Not Requested

Limit(s) of Indemnity: Ł0 Any one occurrence and in all in any one period of insurance.

Excess Ł500 each and every loss for damage to third party property.

Optional extensions:

Merchantable Quality: Not Requested

Extension of territorial limits. Not Requested

Excess Ł500 each and every loss.

EMPLOYERS LIABILITY:  Not Requested

Limit of Indemnity: Ł 0 Any one occurrence.

Extensions:

Injury to working Partners/Proprietors: Not Requested

Optional Extensions:

Extension of territorial limits. Not Requested

15,

Date: 03/04/2012

Page 15 of 15

Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Motor Trade Policy Schedule

Policyholder: Simon Cordell  Policy No: L/WST/MTP/0192359

Operative Date: 23 March 2012

LEGAL EXPENSES

Operative Clauses:

1: Uninsured Loss Recovery.

2: Personal Injury.

3: Motoring Prosecutions.

4: Contract.

Indemnity limits applicable are shown in your policy booklet.

16,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case message

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:58:23

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

17,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case message

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks Mr Simon Cordell

18,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _001.msg

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:58:23

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk  

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

19,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _001.msg

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

20,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case message

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

To: gl-thames.mcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:19:08

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk 

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To:  gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

21,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case message

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

22,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _001.msg

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

To: gl-thamesmcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:22:08

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:19

To: gl-thames.mcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London

23,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _001.msg

N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

24,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _002.msg

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

To: gl-thamesmdist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:56:42

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

25,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _002.msg

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

26,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE_ Simon Cordell Court case _003.msg

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

To: gl-thamesmcenq@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Sent: 27 February 2013 12:54:35

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

Hello

Again, I am writing to get the case below reopened, I have emailed as you can see below, and I still have heard nothing about this case. After a call that was made today, I have been given a next email to send this email to in the hope that it can be dealt with.

Please read the below emails and can you please reply to say you have got this email.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 January 2013 13:20

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I sent an email on the 21/12/2012 about a case below, I have not heard anything about this email. Please can you confirm you have got the email with a reply to this email so that I know this matter is being looked into.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 December 2012 16:47

To: gl-thames.mclist@hmcts.gsl.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Court case

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to the court about a case that was heard about no insurance which the outcome was 6 points on my driving licence and a Ł700 fine.

My Name and address are below

Mr Simon Cordell 23 Byron terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

The problem I have with this is yes I was pulled up by the police and was asked to bring my insurance to a police station which I did do, but it seem the police had given me the wrong form so the police station would not accept me to give them my insurance documents and said it would need to go to court, I have never heard anything about this until I got a letter from DVLA saying I had to send my driving licence back to them, I called DVLA to be told that there was a court case which was heard and that I been given 6 points so needed to send my driving licence to them to get these points added,

I explained to them that I did not know about any court date and that I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day the police pulled me over.

27,

Wrongful conviction and request to set aside the conviction and re-open the case->RE-Simon-Cordell-Court-case-003.msg

DVLA give me the court information to contract the court which I did and was told I need to put in that I did not know about the court date. I called Enfield court and was told that I need to write a letter to them which I have done but as of today's date 21/12/2012 I have not heard anything back from them.

Today 21/12/2012 I got a next letter from DVLA saying that my driving licence was going to be revoked on the 22/12/2012 again I made a call to them which they have put a next 28 days onto the date that they will revoke my driving licence, I have also made a next call to the court and it seems I was given the wrong information and it should have asked for the case to be reopened which I am doing now by send you this email.

Please could you reopen the case so that I can indeed show the court I do in fact have insurance to have been driving on the date I was pulled by the police, and as I said on the phone to the court person I speak to today I did not know about any dates for court before I got the letter from DVLA.

I will enclose in this email my insurance documents so you can see in fact I was insurance, and could you please send me a new date to go to court to prove this.

Many Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 3

joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_07.24.2013_re open matter

24/07/2013

/ Page Numbers: 28

 

 

3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 3

joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_07.24.2013_re open matter

24/07/2013

/ Page Numbers: 28

--

28,

From: Miller, Joanne

joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 24 July 2013 11:48

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: re open matter

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your email of today in relation to your case being re-opened. I have checked our system and have seen that the matter was re listed on the 22.07.13 and on that date the conviction and sentence that was imposed on the 14.11.12 has been set aside and the endorsement on your driving licence will be removed, also any financial penalty imposed will be removed and no money will be owed my you.

Hope this information helps you.

Joanne Miccer

East London Magistrates' Court Thames, Stratford and Waltham Forest Email joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 4

joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_07.24.2013_RE re open matter

24/07/2013

/ Page Numbers: 29,30

 

 

4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 4

joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_07.24.2013_RE re open matter

24/07/2013

/ Page Numbers: 29,30

--

29,

From: Miller, Joanne

joanne.miner@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 24 July 2013 12:33

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: re open matter

Mr Cordell

There are some cases where the person involved in the re-opening matter does not need to attend court but in all cases people should be informed of the date of hearing, not sure this was not done in this case, but as long as the outcome was right for you, I am pleased to hear that.

regards

Joanne Miccer

East London Magistrates' Court Thames, Stratford and Waltham Forest Email joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 24 July 2013 12:27

To: Miller, Joanne

Subject: RE: re open matter

Dear Miller, Joanne

Thank you for the reply in this matter we were not aware the case had been listed for the 22/07/2013, But the outcome the court has made is correct.

Once again thank you for the update in this matter.

Mr. Simon Cordell

From: Miller, Joanne

mailto: joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 24 July 2013 11:48

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: re open matter

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your email of today in relation to your case being re-opened. I have checked our system and have seen that the matter was re listed on the 22.07.13 and on that date the conviction and sentence that was imposed on the 14.11.12 has been set aside and the endorsement on your driving licence will be removed, also any financial penalty imposed will be removed and no money will be owed my you.

Hope this information helps you.

Joanne Miccer

East London Magistrates' Court Thames, Stratford and Waltham Forest Email joanne.miller@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

30,

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation’s IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

5.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 5

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.15.2013_FW RE Simon Cordell

15/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 31,32

 

 

5.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 5

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.15.2013_FW RE Simon Cordell

15/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 31,32

--

31,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:57

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Van-reciept-10-11-2013.jpg

Dear martin

After a next call and talking to oily he asked me to send over the receipt of me buying the van please see attached scan. I am waiting for the new logbook to come from DVLA.

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:07

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Martin

Today the 15/11/13 I made a call to be able to speak to you with regard to what happened yesterday the 14/11/2013 with the police. I have talked to Oilly today and he asked me to write this email to you as they are thinking of closing my insurance policy.

Yesterday I went for a meeting with the owner of a night club for a future job position the meeting was set for 14.00 hours.

I drove down for my meeting and got there at around 13.00 hours there were some police at the road side doing stops on cars etc, as I drove pass and pulled over to park by the night club, my friend who was with me got out of the van to get some drinks and food while I waited in the van, as I got to the club early for my meeting.

The police that were doing the stops came up to me, they told me they wanted to do some checks on the van I was sitting in, I asked why, and they told me under the road traffic act.

I then passed the police my insurance policy for them to go over, the police officer also asked me why I had stopped there.

I explained to him I had a meeting in the night club that we were outside, as it was due to open to the public in 1-month time to secure my future position there. While I was there, I was also planning on asking if there were any painting jobs, I explained all this to the police officer I was talking to.

The police looked inside the van and clearly saw it was empty and that there were also no signs on the van showing it to be a company van. But the police officer was still unhappy. He talked to yourselves as the insurance company on the phone and was told I was not insured, at what point I called you myself as my insurance company as I knew I was insured. I explained the situation to yourselves to be told I was covered for commuting to work, social and domestic, as well as motor trade, but not for carriage of goods for a company, which did not matter as my van was empty and still is whilst being in the police impound.

I am putting in a complaint to the independent complaints commission in regard to the unlawful seizure of my vehicle.

Further to this would it please be possible to find out the status of my insurance policy and the reasons as to why I have been told you are in the process of closing my policy.

Yours sincerely

Mr Simon Cordell

32,

 

 

 

 

 

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 6

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.22.2013_RE RE Simon Cordell _001

22/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 33,34,35,36,37,38,39

 

6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 6

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.22.2013_RE RE Simon Cordell _001

22/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 33,34,35,36,37,38,39

--

33,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 14:24

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Police-Meno.pdf; Police complaint.doc; CX52JRZ-Mid-database.png

Hello Martin

After the call you made today and talked to myself Miss Lorraine Cordell, I am sending over the information you asked for. I do feel also that KMG asking to speak to the police office is in breach of my data protection, but I will be willing to write and allow them to do this.

As I said to KMG yesterday on a phone that was made to them when I talked to Kelly Tilley I have not been found guilty at a court of law for not having no insurance and it is for a court of law to find me guilty not a police officer who thinks I done something when I have not.

Even if KGM does speak to the police office he will still say what he feels and that is not a fact that I am guilty of anything. To be found guilty it would have to be done in front of a judge.

Also Martin as you said on the phone today when you in fact talked to the police on that day not once did they say I had anything in my van that would void my insurance, and in fact I believe at this stage if the police did in fact have proof they would have said to you that my van was full of things which is not the case.

I would like to also know if my insurance is going to carry on while this matter is addressed or if it will be closed down on the 27/11/2013 as the letter says that KGM have sent me. And if KMG is going to close down my policy I would like full written conditions of what part of my policy I have broken.

As for the letter of complain that will be going to the police Simon still has not fully read over it to make sure there is no errors or anything else that needs adding but it does go into details as to what went on, it is only for use by yourself and KGM to read only.

Also as I said on the phone to you today the police are also telling me that the 3 times that my vehicles were seized and I had to pay for them to be taken out of the compound, I will need to claim this back from my insurance company as they had not done their job and put them on the database so they are at fault not the police.

You said to me today that KGM are looking into this as they are on the database and it should show up to the police that I am in fact insured. This has not been the case for me and I have suffered badly due to this and this is the reason I have to carry my insurance policy at all times so when I get pulled over by the police I can show them my documents, as the police say it does not show up as I am insured, this is also the reason the insurance company have had so many calls from the police to asked if I am insured or not since my policy started.

Could you please send me proof that the vehicles where on the database so I can put the claim in to the police to get my money back for the times my vehicles were seized. As at this stage I do not want to have to put a freedom of information act into yourselves or the police to the amount of times that the police have in fact had to call my insurance company to see if I was insured due to the police saying I was not insured..

I have always been very happy with Broadsure Direct that is why I have still use them and would like my insurance to carry on under them.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:57

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Hi Martin

Can you let me know by email if I am going to still have insurance as from the 27/11/2013 please, I got a letter saying my insurance will be closed from the 27/11/2013, and I cannot see the reason for this as I have done nothing wrong.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

34,

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:57

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear martin

After a next call and talking to oily he asked me to send over the receipt of me buying the van please see attached scan. I am waiting for the new logbook to come from DVLA.

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:07

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Martin

Today the 15/11/13 I made a call to be able to speak to you with regard to what happened yesterday the 14/11/2013 with the police. I have talked to Oilly today and he asked me to write this email to you as they are thinking of closing my insurance policy.

Yesterday I went for a meeting with the owner of a night club for a future job position the meeting was set for 14.00 hours.

I drove down for my meeting and got there at around 13.00 hours there were some police at the road side doing stops on cars etc, as I drove pass and pulled over to park by the night club, my friend who was with me got out of the van to get some drinks and food while I waited in the van, as I got to the club early for my meeting.

The police that were doing the stops came up to me, they told me they wanted to do some checks on the van I was sitting in, I asked why, and they told me under the road traffic act.

I then passed the police my insurance policy for them to go over, the police officer also asked me why I had stopped there.

I explained to him I had a meeting in the night club that we were outside, as it was due to open to the public in 1-month time to secure my future position there. While I was there, I was also planning on asking if there were any painting jobs, I explained all this to the police officer I was talking to.

The police looked inside the van and clearly saw it was empty and that there were also no signs on the van showing it to be a company van. But the police officer was still unhappy. He talked to yourselves as the insurance company on the phone and was told I was not insured, at what point I called you myself as my insurance company as I knew I was insured. I explained the situation to yourselves to be told I was covered for commuting to work, social and domestic, as well as motor trade, but not for carriage of goods for a company, which did not matter as my van was empty and still is whilst being in the police impound.

I am putting in a complaint to the independent complaints commission in regard to the unlawful seizure of my vehicle.

Further to this would it please be possible to find out the status of my insurance policy and the reasons as to why I have been told you are in the process of closing my policy.

Yours sincerely

Mr Simon Cordell

35,

36,

RE: RE: Simon Cordell ->Police complaint.doc

I am writing this complaint about the 14/10/2013 when I was going to a meeting with an owner of a night club for a future job position the meeting was set for 14.00 hours at Brixton Hill SW2 1QZ.

When I got to Brixton Hill SW2 1QZ there were some police on the roadside doing some stops of cars etc, I drove pass them and parked up just in front of them.

My friend who was with me got out of my van and went to buy some drinks and food while I waited in the van.

Then next thing a police officer come to my van and said to me he waited to do some checks on my van I asked him the reason for this the police officer replied under the road traffic act he also asked me the reason why I had stopped there as I was passing him my insurance documents.

I explained to him I had a meeting in the night club that we were outside, as it was due to open to the public in 1-month time to secure my future position there. While I was there, I was also planning on asking if there were any painting jobs, I explained all this to the police officer I was talking to.

The police officer made a call to my insurance company and he then replied to me they are saying that I was not insured, at this I was very shocked and started to make a call to my Mother to ask her to call my insurance company to speak about why they was saying I was not insurance. She is fact talked to a person called Martin who took Simons Number and said he would call him. Martin did call and I explained to him what was going on and he told me I was insured and also talked to the police office and told him that I was insured. The police talked on the phone more than once and was told I was in fact insured to drive my van.

The police officer was still not happy and now told me that I was using my Van for work which I told him that was not the case and that I was here for a meeting, I told the police officer to look in my van and see if there were any working tools inside it. The police officer saw this was not the case as the van was empty.

By this time a next police officer had come to the other police officer and I started to talk to him I explained what was going on and what the other officer was saying that I was using my Van to work in, which was not the case and I told him also to look in the van and see if there were any working tools in there. I even showed him a business card I had got made up to give out to people in the hope of work. Which the police officer put in his own wallet to keep for himself.

At this the other officer overheard me and the other officer talking about the business card and then used this to say that I had in fact been working and this is why he was going to seize my van. I told him that where is the print bushes and print in my van as this is what was on the business card it was a printer’s business card. The officer then said why have you got paint of your jeans I told him that I did not have money to buy new jeans and that was why I was looking for work to try and better myself. I also told the office to go into the property where I was due to go for a meeting and ask them if I was working there. He refused to do this. I still feel as if there is a big issue here I am allowed to drive to a meeting and park there as long as I am not carrying goods for a company which I was not and that could clearly be seen my van was empty so how anyone can think I am doing anything wrong is beyond me.

The police officer did not want to hear anything I had to say and was looking for any reason from the start to arrest me or seize my van this was his aim from the start.

It did not matter that the insurance company told him I was insured, the only thing I would not be insured for were if I was to use my van as a tool for carriage of goods for any company which was clearly not the case as my van was empty.

37,

I am insured to go back and forward to any place of work as my insurance covers for social domestic and pleasure and commuting as well as motor trade.

The police officer for some reason would not hear I was insured and just at this time wanted to seize my Van. He was asking me to sign a ticket in order to give me 6 points on my licence and a Ł300 fine and for my van to be seized. Which I did understand what he was asking me to do as this has not happened to me only this time but a further 2 times when the police on a Sunday on both other times seized my vehicles due to them not being able to call my insurance company. And it is showing on the database I was not insured.

I refused to sign as I knew I was insured. I told the police officer to arrest me and that we could get this sorted at the police station, due to me refusing to sign the ticket the police officer arrested me as I asked him to do.

All this time I was on the phone to my mother and she heard all of what was going on. PC Smith spoke to my mum also on the phone two times as well, my mother also asked PC smith was there anything in my Van and PC Smith told her not that the van was empty. My mother also called the insurance company and talked to them they also told her I was insured, and they could not understand why the police was doing this.

I was taken to Southwark police station they were still trying to force me to sign the ticket which I did not want to do, they told me if I did not sign then they would not bail me and take me to court the next morning, I told them to do this I was willing to stay in the police cells till the next day when this could be heard by a judge as I knew I was not in the wrong, they changed their mind and told this would not happen and they wanted me out of the police station. They forced me to sign the ticket and then made me leave the police station,

While waiting outside by reception in the police station I asked to speak to an inspector the police officer who had come to drive me out of Southwark told me if I did not leave with them now then I would have to make my own way or I would break my bail conditions of not being in Southwark, I was on the phone to my mum and she told me she was going to get off the phone and call my solicitors, which she did, my solicitors told my mum to tell me to wait and talk to an inspector and that due to the police taking me to Southwark I would not be breaking my bail conditions as the police had taken me there.

I waited to see an inspector and talked to him, he said due to the police being from Brixton there was very little he could do, but he would get an inspector from Brixton to call me so I could put in my complaint in, this has not happened and this is the reason I am writing my complaint to yourselves. I had to make my way home with no money each time getting to the stop on the train I needed to change telling the train officer what had happened if it was not for the fact they let me get back without paying I would have had to walk all the way home as the police officer would not let me get my things out of the van or my money.

I went to pick my van up and again there was a cost to myself of Ł190, I will be taking this to court as I should have had no need to have 6 points put on my licence and a Ł300 fine when I did in fact have insurance to drive.

Due to also the police officer lying to my insurance saying I was working and carrying goods in my van which is clearly a lie as the van was empty I have also had a letter saying they are closing my insurance over, so I am having to deal with this also.

I do not feel the police officer who dealt with this matter address it as he should have, I feel he did not do his job correctly and I have suffered due to this. My insurance company are saying that the data for my vehicles are on the data base and are looking into the reason why it is not showing up when the police are doing their checks.

38,

Yours sincerely Mr Simon Cordell

39,

 

 

 

7.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 7

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.26.2013_RE Simon Cordell

26/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 40,41,42,43

 

7.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 7

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.26.2013_RE Simon Cordell

26/11/2013

/ Page Numbers: 40,41,42

43

--

40,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 15:46

To: Martin Jenkin

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Data-Protection-KGM.doc

Kelly-TiNer-KGM.doc

Hello Martin,

Thank you for the phone call today to tell me I was still insured.

Could you please pass on the attached documents to Kelly Tiller at KGM one is a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The other letter is just to get Kelly Tiller to confirm by email I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing and also to found out why my van is still not showing up on the database.

And also about the logbooks which I am still waiting for them from DVLA I called DVLA today when I got back from the compound and was told it can take 8 weeks for me to get the new logbooks, I will therefore send then right over to you by email as soon as I get them.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

41,

RE: Simon Cordell->Data-Protection-KGM.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 25/11/2013

KGM House 14 Eastwood Close London E18 1RZ

Dear Sir or Madam

Subject access request

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Please supply the information about me I am entitled to under the Data Protection Act 1998 relating to:

1.      All data to prove that my Vehicles were on the database since my insurance was taken out.

2.      Phone recording of the 14/11/2013 with the police officer and Jessica advising that Mr Simon Cordell was carrying tools in his vehicle.

3.      Phone call for 26/11/2013 with Kelly Tiller and the manager of the Charlton vehicle pound, 8 Bramshot Avenue, Charlton, London, SE7 7HY, saying that there were not tools in the van Reg CX52 JRZ when it was impounded on the 14/11/2013.

4.      And the reason why it still shows as of today’s date 25/11/2013 that my Van Reg CX52 JRZ still shows on the Mid data base as uninsured.

5.      All phone calls made to Broadsure Direct and KGM since my policy started where the police have had to call to confirm I was in fact insured.

6.      If there is any data that cannot be forwarding to me, please state this when forwarding me my data.

42,

If you need any more information from me, or a fee, please let me know as soon as possible.

It may be helpful for you to know that a request for information under the Data Protection Act 1998 should be responded to within 40 days.

If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you and can be contacted on 0303 123 1113 or at www.ico.org.uk/

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

43,

RE: Simon Cordell->Kelly-Tiller-KGM.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 25/11/2013

KGM House 14 Eastwood Close London E18 1RZ

Dear Kelly Tiller

Would it please be possible to confirm by email that I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing by KGM.

Also I have talked to Martin and he has told me that you need the logbook for my Vehicles, I am still waiting for them to come back from DVLA and as soon as I get them back which can take up to 8 weeks I have been told by DVLA on the phone today, I will scan them in and send them over to Martin.

Also can you please look into the reason that my Van CX52 JRZ is still showing up on the database as uninsured as of today’s date.

My Car MA57 LDY is now showing as insured.

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

2014

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 8

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.24.2014_RE RE Simon Cordell CX52JRZ

24/02/2014

/ Page Numbers: 44,45

 

8.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 8

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.24.2014_RE RE Simon Cordell CX52JRZ

24/02/2014

/ Page Numbers: 44,45

--

44,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 24 February 2014 16:34

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell CX52JRZ

Attachments: sold-Van-CX52JRZ.jpg

Hi Martin

After the call today please see the attached recipe for the Van CX52JRZ Lorraine

45,

 

 

9.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 9

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.24.2014_RE Simon Cordell REG CX52JRX

24/02/2014

/ Page Numbers: 46,47

 

9.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 9

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.24.2014_RE Simon Cordell REG CX52JRX

24/02/2014

/ Page Numbers: 46,47

--

46,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 24 February 2014 19:09

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell REG CX52JRX

Attachments: Sold-Van-CX52JRZ-27-04-2013.jpg

Buy-Van-reciept-CX52JRZ-10-11-2013.jpg

Hi Martin

Today when I sent over the recipe for the van, I sent over the wrong one. Simon has just come here and showed me the last 2 recipes for the van. I believe you already have the 10/11/2013 as I emailed this over to you on the 15/11/2013 at 15.57

Lorraine

47,

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 10

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2015_RE Simon Cordell Information

04/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 48,49

 

10.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 10

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2015_RE Simon Cordell Information

04/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 48,49

--

48,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2015 10:26

To: Martin Jenkin

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Hi Martin

I have not heard from you re the below email.

But could you please send me a copy today of Simon Currant insurance policy and his no claims please.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 15:33

To: Martin Jenkin

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Hi Martin

Just giving you an update Simon has called to try and speak to you today to make a late payment on his insurance as he was a day late. could you please make sure someone calls us to make the payment.

As for KGM they are now dealing and addressing the issues, but it took me to start cc my emails to them to Lloyds.

He has been having it really hard due to all this insurance with KGM and the courts, and not being able to drive half the time this policy has been in place due to them keep revoking his driving licence, until the courts then sort it and put it back in place. They have again revoked his driving licence this is the 3 time. I have had to get a solicitor now to help with the cases of no insurance because I seem to be getting nowhere. And also, to deal with the appeal case for the 14/11/2013. I do have the audio now from KGM that proves the police officer lied and some letters I will attach to this email just so you are updated.

I can't send the audio due to most places will not accept that file type. So, I have included the transcript that the solicitor done

Could you please also address doing your section 9 witness statement about the calls for the 14/11/2013 as the appeal case is due to be heard on the 05/03/2015.

Could you also please send over a copy of Simon no claims please?

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin

mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 07 January 2015 09:06

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Good Morning Lorraine,

Apologies for the lack of contact, I have been in and out of the office.

Have you received any correspondence from KGM? we spoke to them prior to Christmas regarding the issues and they have been looking into the situation and as far as I am aware, they were going to respond directly.

I look forward to hearing from you.

49,

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY

t: 01843 594477 f: 01843 594488

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 28 December 2014 23:59

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com  

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Information

Hello Martin

Can you please get back to me with an update as I not heard anything from KGM about the email I sent over to you on the 30/11/2014 with the data that would be needed. I also have not heard anything from you about the section 9 witness statement. Please can you get back to me as soon as possible.

Regards

Lorraine

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.11

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2015_Re Simon Cordell-Appeal

04/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 50,51,52,53,54

55,56,57,58

 

11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.11

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2015_Re Simon Cordell-Appeal

04/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 50,51,52,53,54

55,56,57,58

--

50,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2015 09:53

To: JOSEPHINE WARD

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell-Appeal

Attachments: DOC034 (2).pdf

Appeal-Case-Driving-Tools-26-11-2014.pdf

Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell-03.pdf

DOC008 (3).PDF

Here you go Josey if you look at the date of conviction on the letter the court sent you will see it says 29/08/2014 but it did not go to trail till the 26/11/2014

51,

52,

53,

54,

55,

56,

57,

Re: Simon Cordell-Appeal->Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell-03.pdf

From: GL-SWESTERNMCENQ

To  lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell

Date: 16 February 2015 09:57:22

Attachments: DOC034.pdf

With reference to your e-mail of the 10th February please find attached clerks notes from the trial on the 26th November as requested.

Miss J Lee

Administration Officer

Lavender Hill Magistrates' Court

176a Lavender Hill, London, SW11 1JU

Tel: 020 7805 1470

Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No: 0870 324 0299* *

'I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means'.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec.

(CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.)

This email has been certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

58,

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.12

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.06.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

06/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68

 

12.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.12

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.06.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

06/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68

--

59,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 March 2014 09:38

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this to ask if there is any update, they did not list my case yesterday and it is now listed for today at Woolwich at 2pm so I was wondering if you had any of the data,

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

60,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

61,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

62,

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know some are correct but due to some dates being wrong on some of the ones I can see errors in I would

63,

like to check all the cases on the PNC that was heard at Enfield Magistrates.

If this can be done as a matter of urgency due to the impact this is having on my life with the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court and my bail and other issues.

If the information could be emailed to me, I would be grateful as I am next in court on March 2014 and would like this information of any errors so I can show the judge.

Please see below the lists of cases I would like information on.

 

64,

65,

66,

 

67,

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB 26/01/1981

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying

68,

is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of

69,

the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 13

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_07.03.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06 Open Print Manager Documents

03/07/2014

/ Page Numbers: 70,71

 

13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 13

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_07.03.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06 Open Print Manager Documents

03/07/2014

/ Page Numbers: 70,71

--

70,

From: Martin Jenkin <martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com>

Sent: 03 July 2014 10:51

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: REF: 00-COSX14MT06 Open Print Manager Documents

Attachments: sofdec (COSX14MT06).pdf

Please ask Simon to sign and return

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY

t: 01843 594477

f: 01843 594488

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

71,

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 14

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.10.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

10/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82

 

14.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 14

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.10.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

10/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82

--

72,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:43

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update to the information that I have asked for.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

73,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

74,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

75,

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know

76,

77,

78,

79,

80,

81,

is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of

82,

the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 15

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.11.2014_RE Simon Cordell DVLA

11/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 83,84

 

15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 15

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.11.2014_RE Simon Cordell DVLA

11/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 83,84

--

83,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 11 March 2014 11:42

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com   

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell DVLA

Attachments: DVLA-CX52JRZ.pdf

Hi Martin

Please see the attached letter from DVLA about CX52JRZ. I got the letter today but they seem to have put my Surname as Cardell and not Cordell so I will be contacting them today by phone.

Regards,

Simon

 

84,

RE: Simon Cordell DVLA->DVLA-CX52JRZ.pdf

0300 790 6802 0300 123 1279

www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration

6 March 2014

Date: 6 March 2014

01233/ 1336640030/00423

RE: Simon Cordell DVLA->DVLA

Driver & Vehicle

Longview Road

Licensing Monriston

Agency

Swansea

SAB 7JL

Website: www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration

Phone: 0300 790 6802

Textphone: 0300 123 1279

TS ENT SIMON CARDELL

23 BYRON TERRACES      

HERTFORD ROAD

LONDON      

N9 7DG

ESSE

Dear Sir/Madam

Vehicle registration number: CX52 JRZ

Make: FORD

Model: TRANSIT 300 MWB TD

Thank you for your recent application for a Registration Certificate (V5C) for the above - mentioned vehicle. We are dealing with your request.

Your V62 application should be processed on 20/03/2014 and a V5C issued to you.

Please allow 5 working days from this date before making any enquiries about your application.

If you require any information regarding taxing your vehicle, please refer to the website www.gov.uk/taxdisc

Yours sincerely

Dave Morgan

DVLA Central Capture Unit

Find out about DVLA’s online services

Go to: www.gov.uk/browse/driving

INVESTORS IN PEOPLE

Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 16

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.12.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

12/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

 

16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 16

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.12.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

12/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

--

85,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 March 2014 11:59

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this to see if there is any news as to the data I asked for. I was hoping to have got an email yesterday with some information due to the email you sent me on the 10/02/2014 but I did not. I understand that the court is only open Tuesday to Thursday which only give till tomorrow as you are aware I am back in court on the 18/03/2014 which if I do not get anything by tomorrow I will have to go into court then with nothing as the court would be closed. Could you therefore let me know if the data I have asked for will be available by tomorrow?

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:59

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

As confirmed to Mrs Cordell last week, a member of staff at Tottenham Magistrates Court will research the Registers listed and copies will be sent, by e-mail, to you as we recover them. The Court opens Tuesday to Thursday: we hope to have at least some of the records for you tomorrow.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:43

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update to the information that I have asked for.

Regards

86,

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk  

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

87,

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell

88,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

 To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

89,

Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which r bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know some are correct but due to some dates being wrong on some of the ones I can see errors in I would like to check all the cases on the PNC that was heard at Enfield Magistrates.

If this can be done as a matter of urgency due to the impact this is having on my life with the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court and my bail and other issues.

If the information could be emailed to me, I would be grateful as I am next in court on March 2014 and would like this information of any errors so I can show the judge.

Please see below the lists of cases I would like information on.

90,

91,

92,

93,

94,

organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by

95,

Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

96,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 17

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111

 

17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 17

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111

--

97,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 March 2014 14:10

To: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

Could you please email them to this address if possible? Or would it please be possible for my mum to attend Enfield Court and pick the data up.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 13 March 2014 13:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

A number of the registers have been located and they are being copied now. We will send them by post tomorrow to the address given by you in a previous e-mail:

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

The age and quality of the register entries is such that scanning, and e-mailing is not a viable option. Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

98,

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 March 2014 12:27

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am sorry to keep emailing you, but I still have not had any emails with the data I have asked for. Can you please get back to me with what is going on.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ [mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 March 2014 12:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Our colleague is searching for the files now: I will send whatever she finds today. She will be continuing to search for files tomorrow also.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 March 2014 11:59

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this to see if there is any news as to the data I asked for. I was hoping to have got an email yesterday with some information due to the email you sent me on the 10/02/2014 but I did not. I understand that the court is only open Tuesday to Thursday which only give till tomorrow as you are aware I am back in court on the 18/03/2014 which if I do not get anything by tomorrow I will have to go into court then with nothing as the court would be closed. Could you therefore let me know if the data I have asked for will be available by tomorrow?

99,

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:59

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

As confirmed to Mrs Cordell last week, a member of staff at Tottenham Magistrates Court will research the Registers listed and copies will be sent, by e-mail, to you as we recover them. The Court opens Tuesday to Thursday: we hope to have at least some of the records for you tomorrow.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:43

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update to the information that I have asked for.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell

100,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

101,

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

102,

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may

103,

bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know some are correct but due to some dates being wrong on some of the ones I can see errors in I would like to check all the cases on the PNC that was heard at Enfield Magistrates.

If this can be done as a matter of urgency due to the impact this is having on my life with the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court and my bail and other issues.

If the information could be emailed to me, I would be grateful as I am next in court on March 2014 and would like this information of any errors so I can show the judge.

Please see below the lists of cases I would like information on.

104,

105,

106,

107,

108,

organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by

109,

Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

110,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

111,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 18

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases. _001

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

 

18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 18

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases. _001

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

--

112,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 March 2014 13:12

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

Could you please email them to this address if possible.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk 

Sent: 13 March 2014 13:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

A number of the registers have been located and they are being copied now. We will send them by post tomorrow to the address given by you in a previous e-mail:

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

The age and quality of the register entries is such that scanning, and e-mailing is not a viable option. Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

113,

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 March 2014 12:27

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am sorry to keep emailing you, but I still have not had any emails with the data I have asked for. Can you please get back to me with what is going on.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 12 March 2014 12:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Our colleague is searching for the files now: I will send whatever she finds today. She will be continuing to search for files tomorrow also.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 March 2014 11:59

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this to see if there is any news as to the data I asked for. I was hoping to have got an email yesterday with some information due to the email you sent me on the 10/02/2014 but I did not. I understand that the court is only open Tuesday to Thursday which only give till tomorrow as you are aware I am back in court on the 18/03/2014 which if I do not get anything by tomorrow I will have to go into court then with nothing as the court would be closed. Could you therefore let me know if the data I have asked for will be available by tomorrow?

Regards

114,

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:59

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

As confirmed to Mrs Cordell last week, a member of staff at Tottenham Magistrates Court will research the Registers listed and copies will be sent, by e-mail, to you as we recover them. The Court opens Tuesday to Thursday: we hope to have at least some of the records for you tomorrow.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:43

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update to the information that I have asked for.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell

115,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

116,

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

117,

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may

118,

bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know some are correct but due to some dates being wrong on some of the ones I can see errors in I would like to check all the cases on the PNC that was heard at Enfield Magistrates.

If this can be done as a matter of urgency due to the impact this is having on my life with the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court and my bail and other issues.

If the information could be emailed to me, I would be grateful as I am next in court on March 2014 and would like this information of any errors so I can show the judge.

Please see below the lists of cases I would like information on.

119,

120,

121,

122,

123,

organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by

124,

Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

125,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

126,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

19.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 19

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases. _002

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139

 

19.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 19

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2014_RE Simon Cordell Errors on Cases. _002

13/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139

--

127,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 March 2014 12:27

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am sorry to keep emailing you, but I still have not had any emails with the data I have asked for. Can you please get back to me with what is going on.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 12 March 2014 12:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Our colleague is searching for the files now: I will send whatever she finds today. She will be continuing to search for files tomorrow also.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 March 2014 11:59

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this to see if there is any news as to the data I asked for. I was hoping to have got an email yesterday with some information due to the email you sent me on the 10/02/2014 but I did not. I understand that the court is only open Tuesday to Thursday which only give till tomorrow as you are aware I am back in court on the 18/03/2014 which if I do not get anything by tomorrow I will have to go into court then with nothing as the court would be closed. Could you therefore let me know if the data I have asked for will be available by tomorrow?

128,

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcomermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:59

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

As confirmed to Mrs Cordell last week, a member of staff at Tottenham Magistrates Court will research the Registers listed and copies will be sent, by e-mail, to you as we recover them. The Court opens Tuesday to Thursday: we hope to have at least some of the records for you tomorrow.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 10 March 2014 12:43

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update to the information that I have asked for.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:23

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell

129,

Staff are looking for the records at Enfield Magistrates Court this week; however, we will not have them for tomorrow morning. We will endeavour to have as many as possible before Thursday. If there are specific dates you needed particularly, these could be accessed first.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 March 2014 15:08

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am wondering if there is any update, as I am in Woolwich Crown Court tomorrow and as said I wanted the information before I went to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 14:39

To: 'GL-HCORNERMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

After your email dated the 21/02/2014 I was thinking that you would be searching for the data from the week of the 24/02/2014 as this is what it said in the email. As I said in my 1st email when asking for the information I have a case that is at Woolwich crown court and I am having problems with my bail due to the records on my PNC, I am due in court maybe tomorrow or this week as my solicitor is putting into court to have a hearing and I wanted to have any errors on the PNC addressed at court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:48

130,

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Staff will be searching for the requested Registers from tomorrow. We will contact you as soon as this is done.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 March 2014 13:22

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

To Whom It May Concern:

I was wondering if there were any updates as to the data, I have asked for so that I can check cases against my PNC file.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 21 February 2014 16:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

The records you request are at another court. We will begin searching for them next week when the court is open. Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Officer Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

131,

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:29

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Hello

I do understand that most of the items listed in my emails are archived due to their date but as I can see errors in the dates of some of the things and I know this as fact I would like all items checked that is listed so that it can be checked against the PNC records I have got the print out from.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: GL-HCORNERMCENQ mailto: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 February 2014 12:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to the conversation between Mrs Cordell and a member of staff yesterday, please specify which dates and offences you wish us to check. Almost all the offences are archived and not immediately accessible using the computer; specific dates and offences would help reduce the delay in providing this information.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit Administration Office Highbury Corner Magistrates Court

Tel: 0207-506 3100

Fax: 0870 739 5768

e-mail: GL-HCORNERMCENQ@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

132,

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 February 2014 13:36

To: GL-HCORNERMCENQ

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Errors on Cases.

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell 109 Burncroft Road Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 18/02/2014

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I have an ongoing case at Woolwich Crown Court, and I have noticed some errors in my PNC record which the police printed of at around 25/06/2013.

I would be very grateful if you can pull up the following records so I can check them with the PNC the police printed off for the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court, I have been told I will need a Memorandum of conviction or the transcript for the case.

I do know there are some errors on the cases that was heard at Enfield Magistrates and can see them clearly, but due to how far they go back cannot remember some of the cases. I do also know some are correct but due to some dates being wrong on some of the ones I can see errors in I would like to check all the cases on the PNC that was heard at Enfield Magistrates.

If this can be done as a matter of urgency due to the impact this is having on my life with the case that is ongoing at Woolwich Crown Court and my bail and other issues.

If the information could be emailed to me, I would be grateful as I am next in court on March 2014 and would like this information of any errors so I can show the judge.

Please see below the lists of cases I would like information on.

133,

134,

135,

136,

137,

organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by

138,

Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

139,

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 20

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.25.2014_RE Simon Cordell Logbook

25/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 140,141,142,143,144

 

20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 20

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.25.2014_RE Simon Cordell Logbook

25/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 140,141,142,143,144

-=-

140,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 March 2014 11:40

To: Martin Jenkin

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Logbook

Attachments: CX52JRZ-logbook-full.pdf

Dear Martin

Here is the logbook for CX52JRZ please see attached, I did call DVLA after I got the letter from them which showed the spelling of the last name wrong as it was spelled Cardell and not Cordell, they told me I had to wait until the logbook come in the post and then to fill in section 6 to get it corrected, Which I will be doing,

Also I have also noticed today when the logbook came in the post and I am not sure why they have put the new keepers date as 15/02/2014 as the green slip section 10 was sent to them, so the date of the 10/11/2013 was on it so I will be writing a letter to ask why this was done, Along with the section 6 to correct the last name,

Could you please update us as to when this can be sorted with KGM as to the claim that is against Simon so he can sort his insurance out,

Also, about the claim for 09 Dec 2013 we still have not heard from KGM as to when someone will be sent out to take a report from Simon could this be looked into?

And also, I know there was some confusion as to the number that was called to report this on the 09 Dec 2013, please see the below information from my phone bill

Mon 09 Dec 13:28 SPEC SERV 08444126412 22:00

The call was made to 08444126412 at 13:28 and lasted 22 min this is when Simon called to report what had happened on the 09/12/2013 and give all the information which the person noted, I know there is some issue as to the lady who witnessed this information being missing but it was all given on this call, If it can be possible can someone get the tape for this call and get the information to the witness so KGM can contact her about what she saw and who was at fault,

Lorraine

141,

Copy of my Driving license!

142,

Copy of my Driving license!

143,

Copy of my Driving license!

144,

Copy of my Driving license!

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 21

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.26.2014_RE Simon Cordell Logbook

26/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 145

 

 

21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 21

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.26.2014_RE Simon Cordell Logbook

26/03/2014

/ Page Numbers: 145

--

145

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 26 March 2014 17:54

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Logbook

Hi Martin

Is it all possible to get an update I am losing money due to not having insurance and not being able to drive. You said you would get back to me today and I have not heard anything.

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 March 2014 11:40

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Logbook

Dear Martin

Here is the logbook for CX52JRZ please see attached. I did call DVLA after I got the letter from them which showed the spelling of the last name wrong as it was spelled Cardell and not Cordell, they told me I had to wait until the logbook come in the post and then to fill in section 6 to get it corrected. Which I will be doing.

Also I have also noticed today when the logbook came in the post and I am not sure why they have put the new keepers date as 15/02/2014 as the green slip section 10 was sent to them, so the date of the 10/11/2013 was on it so I will be writing a letter to ask why this was done, Along with the section 6 to correct the last name.

Could you please update us as to when this can be sorted with KGM as to the claim that is against Simon so he can sort his insurance out.

Also, about the claim for 09 Dec 2013 we still have not heard from KGM as to when someone will be sent out to take a report from Simon could this be looked into?

And also, I know there was some confusion as to the number that was called to report this on the 09 Dec 2013, please see the below information from my phone bill

Mon 09 Dec 13:28 SPEC SERV 08444126412 22:00

The call was made to 08444126412 at 13:28 and lasted 22 min this is when Simon called to report what had happened on the 09/12/2013 and give all the information which the person noted. I know there is some issue as to the lady who witnessed this information being missing but it was all given on this call. If it can be possible can someone get the tape for this call and get the information to the witness so KGM can contact her about what she saw and who was at fault.

Lorraine

 

 

22.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 22

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_04.17.2014_

17/04/2014

/ Page Numbers: 146,147,148

 

22.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 22

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_04.17.2014_

17/04/2014

/ Page Numbers: 146,147,148

--

146,

From: Martin Jenkin

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com>

Sent: 17 April 2014 18:44

To: Lorraine Cordell

Attachments: Cordell Cover note.pdf

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY

t: 01843 594477

f: 01843 594488

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

147,

Temporary Motor Insurance Cover Note Number!

148,

Temporary Motor Insurance Cover Note Number!

 

 

 

23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 23

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.15.2014_RE Policy-Simon-Cordell

15/05/2014

/ Page Numbers:149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165

 

23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 23

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.15.2014_RE Policy-Simon-Cordell

15/05/2014

/ Page Numbers:149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165

--

149,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 15 May 2014 13:04

To: Martin Jenkin

Subject: RE: Policy-Simon-Cordell

Attachments: Statement-of-facts.pdf

36980126-Mr Ian Robinson.doc

36980127-Miss M Stavros.doc

36980128-

Miss L Cordell.doc

Policy-plan-letter-dated-12-05-2014.pdf

Simon-Driving Licence-Card-Back.jpg

Simon- Driving Licence-Card-Front (1).jpg

Simon-Driving Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Hi Martin

Simon had a letter from policy plan saying they were cancelling his policy the letter was dated 12/05/2014 and they said they were cancelling seven days from the date of their letter. Not sure as to why as when Simon got your letter dated the 06/05/2014 we sent the documents you asked for to policy plan. Please see attached documents which were posted to policy plan. Could you please see as to the reason as why they are cancelling his policy please.

Regards

Simon

150,

Broadsure Direct 4th Floor, Argyle Centre York Street Ramsgate Kent

CT11 9DS

Telephone :0J 843 594477    Fax :01843 594488

facts.pdf

Policyholder: Mr Simon Cordell

Policy ref: COSX14MT05

STATEMENT OF FACT (vl.02)

Please note that the documents enclosed relate to a "Statement of Fact" insurance policy. This means that Broadsure Direct have prepared the documentation on your behalf, based on the information provided by you.

It is vitally important that you check all the enclosed documentation to ensure that it is correct and that the policy meets your requirements. Please complete & return either declaration below within seven days.

I have checked the Statement of Fact and all related documentation that the information is correct, and the policy meets my requirements.

Print

I UNDERSTAND THAT SHOULD ANY OF THE INFORMATION WITHIN THIS STATEMENT BE INCORRECT, IT IS MY RESPONSIBILTY TO CONTACT BROADSURE DIRECT IMMEDIATELY ON 01843 594477 AND OBTAIN CONFIRMATION THAT THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

151,

Motor trade documents!

152,

Motor trade documents!

153,

Motor trade documents!

154,

Motor trade documents!

155,

Motor trade documents!

156,

Motor trade documents!

157,

Motor trade documents!

158,

Motor trade documents!

159,

Motor trade documents!

160,

Motor trade documents!

161,

Motor trade documents!

162,

Motor trade documents!

163,

Motor trade documents!

164,

Motor trade documents!

165,

Motor trade documents!

 

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 24

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.16.2014_RE Policy-Simon-Cordell

16/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 166,167,168

169,170,171,172

 

24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 24

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.16.2014_RE Policy-Simon-Cordell

16/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 166,167,168

169,170,171,172

--

166,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 16 May 2014 16:27

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Policy-Simon-Cordell

Attachments: 36980157-Jamie Macuire.doc

36980158-L Cordell.doc

36980160.doc

Hi Martin

I got a call today and was told they needed 3 more invoices which I am sending over now.

I hope the invoices will not be used for anything as this could cause me trouble under the data protection law.

Regards

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 May 2014 13:04

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Policy-Simon-Cordell

Hi Martin

Simon had a letter from policy plan saying they were cancelling his policy the letter was dated 12/05/2014 and they said they were cancelling seven days from the date of their letter. Not sure as to why as when Simon got your letter dated the 06/05/2014 we sent the documents you asked for to policy plan. Please see attached documents which were posted to policy plan. Could you please see as to the reason as why they are cancelling his policy please.

Regards

Simon

167,

Motor trade documents!

168,

Motor trade documents!

169,

Motor trade documents!

170,

Motor trade documents!

171,

Motor trade documents!

172,

Motor trade documents!

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 25

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_05.20.2014_FW

20/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 173,174

 

25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 25

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com_05.20.2014_FW

20/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 173,174

--

173,

From: Martin Jenkin

martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 20 May 2014 18:52

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW:

Attachments: image2014-05-20-184559.pdf

174,

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 26

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.22.2014_Plea-form-011401009802

22/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 175,176,177

 

26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 26

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.22.2014_Plea-form-011401009802

22/05/2014

/ Page Numbers: 175,176,177

--

175,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 22 May 2014 14:19

To: swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Plea-form-011401009802

Attachments: Plea-form-011401009802.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached Plea form for summons dated 16/04/2014 for case number 011401009802 to be heard on the 28/05/2014. Which I am pleading not guilty to.

Could you please send back an email recipe that you have received my Plea form.

Regards

Mr Simon Cordell

176,

177,

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 27

gaheris@broadsuredirect.com_06.12.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06-ID58 Open Attach Documents

12/06/2014

/ Page Numbers: 178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207

 

27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 27

gaheris@broadsuredirect.com_06.12.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06-ID58 Open Attach Documents

12/06/2014

/ Page Numbers: 178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207

--

178,

From: Gaheris Edwards

gaheris@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 12 June 2014 13:47

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: REF: 00-COSX14MT06-ID<58> Open Attach Documents

Attachments: Vehicle Referral List Edited 14082012.pdf; Examples of Proof of trading.pdf; 021608047-12-06-2014-13-

43-09.PDF; MotTrade-RR-Summary.pdf.

Terms of Business.pdf.

MotTrade-RR-wording.pdf.

new biz fsa.GE.pdf.

sofdec-GE.pdf.

demands needs.GE.pdf

As requested,

Kind Regards,

Gaheris Edwards

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY

Administration Department

t: 01843 594477

f: 01843 594488

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

179,

Motor trade documents!

180,

Motor trade documents!

181,

Motor trade documents!

182,

Certificate of Motor Insurance

Certificate Number MT10 021608047

183,

Period of Insurance from 19th May 2014  

To Noon Renewal Date 19th May 2015

Total Payable Ł2,088.69

184,

Motor trade documents!

185,

Motor trade documents!

186,

Motor trade documents!

187,

Motor trade documents!

188,

Motor trade documents!

189,

Motor trade documents!

190,

Motor trade documents!

191,

Motor trade documents!

192,

Motor trade documents!

193,

Motor trade documents!

194,

Motor trade documents!

195,

Motor trade documents!

196,

Motor trade documents!

197,

Motor trade documents!

198,

Motor trade documents!

199,

Motor trade documents!

200,

Motor trade documents!

201,

Motor trade documents!

202,

Motor trade documents!

203,

Motor trade documents!

204,

Motor trade documents!

205,

REF: 00-COSX14MT06-ID<58> Open Attach Documents->demands needs._GE_.pdf

SECTION 1

Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (v1.04)

SECTION 2

Mr Simon Cordell

Prospect Ref: COSX064MT8

109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield

Date: 02/06/2014

EN3 7JQ

Dear Mr Cordell

SECTION 3

Thank you for requesting a quotation for your insurance cover.

This letter sets out the nature and scope of the services we are providing to you, together with a Statement of Demands & Needs. It will also provide further information that we are required by law to provide.

Please read it carefully and let us know immediately if any of the information is inaccurate, so that we can take any appropriate action as soon as possible.

Enclosed please find our terms of business and a policy summary. It is important that you read both in full carefully and contact us if you have any queries.

In selecting the insurances set out in the recommendation section below, we have dealt on the following basis.

We offer products from a range of insurers for private cars, light vans and buildings and contents (non-commercial).

We only offer products from a limited number of insurers for Motor Trade, Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV), Fleet, Liability, Landlords, Commercial Premises, and commercial Combined non-investment insurance contracts. Ask us for a list of insurers we offer insurance from.

Duty to disclose all material facts

It is your responsibility to provide complete and accurate information to insurers when you take out your insurance policy, throughout the life of the policy, and when you renew your insurance. Failure to disclose information pertaining to your insurance, or any inaccuracies in information given or changes in circumstances, could result in your insurance being invalid or cover not operating fully and could mean that part or all of a claim may not be paid.

It is important that you ensure that all statements you make on your proposal forms, statement of fact declaration, renewal declaration, claims forms and any other documentation are full and accurate. If a form is completed on your behalf, you should check the answers shown to any questions are true and accurate before signing the document.

You are reminded that it is an offence under The Road Traffic Act to make any false statements or withhold relevant information to obtain a Certificate of Insurance.

Please note under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 you are required not to disclose convictions regarded as "Spent".

You are advised to keep copies of any correspondence you send to us or direct to your insurer.

Material facts are ones which are likely to influence an insurer in the assessment and acceptance of the

206,

application, for example for motor insurance any offence including motor and non-motor offences, drivers’ infirmities, a young or inexperienced driver, Examples for household, buy to let property and commercial premises insurance include subsidence, flood, landslip, theft. For example, for liability insurance previous claims, potential future claims, for Goods in Transit insurance hazardous goods, pharmaceuticals, time critical goods, for commercial combined all facts concerning risks covered. Criminal convictions, bankruptcy, administration, receivership, liquidation, country of residence or if you have had insurance declined or cancelled should be disclosed for all types of insurance. These are only examples and is not meant to be an exhaustive list.

If you are in any doubt about whether information is material, you should disclose it.

Should you require further guidance, please contact us.

SECTION 4

Your Demands and Needs

You have requested a quotation on the basis of your requirements below:

We have set out below our understanding of your demands and needs and whether the policy we have selected meets those demands and needs.

Please read the information below carefully. It records the statements and information you provided when requesting the quotation. If any of the information is incorrect or incomplete please contact us immediately, so that we can take any appropriate action as soon as possible.

Based on the information set out below, we are making a personal recommendation to you of the policy proposed for the reasons set out on this letter.

Comprehensive Cover / Road Risk Only Indemnity Limit Ł10,000 No Public or Employer Liability Cover Mr Simon Cordell to Drive

Social, Domestic & Pleasure Use with Motor Trade Use

No Demonstration Cover / No Additional Business Use

No Protected No Claims Bonus / No Windscreen Cover / No Trade Plates

No High Performance / Classic / Commercial (Over 7.5 Ton) Vehicles

Payment by Direct Debit

Ł500 Excess

The Period of insurance covered in this quotation is 12 months.

SECTION 5

We have reviewed the policies within our range and recommend the following policy to be the most suitable to meet your needs:

Covea  Policy

The Above Policy meets all your demands and needs set out as above

Main exclusions, Limitations, and conditions.

207,

You should read carefully and take note of all exclusions, excesses, limitations, or conditions as set out in this letter and the enclosed Policy Summary. A copy of the policy is available on request.

SECTION 6

From the information provided we are able to offer the following quotation. This and all quotations are subject to change in respect of the premium indicated and the terms and conditions that are supplied.

SECTION 7

Covea

Policy Premium: Ł 2088.69

Including ofŁ 125.32

Broker Arrangement Fee: Ł

Legal Expenses: Ł

Total of

Premiums and Fees: Ł 2088.69

Including ofŁ125.32

SECTION 8 - Insurer Instalments

See attached Direct Debit mandate

SECTION 9 - Broker Instalments WITH DEPOSIT

The Total Premium and Fees can be paid by instalments with an initial payment of Ł 1044.35 followed by monthly 1

instalments of Ł 1044.35 each. Payment by instalments is offered subject to status and the terms and conditions of a

customer credit agreement.

SECTION 10

Please see copy credit agreement form where applicable.

SECTION 11

Other taxes or costs, or both, may exist which are not paid through, nor imposed, by us.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely

Broadsure Direct

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 28

rachelbarker@broadsuredirect.com_07.10.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06-ID63 Open Attach Documents

10/07/2014

/ Page Numbers: 208

 

 

28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 28

rachelbarker@broadsuredirect.com_07.10.2014_REF 00-COSX14MT06-ID63 Open Attach Documents

10/07/2014

/ Page Numbers: 208

--

208,

From: Rachel

rachelbarker@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 10 July 2014 15:50

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: REF: 00-COSX14MT06-ID<63> Open Attach Documents

Good Afternoon Lorraine,

Sorry to bother you but Martin said you would be the best person to email.

Could you please forward Up to Date Copy of Driving Licence for Simon in his correct address as a matter of urgency we have been trying to contact him but no answer.

Many Thanks for all your help if you have any problems or require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind Regards Rachel Barker

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY Administration Department

t: 01843 594477

f: 01843 594488

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 29

tatjana.rogovska2@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_09.15.2014_RE Not read RE urgent Simon CORDELL 01140159689

15/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 209

 

 

29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 29

tatjana.rogovska2@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_09.15.2014_RE Not read RE urgent Simon CORDELL 01140159689

15/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 209

--

209,

From: Rogovska2, Tatjana

tatjana.rogovska2@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 15 September 2014 09:31

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Not read: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

There were 2 emails from you in our inbox which looked identical to me and one of them had an attachment. I deleted the email without the attachment.

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 September 2014 19:33

To: Rogovska2, Tatjana

Subject: FW: Not read: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Dear Rogovska2, Tatjana

Can you please advise as to what email was deleted I did send 2 emails the same but the 1st one I forgot to attach my insurance document so I sent the email again which included my insurance document can you please advise as to if you have my email and the attached insurance document?

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Rogovska2, Tatjana

mailto: tatiana.roaovska2@hmcts.asi.gov.uk

Sent: 12 September 2014 16:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Not read: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Your message was deleted without being read on 12 September 2014 15:30:05 UTC.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 30

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.15.2014_RE Simon Cordell documents

15/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 210,211,212

 

30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 30

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.15.2014_RE Simon Cordell documents

15/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 210,211,212

--

210,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 15 September 2014 23:24

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell documents

Attachments: Driving Lic.jpg; Driving Lic Back Part.jpg

Hi Martin

I am sorry my head is really not with it I sent the wrong photo part of the licence please see attached and pass these over.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 September 2014 10:23

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell documents

Hi Martin

Can these please be passed on for Simon Insurance I did say I would get them over on Friday to the lady that called me and said she forgot to send the insurance documents out, she also said that policy plan had done a letter to cancel the new policy, so can you please let me know ASAP if everything is still ok with Simon cover. She also gave me her email wish I can’t seem to find, but I been sorting out funerals for my Late mum and also a close friend of the family died also so at this time it’s been a really hard time for us as a family.

Regards

Lorraine

211,

Copy of my Driving Licence!

212,

Copy of my Driving Licence!

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 31

pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_09.18.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

18/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 213,214,215

 

31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 31

pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_09.18.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

18/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 213,214,215

--

213,

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 18 September 2014 17:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Attachments: HMCTS - Application to Def giving new Re-opening date - S CORDELL.doc

For your information, please find letter attached

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

Sent: 18 September 2014 16:09

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

RichmondSouthProsecutions@met.police.uk

Cc: LCCC Compliance Unit; LCCC Enforcement Unit

Subject: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Dear Sirs,

Please note that the above case has been relisted for a reopening hearing on the 30th instant at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, courtroom 1 at 2 pm. Therefore, please be good enough to have your file in court and can the LCCC please put this matter on hold until after the hearing, when the Defendant will attend. Thank you.

Regards

P Brown

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be

214,

monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

215,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->HMCTS – Application to Def giving new Re-opening date - S CORDELL.doc

September 19,

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

2014

Mr Simon Cordell

109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Lavender Hill Magistrates' Court

176a Lavender Hill Battersea London SW11 1JU

DX 58559 Clapham Junction

T 0207 805 1497 F 0207 805 1437

gl-swesternmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

www.justice.aov.uk

Cluster Manager:

Jan Hartnett

Courts in the SW Group:

Lavender Hill Magistrates' Court Wimbledon Magistrates' & Youth Court

Dear Mr Cordell

Our ref: 1402437891

Re: Re-opening Summons Hearing

With reference to your recent court hearing, the matter has been listed for: -

Tuesday, 30th September 2014 at 2 pm at Lavender Hill Magistrates’ Court,

176A Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

Your case may be dealt with on that day, or and a new date of hearing will be set for your case to be heard. If you have any queries, please contact the Admin Centre at Lavender Hill. It is in your best interest to attend this hearing.

Yours faithfully,

P Brow

P Brown

Admin Officer

Lavender Hill Admin Centre

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 32

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229

 

32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 32

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229

--

216,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 30 September 2014 13:29

To: mandy.skinner@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Attachments:

S Cordell Cert._ GE_ 2013-2014.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ FW_RE_ CX52JRZ.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ FW_ RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ [1] RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ REF_ 00-COSX14MT04-ID_42_ Urgent.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ Simon Cordell-01.pdf

Forwarded re phone call

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 30 September 2014 12:47

To: 'Brown-W, Pauletta'

Subject: RE: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Dear Miss Brown

My son was due to attend court today at 2pm but he is very unwell as I said on the phone to you his Nan has just died and he also has crohn's disease and depression, due to his Nan passing away this has made his crohn's disease come on very bad.

We have tried to leave today to come to the court and had to turn round due to my son needing to change his things again.

Please can this email be passed to the judge to show why my son cannot attend court today.

In addition, please show the judge my son's insurance documents and all the emails that went back and forward to the insurance company.

Can you please ask the Officer that checks the documents to call KGM which will show he was insured and ask him to talk to Kelly Tiller who direct number is in the emails.

Can you please get back to me with an update to this matter and if the judge will set a new date or deal with this matter today as he will have all the documents needed to show my son was in fact insured.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

mailto: pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk  

Sent: 18 September 2014 17:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

For your information, please find letter attached

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

217,

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

Sent: 18 September 2014 16:09

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

RichmondSouthProsecutions@met.police.uk

Cc: LCCC Compliance Unit; LCCC Enforcement Unit

Subject: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Dear Sirs,

Please note that the above case has been relisted for a reopening hearing on the 30th instant at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, courtroom 1 at 2 pm. Therefore, please be good enough to have your file in court and can the LCCC please put this matter on hold until after the hearing, when the Defendant will attend. Thank you.

Regards

P Brown

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

218,

KGM

MOTOR INSURANCE

Member of Canopies Group

Certificate of Molo; insurance

Name of Policy holder Mr SIMON CORDELL

Policy Number: MT3574694

Registration Number of the Vehicle: Any motor vehicle the property of the Insured or in their custody or control

Effective Time and Date for Commencement of the Insurance for the purposes of the Relevant Law: 0:01 23 February 2013

Expiry Time and Date of the Insurance: 23:59 22 February 2014

219,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine CX52JRZ.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 17:20

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: CX52JRZ

Hello Martin

Please see the below email that I have been told by the police to contract Charlton Car Pound as when any vehicle is impounded, they do a check and list all the items in the vehicle. I am hoping to get a reply to my email on how to go about getting the list shortly.

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 17:14

To: vrescharlton@met.police.uk

Subject: RE: CX52JRZ

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after calling the police and being told to contract yourselves about a matter I am trying to sort out.

My Van reg CX52 JRZ was impounded to Charlton Car Pound, 8 Bramshot Avenue, London, SE7 7HY on the 14/11/2013 tickets No: 01/ J63181495

I have been told by the police when I called them that each vehicle that is impounded you do a check on to list what items are in there.

I would like to know how I can go about getting a list of items that was in my van reg CX52 JRZ as I need this list to give it to my insurance company.

Or if my insurance company emails you can you give them a list.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/32f56c08883d4e0098c6f6f8b77...

11/09/2014

220,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine Cordell Son Cordell.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:06

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com   

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Hello Martin

I have spent all weekend trying to get hold of the two Charlton Car Pound as that is where the police have said there will hold a list of what was in the van. The police have told me that the compound has to make a list of every vehicle that is impounded so it covers them also so they will have a list. I have sent 2 emails over the weekend which I do know they have read as I had tracking on them.

I have spoken to Kelly today and she has asked me to make sure you have the information for the compound and can you pass it over to her asap. Also can you find out from Kelly Tiller if Simon will be covered after 12.00 today while she gets hold of the compound please and let us know as soon as possible.

Emails for the compound charltondocuments@met.police.uk vrescharlton@met.police.uk Address and ticket number

Charlton Car Pound, 8 Bramshot Avenue, London, SE7 7HY on the 14/11/2013 tickets No: 01/ J63181495

Charlton Car Pound 02082848661 telephone number that I can find.

Van Reg CX52JRZ and the date was taken in was the 14/11/2013

I have also been speaking to Sally Browne, duty inspector at Lambeth police station, I spoken to her on the 22/11/2013 and the 23/11/2013 when she called me back. I was told that due to this going to court the police would not be able to talk to us and that they will not be back on duty till the end of this week and they will be doing night shaft.

CAD 7548/22Nov13 and also CAD 10164/22Nov13 these are the 2 CAD numbers for me asking to speak to the inspector Silly Browne.

Please see the read receipts below for the emails I sent over to the compound Your message

To: Austin PAUL R - Services

Subject: RE: CX52JRZ

Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 5:14:12 PM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London was read on Saturday, November 23, 2013 4:41:48 AM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/892c09e27c074f97a8c9258c5a8... 11/09/2014

221,

Page 2 of 3

the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents.

The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Find us at:

Your message

To: Guy Rob - CC Services

Subject: FW: RE: CX52JRZ

Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2013 1:32:58 PM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London was read on Sunday, November 24, 2013 5:01:36 PM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents.

The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 24 November 2013 13:33

To: charltondocuments@met.police.uk

Subject: FW: RE: CX52JRZ

Hello

Can anyone please tell me how I can deal with this issue below Many Thanks

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/892c09e27c074f97a8c9258c5a8...

11/09/2014

222,

Page 3 of 3

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 17:14

To: vrescharlton@met.police.uk

Subject: RE: CX52JRZ

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after calling the police and being told to contract yourselves about a matter I am trying to sort out.

My Van reg CX52 JRZ was impounded to Charlton Car Pound, 8 Bramshot Avenue, London, SE7 7HY on the 14/11/2013 tickets No: 01/ J63181495

I have been told by the police when I called them that each vehicle that is impounded you do a check on to list what items are in there.

I would like to know how I can go about getting a list of items that was in my van reg CX52 JRZ as I need this list to give it to my insurance company.

Or if my insurance company emails you can you give them a list.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/892c09e27c074f97a8c9258c5a8...

11/09/2014

223,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine Cordell Cordell.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 16:50

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: [1] RE: Simon Cordell

Hello Martin

Kelly from KGM has just called and said that they will keep the cover till Monday at 12.00 for us to have time to get information from the police that there was in fact no tools in the van. Simon has already been on the phone to the police and been told to contract the compound 6the van was taken to as they have to check every vehicle that is taken there, he is at this time on the phone to the compound in order to try and get the information that KGM needs.

The Compound it was taken to is

Charlton vehicle pound 8 Bramshot Avenue,

Charlton,

London,

SE77HY

Simon

From: Martin Jenkin mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 22 November 2013 15:50

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: [1] RE: Simon Cordell

Hi Lorraine,

Please find response from your insurers

I have listened to the call that took place between the police and my colleague Jessica advising that Mr Simon Cordell was carrying tools in his vehicle so unfortunately, we have no other opportunity but to continue with the cancellation of the policy.

Unfortunately the policy will cease as of tomorrow as per the letter from KGM.

The only way to stop this is to either get the Police officer to contact KGM, or to get a signed statement from him before 1700hrs today.

Regards

Martin

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 15:15

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Hello Martin

I made a mistake on the date that KGM said they were going to close my insurance policy it’s the 23/11/2013 so I will need to know today if I will still be insured as from 23/11/2013 until this matter is sorted.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 November 2013 14:24

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Hello Martin

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/e8f014d0038a430ebb045cc2ec9...

11/09/2014

224,

Page 2 of 3

After the call you made today and talked to myself Miss Lorraine Cordell, I am sending over the information you asked for. I do feel also that KMG asking to speak to the police office is in breach of my data protection, but I will be willing to write and allow them to do this. As I said to KMG yesterday on a phone that was made to them when I talked to Kelly Tilley I have not been found guilty at a court of law for not having no insurance and it is for a court of law to find me guilty not a police officer who thinks I done something when I have not. Even if KGM does speak to the police office he will still say what he feels and that is not a fact that I am guilty of anything. To be found guilty it would have to be done in front of a judge.

Also Martin as you said on the phone today when you in fact talked to the police on that day not once did they say I had anything in my van that would void my insurance, and in fact I believe at this stage if the police did in fact have proof they would have said to you that my van was full of things which is not the case.

I would like to also know if my insurance is going to carry on while this matter is addressed or if it will be closed down on the 27/11/2013 as the letter says that KGM have sent me. And if KMG is going to close down my policy I would like full written conditions of what part of my policy I have broken.

As for the letter of complain that will be going to the police Simon still has not fully read over it to make sure there is no errors or anything else that needs adding but it does go into details as to what went on, it is only for use by yourself and KGM to read only.

Also as I said on the phone to you today the police are also telling me that the 3 times that my vehicles were seized and I had to pay for them to be taken out of the compound, I will need to claim this back from my insurance company as they had not done their job and put them on the database so they are at fault not the police.

You said to me today that KGM are looking into this as they are on the database and it should show up to the police that I am in fact insured. This has not been the case for me and I have suffered badly due to this and this is the reason I have to carry my insurance policy at all times so when I get pulled over by the police I can show them my documents, as the police say it does not show up as I am insured, this is also the reason the insurance company have had so many calls from the police to asked if I am insured or not since my policy started.

Could you please send me proof that the vehicles where on the database so I can put the claim in to the police to get my money back for the times my vehicles were seized. As at this stage I do not want to have to put a freedom of information act into yourselves or the police to the amount of times that the police have in fact had to call my insurance company to see if I was insured due to the police saying I was not insured..

I have always been very happy with Broadsure Direct that is why I have still use them and would like my insurance to carry on under them.

From: Lorraine Cordell [ mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:57

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Hi Martin

Can you let me know by email if I am going to still have insurance as from the 27/11/2013 please, I got a letter saying my insurance will be closed from the 27/11/2013, and I cannot see the reason for this as I have done nothing wrong.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [ mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:57

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/e8f014d0038a430ebb045cc2ec9...

11/09/2014

225,

Page 3 of 3

Dear martin

After a next call and talking to oily he asked me to send over the receipt of me buying the van please see attached scan. I am waiting for the new logbook to come from DVLA.

Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 15 November 2013 13:07

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Martin

Today the 15/11/13 I made a call to be able to speak to you with regard to what happened yesterday the 14/11/2013 with the police. I have talked to Oilly today and he asked me to write this email to you as they are thinking of closing my insurance policy.

Yesterday I went for a meeting with the owner of a night club for a future job position the meeting was set for 14.00 hours.

I drove down for my meeting and got there at around 13.00 hours there were some police at the road side doing stops on cars etc, as I drove pass and pulled over to park by the night club, my friend who was with me got out of the van to get some drinks and food while I waited in the van, as I got to the club early for my meeting.

The police that were doing the stops came up to me, they told me they wanted to do some checks on the van I was sitting in, I asked why, and they told me under the road traffic act.

I then passed the police my insurance policy for them to go over, the police officer also asked me why I had stopped there.

I explained to him I had a meeting in the night club that we were outside, as it was due to open to the public in 1-month time to secure my future position there. While I was there, I was also planning on asking if there were any painting jobs, I explained all this to the police officer I was talking to.

The police looked inside the van and clearly saw it was empty and that there were also no signs on the van showing it to be a company van. But the police officer was still unhappy. He talked to yourselves as the insurance company on the phone and was told I was not insured, at what point I called you myself as my insurance company as I knew I was insured. I explained the situation to yourselves to be told I was covered for commuting to work, social and domestic, as well as motor trade, but not for carriage of goods for a company, which did not matter as my van was empty and still is whilst being in the police impound.

I am putting in a complaint to the independent complaints commission in regard to the unlawful seizure of my vehicle.

Further to this would it please be possible to find out the status of my insurance policy and the reasons as to why I have been told you are in the process of closing my policy.

Yours sincerely

Mr Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/e8f014d0038a430ebb045cc2ec9...

11/09/2014

226,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ REF_ 42_ Urgent.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 17:12

To: 'Vicky Beale'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT04-ID<42> Urgent

Hello Vicky Beale

After the call I made to yourself about the email you sent me I will go to the compound in the morning due to the time now I would not get there still very late due to the tariff and by the time I got there I do not believe Kelly Tiller would still be working so I will go in the morning and when I get there I will call Kelly.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

From: Vicky Beale mailto: vickybeale@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:10

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: REF: 00-COSX14MT04-ID<42> Urgent

Importance: High

Kind Regards,

Vicky Beale

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

From: Vicky Beale mailto: vickybeale@broadsuredirect.com  

Sent: 25 November 2013 15:53

To: lorriane32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: REF: 00-COSX14MT04-ID<42> Urgent

Importance: High

Good Afternoon,

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/2b3bc59100854683a73894b080...

11/09/2014

227,

Page 2 of 2

Can you please ask Simon to contact me urgently, as we need him to go to the compound and when he is there to contact Kelly at KGM on 02085301811, if he can't do this that we need a report form from the compound and for him to contact 02071613500 and request a subject access request of report.

Kind Regards,

Vicky Beale

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/2b3bc59100854683a73894b080... 11/09/2014

228,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine Change Re Simon Cordell.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 15:46

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Data-Protection-KGM.doc.

Kelly-Tiller-KGM.doc

Hello Martin,

Thank you for the phone call today to tell me I was still insured.

Could you please pass on the attached documents to Kelly Tiller at KGM one is a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The other letter is just to get Kelly Tiller to confirm by email I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing and also to found out why my van is still not showing up on the database.

And also about the logbooks which I am still waiting for them from DVLA I called DVLA today when I got back from the compound and was told it can take 8 weeks for me to get the new logbooks, I will therefore send then right over to you by email as soon as I get them.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/bf6c57d68b364b7a9c556779b77...

30/09/2014

229,

FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802->Lorraine Cordell-01.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 18 December 2013 13:06

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Hi Martin

I have still not had a reply from KGM about the data protection or an email from them to say he is in fact still insured. And on the Mid database the van is still showing as not insured, due to this Simon is not driving the van as he does not want to get pulled again by the police which I don’t think is right as he has in fact paid his insurance to be able to drive it if he needs to can this please be sorted out as he really does not want any more problems with getting pulled over due to it not showing up as insured. I also have called DVLA again about the logbook and have been told that they should be with us soon.

Many Thanks

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 15:46

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Hello Martin,

Thank you for the phone call today to tell me I was still insured.

Could you please pass on the attached documents to Kelly Tiller at KGM one is a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The other letter is just to get Kelly Tiller to confirm by email I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing and also to found out why my van is still not showing up on the database.

And also about the logbooks which I am still waiting for them from DVLA I called DVLA today when I got back from the compound and was told it can take 8 weeks for me to get the new logbooks, I will therefore send then right over to you by email as soon as I get them.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/b809ad443dde47888749f7f2f1c... 30/09/2014

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 33

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ_001

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243

 

33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 33

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_FW Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ_001

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243

--

230,

From: Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 30 September 2014 13:22

To: swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Attachments: S Cordell Cert._GE_2013-2014.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ FW RE CX52JRZ.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ FW RE_SimonCordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE [1] RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE REF_ 00-COSX14MT04-ID_42_ Urgent.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE Simon Cordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE Simon Cordell-01.pdf

Dear Miss Brown

My son was due to attend court today at 2pm but he is very unwell as I said on the phone to you his Nan has just died and he also has crohn's disease and depression, due to his Nan passing away this has made his crohn's disease come on very bad.

We have tried to leave today to come to the court and had to turn round due to my son needing to change his things again.

Please can this email be passed to the judge to show why my son cannot attend court today.

In addition, please show the judge my son's insurance documents and all the emails that went back and forward to the insurance company.

Can you please ask the Officer that checks the documents to call KGM which will show he was insured and ask him to talk to Kelly Tiller who direct number is in the emails.

Can you please get back to me with an update to this matter and if the judge will set a new date or deal with this matter today as he will have all the documents needed to show my son was in fact insured.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Brown-W, Pauletta mailto: pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 18 September 2014 17:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

For your information, please find letter attached

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014, our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

Sent: 18 September 2014 16:09

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

RichmondSouthProsecutions@met.police.uk

Cc: LCCC Compliance Unit; LCCC Enforcement Unit

Subject: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

231,

Dear Sirs,

Please note that the above case has been relisted for a reopening hearing on the 30th instant at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, courtroom 1 at 2 pm. Therefore, please be good enough to have your file in court and can the LCCC please put this matter on hold until after the hearing, when the Defendant will attend. Thank you.

Regards

P Brown

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467 |

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014, our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

232,

KGM

MOTOR INSURANCE

Member of Canopies Group

Certificate of Molo; insurance

Name of Policy holder Mr SIMON CORDELL

Policy Number: MT3574694

Registration Number of the Vehicle: Any motor vehicle the property of the Insured or in their custody or control

Effective Time and Date for Commencement of the Insurance for the purposes of the Relevant Law: 0:01 23 February 2013

Expiry Time and Date of the Insurance: 23:59 22 February 2014

--

233,234,235,236,237,238,239,240,241,242,243,

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 34.

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_RE Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

 

34.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 34.

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.30.2014_RE Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ

30/09/2014

/ Page Numbers: 244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

--

244,

Dear Miss Brown

My son was due to attend court today at 2pm but he is very unwell as I said on the phone to you his Nan has just died and he also has crohn's disease and depression, due to his Nan passing away this has made his crohn's disease come on very bad.

We have tried to leave today to come to the court and had to turn round due to my son needing to change his things again.

Please can this email be passed to the judge to show why my son cannot attend court today.

In addition, please show the judge my son's insurance documents and all the emails that went back and forward to the insurance company.

Can you please ask the Officer that checks the documents to call KGM which will show he was insured and ask him to talk to Kelly Tiller who direct number is in the emails.

Can you please get back to me with an update to this matter and if the judge will set a new date or deal with this matter today as he will have all the documents needed to show my son was in fact insured.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

mailto: pauletta.brown-w@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 18 September 2014 17:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

For your information, please find letter attached

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467 |

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014, our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

From: Brown-W, Pauletta

Sent: 18 September 2014 16:09

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

RichmondSouthProsecutions@met.police.uk

Cc: LCCC Compliance Unit; LCCC Enforcement Unit

Subject: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 30 September 2014 12:47

To: 'Brown-W, Pauletta'

Subject: RE: Application to Reopen - Simon P CORDELL (02TJJ63181495 LAH) 1401009802

Attachments:

S Cordell Cert._ GE_ 2013-2014.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ FW_RE_ CX52JRZ.pdf

Lorraine Cordell_ FW_ RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ [1] RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ REF_ 00-COSX14MT04-ID_42_ Urgent.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf.

Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ Simon Cordell-01.pdf

245,

Dear Sirs,

Please note that the above case has been relisted for a reopening hearing on the 30th instant at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, courtroom 1 at 2 pm. Therefore, please be good enough to have your file in court and can the LCCC please put this matter on hold until after the hearing, when the Defendant will attend. Thank you.

Regards

P Brown

Pauletta Brown | Admin Officer | HMCTS |

176a Lavender Hill, Battersea, London SW11 1JU

T: 020 7805 1467 |

F: 020 7805 1437 |

DX 58559 Clapham Junction |

E: Pauletta.Brown-W@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014, our fax will be GOLDFAX No:0870 324 0299*

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means."

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

246,

KGM

MOTOR INSURANCE

Member of Canopies Group

Certificate of Molo; insurance

Name of Policy holder Mr SIMON CORDELL

Policy Number: MT3574694

Registration Number of the Vehicle: Any motor vehicle the property of the Insured or in their custody or control

Effective Time and Date for Commencement of the Insurance for the purposes of the Relevant Law: 0:01 23 February 2013

Expiry Time and Date of the Insurance: 23:59 22 February 2014

--

247,248,249,250,251,252,253,254,255,256,257,258,

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 35

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_10.08.2014_RE RE urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

08/10/2014

/ Page Numbers: 259,260,261

 

35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 35

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_10.08.2014_RE RE urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

08/10/2014

/ Page Numbers: 259,260,261

--

259,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 08 October 2014 18:24

To: 'gl-brentmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Attachments: S Cordell Cert_ GE_ 2013-2014.pdf

Dear sir or Madam

I am writing this email due to the reply dated the 01/10/2014 I got in the post on 06/10/2014 about the email I sent to you on the 12/09/2014 please see below email dated 12/09/2014.

 

 

Above is a picture of the reply where you say I have 21 days to file a statutory declaration due to me being unaware of the court processing.

I did not know about this court case. I have been wrongfully convicted and have points on my licence, which should not be there.

In the email dated the 12/09/2014, I asked for my case to be listed in order that I could do the following

Application to set aside the conviction

Re-open the case

260,

The reason for this is because I have been wrongfully convicted as I did in fact have insurance. As shown in the attached file.

Please can you list my case in court so I can put the Application to set aside the conviction, Re-open the case that I have been wrongfully convicted for.

This matter is urgent. I cannot resolve this matter until the case is listed before either a District Judge or Magistrates so I would appreciate your cooperation. This is causing me stress. Can you please resolve this legal matter by listing the case for an application to set aside the conviction? I can then forward my documents to the relevant prosecuting authority.

Regards Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 September 2014 15:11

To: gl-brentmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Dear Sir or Madam

I have tried to call the court on a number of occasions regarding my conviction and sentence for no insurance but the phone just rings when I press the number given to ask about this case the telephone number I am calling is 0208 955 0555. I have now found out the information to the case but pressing number 7 the lady I spoke to did in fact try and put me to a manager but that also just ring then cut me off. So, I called back again and asked her if she could give me the information which she did.

I am making this request to have my case listed in order that I can do the following.

Application to set aside the conviction

Re-open the case

My name: Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

Address: 109 Burncroft Av Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Case No: 011401596899

Application to set aside the conviction: -

On 01/01/2014 I was stopped by the police as they did not believe that I held a valid policy of insurance. Due to this being a holiday my insurance company was closed so the police could not check if I was in fact was insured, I was insured and asked the police to check there records due to the amount of problems I had had with my insurance not showing on the MID database and being stopped do many times they did this and could in fact see many times but still impounded my van reg CX52 JRZ.

After the holidays I went to the compound and had to again pay for my Van to be taken out of the compound.

I never received any summons in relation to this matter and I only became aware that the case had been dealt with in my absence when I received a letter from the DVLA advising me that I had to send in my driving licence. I disputed with the DVLA the points, but I was

261,

given an ultimatum that if I did not send in my licence it would be revoked.

The offence of no insurance was allegedly committed on 01/01/2014. I had a valid policy of insurance from 23/02/2013 and this policy was valid until 22/02/2014 The company insuring me was KGM, and my broker was Broadsure direct I am the named policy holder, Mr. Simon Cordell and my policy number is MT3574694.

I have points on my licence which I should not have. Can you please as a matter of urgency email me back on this matter so that I can have a date so that the conviction can be set aside and my case heard in order that I can show the court my insurance and the PLO can make the necessary enquiries.

I would be grateful if you can inform DVLA that this matter and the points that have been added to my licence is being disputed so this can be put on hold as I do not see why I should suffer when I have done nothing wrong and I was insured to drive. This is in fact have a big effect on my life when I have done nothing wrong and would like this addressed as a matter of urgency.

This matter is urgent. I cannot resolve this matter until the case is listed before either a District Judge or Magistrates so I would appreciate your cooperation. This is causing me stress. Can you now please resolve this legal mater by listing the case for an application to set aside the conviction? I can then forward my documents to the relevant prosecuting authority.

Please see attached my insurance documents for this offence in fact showing I was in fact insured.

I await hearing from you in relation to this matter and I thank you in advance for your anticipated co-operation in this matter.

Yours faithfully

Simon Cordell

261+

KGM

MOTOR INSURANCE

Member of Canopies Group

Certificate of Molo; insurance

Name of Policy holder Mr SIMON CORDELL

Policy Number: MT3574694

Registration Number of the Vehicle: Any motor vehicle the property of the Insured or in their custody or control

Effective Time and Date for Commencement of the Insurance for the purposes of the Relevant Law: 0:01 23 February 2013

Expiry Time and Date of the Insurance: 23:59 22 February 2014

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 36

Anita.Ayi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk_11.20.2014_Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Ag

20/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 262,263,264

265,266,267

 

36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 36

Anita.Ayi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk_11.20.2014_Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Ag

20/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 262,263,264

265,266,267

--

262,

From: Ayi, Anita

Anita.Ayi@fmandal-ombudsman.org.uk

Sent: 20 November 2014 17:30

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited (Our ref: 16352175)

Attachments: Cordell CF.rtf

Dear Ms Cordell

Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited

Thank you for getting in touch with us. Our consumer leaflet explains our role - so do read through and have a look at how we can help: www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/consumer-leaflet.htm

As you can see, before we can take on a complaint, the business involved must have the chance to put things right. what happens next

I've written to the business to let them know about the complaint. They should contact you soon to tell you they are looking into what's happened - and to ask for more details if they need them.

If you don't hear from the business within the next few days, you can contact them using the details below - mentioning that we have already written to them. They should give you their final response to the complaint - in writing - within eight weeks of the date they first received it.

The business's final response should summarise the complaint and give you their final say. It should also tell you that you can refer the complaint to us if you're not happy - which you have to do within six months.

In case you need it, the business's address is:

KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited

KGM House

George Lane

London

E18 1RX

263,

once you have a final response - or after eight weeks

If you're not happy with the business's final response - or if eight weeks pass and you haven't received it - then please fill in the enclosed complaint form and send it to us.

Please also send us a copy of the final response and any other information you think is important to the complaint. There's no need to send us any original documents.

We don't normally pay the professional fees - in full or in part - of any solicitor, accountant, or other paid adviser that a consumer might use to bring a complaint to us.

We won't take any more action unless you contact us again. If you would like more information about us, please see our website - www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk.

Yours sincerely Anita Ayi

Consumer Consultant

Anita Ayi | Consumer Consultant |

Tel: 020 3716 9790 |

Fax: 020 3716 9791 |Financial Ombudsman Service |

Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR

This email is covered by our email disclaimer.

This email was sent from Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd. Registered in England and Wales. Registered Number: 3725015. Registered Office: Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR, United Kingdom.

264,

265,

266,

267,

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 37

Anita.Ayi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk_11.21.2014_RE Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting

21/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 268,269,270

271,272,273,274

 

37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 37

Anita.Ayi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk_11.21.2014_RE Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting

21/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 268,269,270

271,272,273,274

--

268,

From: Ayi, Anita

Anita.Ayi@fmandal-ombudsman.org.uk

Sent: 21 November 2014 11:30

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited (Our ref: 16352175)

Attachments: Cordell CF.rtf

Dear Lorraine

Many thanks for your email.

I have reattached the complaint form to the email for your perusal.

If you have any further question, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,

Anita Ayi

Consumer Consultant

Anita Ayi | Consumer Consultant |

Tel: 020 3716 9790 |

Fax: 020 3716 9791 |

Financial Ombudsman Service | Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 November 2014 20:09

To: Ayi, Anita

Subject: RE: Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited (Our ref: 16352175)

Hello

Thank you for the email to the complaint but I cannot see the attached form which my son would need to look over and write anything else that has not been written and sign and send back.

Could you please attach the form so that this can be done

Regards

Lorraine

From: Ayi, Anita mailto: Anita.Ayi@financial-ombudsman.org.uk

 Sent: 20 November 2014 17:30

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited (Our ref: 16352175)

Dear Ms Cordell

Mr S Cordell's complaint about KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited

Thank you for getting in touch with us. Our consumer leaflet explains our role - so do read through and have a look at how we can help: www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/consumer-leaflet.htm

As you can see, before we can take on a complaint, the business involved must have the chance to put things right. what happens next

I've written to the business to let them know about the complaint. They should contact you soon to tell you they are looking into what's happened - and to ask for more details if they need them.

269,

If you don't hear from the business within the next few days, you can contact them using the details below - mentioning that we have already written to them. They should give you their final response to the complaint - in writing - within eight weeks of the date they first received it.

The business's final response should summarise the complaint and give you their final say. It should also tell you that you can refer the complaint to us if you're not happy - which you have to do within six months.

In case you need it, the business's address is:

KGM Underwriting Agencies Limited

KGM House

George Lane

London

E18 1RX

270,

once you have a final response - or after eight weeks

If you're not happy with the business's final response - or if eight weeks pass and you haven't received it - then please fill in the enclosed complaint form and send it to us.

Please also send us a copy of the final response and any other information you think is important to the complaint. There's no need to send us any original documents.

We don't normally pay the professional fees - in full or in part - of any solicitor, accountant, or other paid adviser that a consumer might use to bring a complaint to us.

We won't take any more action unless you contact us again. If you would like more information about us, please see our website - www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk.

Yours sincerely Anita Ayi

Consumer Consultant

Anita Ayi | Consumer Consultant |

Tel: 020 3716 9790 |

Fax: 020 3716 9791 |

Financial Ombudsman Service | Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR

This email is covered by our email disclaimer.

This email was sent from Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd. Registered in England and Wales. Registered Number: 3725015. Registered Office: Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR, United Kingdom.

This email is covered by our email disclaimer.

This email was sent from Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd. Registered in England and Wales. Registered Number: 3725015. Registered Office: Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR, United Kingdom.

271,

Financial Ombudsman Service / complaint form!

272,

Financial Ombudsman Service / complaint form!

273,

Financial Ombudsman Service / complaint form!

274,

Financial Ombudsman Service / complaint form!

 

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 38

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.21.2014_RE Simon Cordell

21/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 275,276

 

 

38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 38

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.21.2014_RE Simon Cordell

21/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 275,276

--

275,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 21 November 2014 14:12

To: gl-bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: 011402647845-Court-Case.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a letter from the court that my son Simon Cordell DOB 26/01/2014 had a case on the 06/11/2014 in Bromley Magistrates Court

It says on the letter it was for a case of no insurance the case number is 011402647845

The problem is we did not know he was due to come to court on this date we have had no summons and my son is insured he always has insurance and would not drive without it.

There has been a number of issues with his insurance and this is due to it not showing up on the MID database. There has been a number of Seizers to his vehicles for no insurance when he was in fact insured.

Could you please send me details of what date this offence of no insurance happened? This way I can send the correct insurance policy by email. and can work forward to clearing this matter up.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

276,

RE: - Simon Cordell->011402647845-Court-Case.pdf

Bromley Magistrates' Court Code 2575

London Collection and Compliance Centre PO Box 31090 London SW1P 3WQ Payments 0300 790 9901 www.direct.gov.uk/payacourtfine Information 020 7556 8500 AP 31712

Mr Simon Paul CORDELL

109 Burnt Croft Avenue

Enfield

Middlesex

EN3 7JQ

Division: 077

Account number: 14115223S CG

Case number: 011402647845

Born: 26 January 1981

Notice of fine and collection order

Offences and penalties

Date

Offences and Impositions

 

Amount Ł

6 Nov 2014

1 / Use a motor vehicle on a road / public place without

Fine

600.00

 

third party insurance.

Victim Sur

60.00

 

 

Costs

85.00

You must pay:

The total amount on or before 4 December 2014

Total: Ł

745.00

The court has made a Collection Order to collect the sum due.

See reverse for details on how to pay. Failure to pay as ordered will make you liable for further enforcement action unless you pay the full balance immediately. This could include:

® Deductions from your earnings

· Deductions from your benefit

· A distress warrant being issued to the bailiffs for the seizure of goods (which will incur additional costs of up to Ł300)

» Warrant for your arrest to return you to court

· Increasing your fine by 50%

9 Clamping, removal, and sale of your vehicle

· Registering the account in the Register of Judgements, Orders and Fines (affecting your ability to obtain credit)

· If after these sanctions have been imposed, your fine remains outstanding, the court may order that you are imprisoned for non-payment.

If you have difficulties in paying the amount you must immediately contact the Enforcement Team on the number above.

All enquiries regarding this notice should be made to the above address.

Date: 6 November 2014

K. T. Griffiths

Justices' Clerk

Mr Simon Paul CORDELL

7 November 2014/FINO 36 0/2415061/1

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 39

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.27.2014_FW Simon Cordell

27/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 277,278,279

 

39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 39

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.27.2014_FW Simon Cordell

27/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 277,278,279

--

277,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:49

To: 'sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Attachments: si-insurance-19-05-2014.pdf

Dear Miss S E Leslie

Thank you for the reply to my email, I did in fact speak to someone at the court yesterday Mr Mark Dredge as I explained my son was due in court yesterday on a next matter of no insurance when he was insured. After speaking to that court, they told me to ask the CPS dealing with that case to deal with the other 2 matters of no insurance which my son never got a summons for.

Mark Dredge told me the case at Bromley was in fact a date of 20/05/2014 so I attended court with my son yesterday with my son’s insurance papers for that date.

I did ask the CPS yesterday to deal with these other 2 matters, but she said she could not, and I would have to contract the court which I had told her I had already done.

Please see attached file of my son’s insurance.

You can contact me on 07961 833021.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell

From: Leslie, Sandra [mailto:sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk] On Behalf Of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Morning Miss Cordell

Thank you for your email, please could you email me your mobile number to discuss this matter further.

Regards Miss S E Leslie

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 21 November 2014 14:12

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a letter from the court that my son Simon Cordell DOB 26/01/2014 had a case on the 06/11/2014 in Bromley Magistrates Court

It says on the letter it was for a case of no insurance the case number is 011402647845

The problem is we did not know he was due to come to court on this date we have had no summons and my son is insured he always has insurance and would not drive without it.

There has been a number of issues with his insurance and this is due to it not showing up on the MID database. There has been a number of Seizers to his vehicles for no insurance when he was in fact insured.

Could you please send me details of what date this offence of no insurance happened? This way I can send the correct insurance policy by email. and can work forward to clearing this matter up.

278,

Regards Lorraine Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

279,

 

 

40.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 40

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.27.2014_RE Simon Cordell

27/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 280,281,282

 

 

 

40.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 40

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_11.27.2014_RE Simon Cordell

27/11/2014

/ Page Numbers: 280,281,282

--

280,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:44

To: 'GL-BROMLEYMCENQ'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: si-insurance-19-05-2014.pdf

Dear Miss S E Leslie

Thank you for the reply to my email, I did in fact speak to someone at the court yesterday Mr Mark Dredge as I explained my son was due in court yesterday on a next matter of no insurance when he was insured. After speaking to that court, they told me to ask the CPS dealing with that case to deal with the other 2 matters of no insurance which my son never got a summons for.

Mark Dredge told me the case at Bromley was in fact a date of 20/05/2014 so I attended court with my son yesterday with my son’s insurance papers for that date.

I did ask the CPS yesterday to deal with these other 2 matters, but she said she could not, and I would have to contract the court which I had told her I had already done.

Please see attached file of my son’s insurance.

You can contact me on 07961 8.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell

From: Leslie, Sandra [mailto:sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk] On Behalf Of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Morning Miss Cordell

Thank you for your email, please could you email me your mobile number to discuss this matter further.

Regards Miss S E Leslie

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 21 November 2014 14:12

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a letter from the court that my son Simon Cordell DOB 26/01/2014 had a case on the 06/11/2014 in Bromley Magistrates Court

It says on the letter it was for a case of no insurance the case number is 011402647845

The problem is we did not know he was due to come to court on this date we have had no summons and my son is insured he always has insurance and would not drive without it.

There has been a number of issues with his insurance and this is due to it not showing up on the MID database. There has been a number of Seizers to his vehicles for no insurance when he was in fact insured.

Could you please send me details of what date this offence of no insurance happened? This way I can send the correct insurance policy by email. and can work forward to clearing this matter up.

281,

Regards Lorraine Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

282,

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 41

Mark.Dredge@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_12.04.2014_FW Simon Cordell

04/12/2014

/ Page Numbers: 283,284,285,286

 

41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 41

Mark.Dredge@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

12.04.2014_FW Simon Cordell

04/12/2014

/ Page Numbers: 283,284,285,286

--

283,

From: Dredge, Mark <Mark.Dredge@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk> on behalf of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

gl-bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Attachments: si-insurance-19-05-2014.pdf

Dear Miss Leslie,

Please be informed that I the Statutory Declaration was granted and will be heard 18/12/2014

Kind Regards

Mark Dredge Customer Services

SE Group Bexley-Bromley-Greenwich Magistrates' Courts 1 London Road Bromley BR11RA

0208 437 3500 Gold Fax 0870 324 0223

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:44

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Miss S E Leslie

Thank you for the reply to my email, I did in fact speak to someone at the court yesterday Mr Mark Dredge as I explained my son was due in court yesterday on a next matter of no insurance when he was insured. After speaking to that court, they told me to ask the CPS dealing with that case to deal with the other 2 matters of no insurance which my son never got a summons for.

Mark Dredge told me the case at Bromley was in fact a date of 20/05/2014 so I attended court with my son yesterday with my son’s insurance papers for that date.

I did ask the CPS yesterday to deal with these other 2 matters, but she said she could not, and I would have to contract the court which I had told her I had already done.

Please see attached file of my son’s insurance.

You can contact me on 07961.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell

From: Leslie, Sandra

mailto: sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk On Behalf Of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Sent: 27 November 2014 12:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Morning Miss Cordell

Thank you for your email, please could you email me your mobile number to discuss this matter further.

Regards Miss S E Leslie

284,

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 November 2014 14:12

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a letter from the court that my son Simon Cordell DOB 26/01/2014 had a case on the 06/11/2014 in Bromley Magistrates Court

It says on the letter it was for a case of no insurance the case number is 011402647845

The problem is we did not know he was due to come to court on this date we have had no summons and my son is insured he always has insurance and would not drive without it.

There has been a number of issues with his insurance and this is due to it not showing up on the MID database. There has been a number of Seizers to his vehicles for no insurance when he was in fact insured.

Could you please send me details of what date this offence of no insurance happened? This way I can send the correct insurance policy by email. and can work forward to clearing this matter up.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

285,

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

286,

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 42

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_FW MT3574694

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297

 

42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 42

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_FW MT3574694

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297

--

287,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 21 January 2015 22:53

To: 'Andrew.Austin@canopius.com'

Cc: 'complaints@lloyds.com'

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Attachments: S Cordell Cert._ KGM_ 2013-2014_Colour.pdf.

Information we need.pdf

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

288,

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew

mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime, I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

289,

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subj etc. access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact, would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew

mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

· Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

· Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

· Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations, we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00.

290,

Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even

291,

aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has

292,

messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work. Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards Simon Cordell

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

293,

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

294,

295,

FW: MT3574fpage on we need.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

Section 9 witness statement from:

· Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

· Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

· All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

· The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

· Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

Section 9 witness statement from:

· Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

· This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

· Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

296,

Page 2 of 3

· Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

· The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

· Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

· Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin [mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately, Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

297,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 43

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_RE MT3574694

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308

 

43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 43

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_RE MT3574694

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308

--

298,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 22:51

To: 'Austin, Andrew'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Attachments: S Cordell Cert._ KGM_ 2013-2014_Colour.pdf

Information we need.pdf

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

299,

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime, I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you

300,

did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed, and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact, would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew

mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

· Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

· Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

· Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations, we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

301,

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have

302,

been cancelled which to me What was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summon the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work. Due to the fact, KGM could

303,

not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards Simon Cordell

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

304,

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

305,

306,

RE: MT3574fpage on we need.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

Section 9 witness statement from:

1. Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

2. Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

3. All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

4. The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

5. Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

· Section 9 witness statement from:

6. Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

7. This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

8. Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

307,

Page 2 of 3

9. Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

10. The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

11. Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

12. Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

308,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 44

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_RE MT3574694_002

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

 

44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 44

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2015_RE MT3574694_002

21/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

--

309,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: andrew.austin@canopius.com

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Attachments: RE_REF_00-COSX14MT07-ID_80

Open Attach Documents.pdf.

RE_ Simon Cordell.pdf.

Data-Protection-KGM.doc.

Kelly-TiNer-KGM.doc

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

310,

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work. Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

311,

Regards

Simon Cordell

312,

RE: MT3574694->RE_ REF_ 00-COSX14MT07-ID_80POpeniAtt°ch4Documents.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

· Section 9 witness statement from:

1. Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

2. Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

3. All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

4. The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

5. Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

· Section 9 witness statement from:

6. Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

7. This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

8. Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

313,

Page 2 of 3

9. Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

10. The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

11. Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

12. Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin

Mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

314,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

315,

RE: MT3574694->Data-Protection-KGM.doc

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 26 November 2013 15:46

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Data-Protection-KGM.doc.

Kelly-Tiller-KGM.doc

Hello Martin,

Thank you for the phone call today to tell me I was still insured.

Could you please pass on the attached documents to Kelly Tiller at KGM one is a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The other letter is just to get Kelly Tiller to confirm by email I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing and also to found out why my van is still not showing up on the database.

And also about the logbooks which I am still waiting for them from DVLA I called DVLA today when I got back from the compound and was told it can take 8 weeks for me to get the new logbooks, I will therefore send then right over to you by email as soon as I get them.

Many Thanks

Simon Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/ad3ceeed5576443cb0c61af3f3b...

21/01/2015

316,

RE: MT3574694->Data-Protection-KGM.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 25/11/2013

KGM House 14 Eastwood Close London E18 1RZ

Dear Sir or Madam

Subject access request

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Please supply the information about me I am entitled to under the Data Protection Act 1998 relating to:

1. All data to prove that my Vehicles were on the database since my insurance was taken out.

2. Phone recording of the 14/11/2013 with the police officer and Jessica advising that Mr Simon Cordell was carrying tools in his vehicle.

3. Phone call for 26/11/2013 with Kelly Tiller and the manager of the Charlton vehicle pound, 8 Bramshot Avenue, Charlton, London, SE7 7HY, saying that there were not tools in the van Reg CX52 JRZ when it was impounded on the 14/11/2013.

4. And the reason why it still shows as of today’s date 25/11/2013 that my Van Reg CX52 JRZ still shows on the Mid data base as uninsured.

5. All phone calls made to Broadsure Direct and KGM since my policy started where the police have had to call to confirm I was in fact insured.

6. If there is any data that cannot be forwarding to me, please state this when forwarding me my data.

317,

If you need any more information from me, or a fee, please let me know as soon as possible.

It may be helpful for you to know that a request for information under the Data Protection Act 1998 should be responded to within 40 days.

If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you and can be contacted on 0303 123 1113 or at www.ico.org.uk/

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

318,

RE: MT3574694->Kelly-Tiller-KGM.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 25/11/2013

KGM House 14 Eastwood Close London E18 1RZ

Dear Kelly Tiller

Would it please be possible to confirm by email that I am in fact still insured so I have this in writing by KGM.

Also I have talked to Martin and he has told me that you need the logbook for my Vehicles, I am still waiting for them to come back from DVLA and as soon as I get them back which can take up to 8 weeks I have been told by DVLA on the phone today, I will scan them in and send them over to Martin.

Also can you please look into the reason that my Van CX52 JRZ is still showing up on the database as uninsured as of today’s date.

My Car MA57 LDY is now showing as insured.

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 45

complaints@lloyds.com_01.22.2015_Notification Case No 80792014 - MT3574694_001

22/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

 

 

45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 45

complaints@lloyds.com_01.22.2015_Notification Case No 80792014 - MT3574694_001

22/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

--

319,

From: Complaints complaints@lloyds.com

Sent: 22 January 2015 12:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574694

Attachments:   S Cordell Cert

KGM_ 2013-2014_Colour.pdf

Information we need.pdf

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your emails.

I note that you have been liaising with Canopius in regard to your complaint and from the correspondence we have on file that it is your intention to go to court.

Lloyd's complaints procedure is to offer policyholders the option for a review by Lloyd's, should they remain dissatisfied with the way in which their complaint has been handled. This is an independent review by a case officer at Lloyd's. However please note once a complaint becomes the subject of a court case Lloyd's can take no further action and we would have to cease our investigation.

Therefore, please can you confirm whether you are providing these emails for information only or whether you wish Lloyd's to review your case in place of potential court proceedings.

Kind regards Cheryl

Mrs Cheryl Shannon Case Officer Complaints Lloyd's

Telephone +44 (0)1634 39 5693 www.lloyds.com

SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 22:53

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Cc: Complaints

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

320,

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew

Mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

321,

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

322,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

1. Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

2. Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

3. Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

323,

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At these times lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I

324,

waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work. Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards

Simon Cordell

325,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

The information in this E-Mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged.

326,

If you are NOT the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. You should NOT retain, copy, or use this E-mail for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of its contents to any other person or persons.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, EXCEPT where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Lloyd's.

Lloyd's may monitor the content of E-mails sent and received via its network for viruses or unauthorised use and for other lawful business purposes.

Lloyd's is authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

327,

328,

Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574fpagfnfJri°fti0n we need.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

· Section 9 witness statement from:

1. Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

2. Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

3. All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

4. The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

5. Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

· Section 9 witness statement from:

6. Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

7. This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

8. Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

329,

Page 2 of 3

9. Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

10. The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

11. Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

12. Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin

Mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com  

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

330,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

 

 

 

46.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 46

 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.22.2015_RE Notification Case No 80792014 - MT3574694

22/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343

 

 

46.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 46

 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.22.2015_RE Notification Case No 80792014 - MT3574694

22/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343

--

331,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 22 January 2015 15:55

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: Notification Case No 8079/2014 -

Attachments: MT3574694 Information we need.pdf

Dear Andrew

Please see the below email from Mrs Cheryl Shannon, Case Officer, Complaints, Lloyd’s, and my reply.

I said to her I am willing to give you 7 days to get the information, we have been asking for to clear my son's name at court. Please see attached for information we need.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Complaints mailto: complaints@lloyds.com

Sent: 22 January 2015 15:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574694

Dear Mrs Cordell,

Thank you for your email and for speaking to me this afternoon.

with the Subject Access Request and call recordings that we will not escalate your complaint to a Lloyd's

Kind regards Cheryl

Just to clarify our conversation, you wish to allow KGM 7 days to supply you as requested by you.

You wish to continue to copy us in correspondence for our records only and review unless you instruct us to.

Mrs Cheryl Shannon Case Officer Complaints Lloyd's

Telephone +44 (0)1634 39 5693 www.lloyds.com

SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 January 2015 14:10

To: Complaints

Subject: RE: Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574694

Dear Mrs Cheryl Shannon

332,

Thank you for the email it is not my intention to go to court yet.

But due to the mess up with my insurance from KGM my driving licence has been very badly damaged, and I have suffered due to the insurance I had with KGM not showing up on the Police MID database. This in turn made me keep getting pulled by the police on the weekdays it was not so bad as I always had to carry my insurance policy and showed the police and they called my insurance company. But at the weekends due to the insurance company being closed the police could not confirm I had insurance so my vehicles were sized which in turn I suffered with the cost to take my vehicles out of the police compound and wasted my time having to go to the compound when there should have been no need. Also it caused me problems getting home after the police sized my vehicles. I am out of pocket of around Ł1700.00 just for the cost to get my vehicles out of the compound this is without everything else that has led on due to it showing I was not insured.

I have had to go to a number of court cases just to prove I had insurance and then there have been cases where I have had no summons from the police so could not file I was pleading not guilty so they found me guilty when I did not even know there was a court case going ahead.

This has put points on my driving licence and fines, and I have been banned from driving. I have had to spend my time to get the cases reopened once I knew about them also.

In addition, there was one case when the police lied to my insurance company that I had tools in my van which I did not. Which I had to spend more of my time to prove to KGM that in fact there was no tools in my van as my insurance was getting cancelled for no good reason. I done this by way of having to go to the police compound as when any vehicle is impounded, they have list everything that was in the vehicle. When I got to the police compound I spoke to a manager who confirmed there were no tools, and a telephone call was made to Kelly Tiller at KGM and she spoke to the manager and he confirmed to her there was no tools when the van was taken into the police compound or when it was removed from the police compound.

I knew this case would go to court as the police office had in fact tried to make my insurance void, so I put in Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 to be able to get the information I knew I would need. KGM done nothing about this I did not get one reply from putting 3 Subject access requests under the Data Protection Act 1998 this was going back to Nov 2013. this case was heard at court and due to not having the information I needed to prove the police office was not telling the truth I was found guilty and disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance. I have appealed this as I was insured but need the data which KGM hold to prove this, but they will not give me it. This case is due to go to the crown court I have not got a date yet but if I can get the information to the CPS it will not need to go to appeal. I have asked KGM again in Nov 2014 for the information and written what would be needed just for this case, and they still have not sent it and I being asked for information.

ATM as it stands KGM have failed to comply with 3 Subject access requests under the Data Protection Act 1998 and follow the correct protocol for acting on a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

All this is having a huge impact on my life not being able to drive due to points on my driving licence which in fact was clean now I have such a mess to sort out just to get all of this sorted when I was in fact insured and had paid for my insurance and have done nothing wrong.

Yes, I am very upset over all of this and KGM is not helping I have been asking and asking and getting nowhere I should not be going through this. Yes I do want my money back I have lost but right now I want these court cases to be dealt with and for my driving licence to go back to being clean with no points this is the most important part for me but KGM does not seem to understand this and this is upsetting me even more, the insurance I took out with KGM has turned into a nightmare and I don't know when this is going to end and they are going to deal with this matter so I can clear my name with DVLA and the courts.

I am forwarding you all the emails I am sending so you can see what is going on and keep updated. As you can see, I am not getting very far with the information I need to clear my name with the courts and DVLA. If KGM fail to comply with the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 and give me the information I need within 7 days I will be putting it in your hands to deal with all of the matters as this has been going on long enough.

333,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Complaints

mailto: complaints@llovds.com

Sent: 22 January 2015 12:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your emails.

I note that you have been liaising with Canopius in regard to your complaint and from the correspondence we have on file that it is your intention to go to court.

Lloyd's complaints procedure is to offer policyholders the option for a review by Lloyd's, should they remain dissatisfied with the way in which their complaint has been handled. This is an independent review by a case officer at Lloyd's. However please note once a complaint becomes the subject of a court case Lloyd's can take no further action and we would have to cease our investigation.

Therefore, please can you confirm whether you are providing these emails for information only or whether you wish Lloyd's to review your case in place of potential court proceedings.

Kind regards Cheryl

Mrs Cheryl Shannon Case Officer Complaints Lloyd's

Telephone +44 (0)1634 39 5693 www.lloyds.com

SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 22:53

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Cc: Complaints Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that

334,

believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

Simon Cordell

335,

From: Austin, Andrew

mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com 

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

336,

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

337,

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving

338,

my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work. Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards

Simon Cordell

339,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

340,

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

The information in this E-Mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged.

If you are NOT the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. You should NOT retain, copy, or use this E-mail for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of its contents to any other person or persons.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, EXCEPT where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Lloyd's.

Lloyd's may monitor the content of E-mails sent and received via its network for viruses or unauthorised use and for other lawful business purposes.

Lloyd's is authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

The information in this E-Mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged.

If you are NOT the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. You should NOT retain, copy, or use this E-mail for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of its contents to any other person or persons.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, EXCEPT where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Lloyd's.

Lloyd's may monitor the content of E-mails sent and received via its network for viruses or unauthorised use and for other lawful business purposes.

Lloyd's is authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

341,

RE: Notification Case No 8079/2014 - MT3574fp9agfnfJri°fti0n we need.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

Section 9 witness statement from:

1. Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

2. Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

3. All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

4. The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

5. Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

Section 9 witness statement from:

6. Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

7. This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

8. Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

342,

Page 2 of 3

· Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

· The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

· Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

· Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin [mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com]

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

343,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 47

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_01.23.2015_FW FW MT3574694

23/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

 

47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 47

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_01.23.2015_FW FW MT3574694

23/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

--

344,

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

Attachments: S Cordell Cert._ KGM_ 2013-2014_Colour.pdf

Information we need.pdf

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a Ł10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court

345,

and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect me

346,

vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don't feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

347,

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | <http://www.kgminsurance.co.uk/> www.kgminsurance.co.uk | <http://www.canopius.com/> www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

348,

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner's Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

349,

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

· Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman

when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

· Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

· Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject

350,

access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

351,

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when

352,

any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for

353,

information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work.

Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

354,

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards

Simon Cordell

355,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents

356,

Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

357,

358,

FW: FW: MT35746 - On we need.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 30 November 2014 14:47

To: ’Martin Jenkin’

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents

Hi Martin

Thank you for getting back to me about this matter, and for you contacting KGM and getting this addressed, please see the below information that will be needed. We will also still need the section 9 witness statement from you.

The below section is what will be needed from KGM.

Section 9 witness statement from:

1. Jessica about the call that she took, from the police officer who called KGM after Simon Cordell was stopped on the 14/11/2013. This statement will include what was said on the phone call by the police officer and what Jessica said to the police officer this would also include what sort of tools the police officer said there was in the van. Any other information as to the date of the 14/11/2013 and after this date as to any dealing Jessica had with the stop on the 14/11/2013.

2. Copy of all phone recordings between the police officer, and Jessica on the date of 14/11/2013.

3. All phone recordings of any calls that were made, to KGM from Simon Cordell or Lorraine Cordell to try to stop his insurance policy being cancelled and to address the stop that was made on the 14/11/2013.

4. The phone recording of when Kelly Tiller had asked Simon Cordell to go to the police compound, and get someone from the compound to call Kelly Tiller about the list of tools that was meant to have been in the van when the police stopped Mr |Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. I believe Simon Cordell went to the police compound on the 26/11/2013 and this is where the manager of the compound and Simon Cordell spoke to called Kelly Tiller and confirmed there was in fact no tools in the van.

5. Copies of all emails that were sent from KGM to Broadsure and Broadsure to KGM with regard to the police stop of Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all emails of dates after the 14/11/2014 when Simon Cordell was trying to stop his insurance policy from being cancelled and was trying to address this matter of what the police had said about there being tools in his Van which was why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled.

Section 9 witness statement from:

6. Kelly Tiller as to any dealing she had with the police stop on Simon Cordell on the 14/11/2013. This would include all dealing with Broadsure about this matter and any calls that was made to her by Simon Cordell and Lorraine Cordell, and any calls Kelly Tiller made about this matter about the cancellation of the policy and the stop by the police on the 14/11/2014 until this issue was addressed.

7. This would also include all details of the call that was made by the police compound to Kelly Tiller on the 26/11/2013 to prove there were no tools in the van. Which in turn stopped the cancelation of the insurance policy as I believe the reason for the cancellation was due to Kelly Tiller saying he had voided his insurance due to there being tools in the van.

8. Full details as to why the insurance policy was going to be cancelled and what Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have done wrong which would have in fact made his insurance policy void.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

359,

Page 2 of 3

· Full details as to why in the end the insurance policy was not cancelled and the reasons for not cancelling which was due to Mr Simon Cordell going to the police compound and the police compound confirming to Kelly Tiller over the phone there was in fact no tools in the van.

· The reason why until Jan 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance did not show up on the MID database.

· Confirmation Simon Cordell did have insurance to drive on the 14/11/2014 and did not void his insurance in any way.

· Why Kelly Tiller did not deal with all the data protection requests that had been submitted to KGM, under the data protection act 1998 subject access request, as if this had been done Simon Cordell would not be in the court system for this case.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin

mailto: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Sent: 28 November 2014 14:36

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: REF: 00-COSX14MT07-ID<80> Open Attach Documents Lorraine,

I have spoken to the manager at KGM and he has advised Andy Austin is detailing with the case.

They have asked for a clear email for me to send to them of your requirements.

Please could you email what is required for me to forward on!

(unfortunately, Kelly is on annual leave at present)

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

360,

Page 3 of 3

error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3815cbf28add435d9773bab08ca... 21/01/2015

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 48

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_01.30.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

30/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385

 

48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 48

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_01.30.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

30/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385

--

361,

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Sent: 30 January 2015 17:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew; Donovan, Paul

Subject: Simon Cordell

Attachments: RE: MT3574694

Dear Simon,

S Cordell 300115.pdf; s Cordell call from police 141113.wma; Van-reciept-10-11-2013.jpg; MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB); 26_H_2013_13_53_KellyTiller Kelly call to compound.wav

Please find attached the following -

·         Recording of the original call made by the Police officer to KGM in which he advised that there were tools in your van.

·         Recording of the call between Kelly Tiller and the Police compound in which Kelly was advised that there were no tools in the vehicle.

·         Receipt showing purchase of the van.

·         E-Mail from Gareth Mullet from the compound confirming that there was nothing on the seizure notice to indicate that there were any tools removed from the vehicle or in the vehicle in the compound.

·         Letter of Indemnity for the CPS/Courts.

I believe these are the relevant items you were after and hope this will assist you to resolve the court matters. If you need anything else please let me know, or in my absence Andy Austin.

Paul Donovan will respond separately in respect of your data request but hopefully the attached will meet your requirements. As soon as I receive documentation from you to support costs incurred, I can consider our response on compensation.

No doubt I will hear from you shortly, in the meantime have a good weekend.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 27 January 2015 11:14

To: Wood, Peter

Cc: Austin, Andrew; complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Yes please could you send the tapes out and the Letter of Indemnity I would be most grateful as I think this would cover the courts and would like to get the information to them as soon as possible to the court and CPS.

As for the other information that is acceptable, as I not sure how long it will take the police compound to send me over the information, I will need to send to you they do take their time.

362,

I am just happy this matter is getting address as said the most worrying thing was the court case and this is the information I needed. I hope you have a great time on leave.

I look forward to hearing from you and will pass the information over from the police compound as soon as I have it.

Regards

Simon

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 27 January 2015 10:05

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

I spent some time last Friday tracking down a number of calls and did find the original call that the Police made to Jessica and the calls Kelly made to the Compound so we can provide these and it sounds like these are the important calls from the CPS and Courts viewpoint. I will pass these over to our Data Protection Officer of course but will ask if its ok for me to release them to you in the meantime before he does his official response.

I think we should also do the Letter of Indemnity and will send this across to you in the next few days, there’s no reason why you can't send this across now and it can do no harm.

I'm conscious we have not done a formal final response yet to your complaint, I intend to do this as soon as we receive full details of the recovery costs you incurred and can make a decision on compensation, I trust that’s acceptable.

If you need anything else or have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us.

I am keeping Andy in the loop as I am due to go on leave from 12/2/15 - 8/3/15 so he will need to pick up any issues that may arise during that time.

We will be in touch shortly and await details from you as above in due course.

King Regards Mr Peter Wood

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 26 January 2015 23:10:04 GMT

To: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com <complaints@lloyds.com>

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter Wood

Thank you for picking this up and taking the time to deal with this matter.

363,

The date of the appeal I do not have yet.

I are waiting for this but the court and CPS said if I get the information needed before the court date then it could be sent to the court who found me guilty and the CPS and this would be linked to the case and addressed. In addition, there should be no need for the appeal court case.

I am trying to do this so that a next day is not got to be wasted of my time in court and getting to and from the court.

The day that the police officer pulled me and told KGM that I had tools in my van, which the police officer lied, and the police officer has said this in court so lied to the judge is 14/11/2013.

I think due to what the police officer said in court the CPS and judge would like to know the facts and what the police officer said on that phone call to KGM. In addition, when KGM spoke to the manager at the police compound and found out in fact there was not tools, I think the reason for this is the police officer committed perjury in the court.

That is why they asked me to get proof that my insurance was not void, section 9 witness statements as to what the police officer told KGM on the phone to try to void my insurance, In addition, the facts how KGM found out I had in fact done nothing wrong and my insurance should not be cancelled.

However, if you think a Letter of Indemnity would sort this matter out then if this could be done I would be very grateful, but could you include in the letter only reason this has come about is due to what the police officer told KGM about the tools being in the van. In addition, this is the reason KGM told the police officer that I would not then be covered by the insurance policy I had in force with them.

This should cover it I hope as I really did nothing wrong and Kelly Tiller knows the police officer lied to get my insurance cancelled as she spoke to the police compound and they told her there was no tools.

The vehicle registration I was driving on the 14/11/2010 was CX52JRZ, this registration was included on my insurance. So should have shown on the database along with my car. However, none showed up as being insured on the MID database, this is what has caused me all the problems with the police.

As already aware yes, I was stopped around 8 or 9 times and had vehicles seized.

I do have some of the some of them here already like do have the receipt what I paid to get the vehicle out of the compound for the 14/11/2013 case I picked that up on the 16/11/2013.

I have the ones for the 08/04/2013, 29/10/2013, 16/11/2013, 03/01/2014 I just need to get the receipts for the other dates and also something that shows they was all sized due to no insurance from the police compound.

As for the Data Subject Access Request, I am most grateful that this is being addressed. If I had known a fee was, needed I would have paid that right away, but due to no one getting back to me about the ones that were put in, I did not know a fee was needed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

364,

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a Ł10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder. co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com <Andrew.Austin@canopius.com>

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court

365,

and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is

366,

really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

367,

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@,llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

368,

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | <http://www.kgminsurance.co.uk/> www.kgminsurance.co.uk | <http://www.canopius.com/> www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@.llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

369,

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

370,

1. Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman

when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

2. Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

3. Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

371,

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@,llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

372,

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in

373,

fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

374,

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work.

Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

375,

Regards

Simon Cordell

376,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy

377,

this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

378,

379,

380,

381,

Blank page!

380,

RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell-> MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB).msg

From: MT Underwriting [MT.Underwriting@canopius.com]

To: Gramlick, Les

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34:12

Subject: FW: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly Tiller

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9116 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto:GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk] On Behalf Of VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 14:10

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly,

I have looked at the seizure notice nothing was taken at the roadside and nothing was registered as left in the vehicle Regards Gareth

From: Tiller, Kelly [mailto: Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:28

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: RE: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

I have been told by the police that you do a report on all items that was in the vehicle at the time it was ceased. Can I have a copy of this report please?

Kind regards Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 | F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:26

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

We have no record what was in the vehicle, we do not touch the vehicles contents.

Regards

F S Williams

382,

RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell-> MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB).msg

From: Tiller, Kelly mailto: Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:55

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Morning,

I need some assistance with regards to the above. We ensure Mr Simon Cordell and I need a copy of the report of the items that was in his vehicle at the time it was ceased.

We are due to cancel his policy @ noon today.

Your urgent advises are awaited.

Kind regards

Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your

383,

RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell-> MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB).msg

system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

384,

RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell-> MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB).msg

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 49

enquiries@cps.gsi.gov.uk_01.31.2015_RE Case appeal

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 386

 

 

49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 49

enquiries@cps.gsi.gov.uk_01.31.2015_RE Case appeal

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 386

--

386,

From: Enquiries

enquiries@cps.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 31 January 2015 02:59

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Case appeal

Thank you for contacting Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Enquiries

The CPS is responsible for prosecuting most criminal cases in England and Wales, following a police investigation.

If you are contacting CPS Enquiries in relation to a case which is presently before the courts, or in relation to a case which the CPS is advising the police on charges, you should contact the relevant CPS area directly. Contact details for the 13 CPS regional offices can be found at the following link:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/your_cps/our_organisation/the_cps_areas.html

Your query may be forwarded to the relevant CPS regional office in the best position to respond to any issues that you have raised. If your email is forwarded, a response will be provided to you by the relevant CPS regional office within 20 working days.

Please note that if you have previously been advised that the CPS cannot aid you and your query does not raise any new issues, we will not be able to provide any further response. If your enquiry does not relate to the CPS, we will be unable to provide a response, but may be able to provide contact details for the relevant agency or organisation.

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.

If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 50

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_FW MT3574694 Simon Cordell

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413

 

 

50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 50

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_FW MT3574694 Simon Cordell

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413

--

387,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 31 January 2015 18:15

To: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Cc: m.mckee@michaelcarrollandco.com

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Attachments: S Cordell 300115.pdf.

s Cordell call from police 141113.wma.

Van-reciept-10-11-2013.jpg.

MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ (28.9 KB); 26_11_2013_13_53        

Kelly-Tiller-Kelly-call to compound.wav

Hi Josey

I got the attached information from Simon’s insurance company on Friday. After a lot of work to get it and a lot of emails and over a year of time. The letter of Indemnity is not correct with some points which I have asked peter wood to address.

Simon has asked me to forward this to you.

The reason is this show how far the police will go to lie. Not only did he lie to KGM Simon’s insurance, about tools being in Simon’s van to void Simon insurance cover and be able to seize his van. He then went on to lie in his statement of facts to be used at court saying nothing about tools just that the insurance said Simon’s was not covered by his insurance. He then stood up in court and under oath when the judge asked him about tools being in the van said he did not say tools was in the van. The reason the judge asked this was he saw emails from KGM saying about the tools.

Simon was found guilty of this and we have taken it to appeal and are waiting on a date.

But in the Asbo case can this not be shown that the police will lie even under oath. They are trying to use Simon’s char in the Asbo case and make him look bad. Why can we not show the police in the same light by using this information?

Simon has asked can you get the case papers from the courts for this case and the Woolwich case. As these cases do show somewhat how far the police are willing to go with Simon.

In the Asbo case papers you have police saying in their statement they know Simon is always insured it is on police file how much he was stopped. Yet he has around 8 cases at court for no insurance. In addition, most of these cases he never had a summons for, and they found him guilty due to him knowing nothing about the case was due to be in court.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter

mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 30 January 2015 17:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew; Donovan, Paul

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

Please find attached the following -

1. Recording of the original call made by the Police officer to KGM in which he advised that there were tools in your van.

2. Recording of the call between Kelly Tiller and the Police compound in which Kelly was advised that there were no tools in the vehicle.

3. Receipt showing purchase of the van.

4. E-Mail from Gareth Mullett from the compound confirming that there was nothing on the seizure notice to indicate that

388,

there were any tools removed from the vehicle or in the vehicle in the compound.

• Letter of Indemnity for the CPS/Courts.

I believe these are the relevant items you were after and hope this will assist you to resolve the court matters. If you need anything else please let me know, or in my absence Andy Austin.

Paul Donovan will respond separately in respect of your data request but hopefully the attached will meet your requirements. As soon as I receive documentation from you to support costs incurred, I can consider our response on compensation.

No doubt I will hear from you shortly, in the meantime have a good weekend.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 27 January 2015 11:14

To: Wood, Peter

Cc: Austin, Andrew; complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Yes please could you send the tapes out and the Letter of Indemnity I would be most grateful as I think this would cover the courts and would like to get the information to them as soon as possible to the court and CPS.

As for the other information that is acceptable, as I not sure how long it will take the police compound to send me over the information, I will need to send to you they do take their time.

I am just happy this matter is getting address as said the most worrying thing was the court case and this is the information I needed. I hope you have a great time on leave.

I look forward to hearing from you and will pass the information over from the police compound as soon as I have it.

Regards

Simon

From: Wood, Peter [mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 27 January 2015 10:05

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

389,

I spent some time last Friday tracking down a number of calls and did find the original call that the Police made to Jessica and the calls Kelly made to the Compound so we can provide these and it sounds like these are the important calls from the CPS and Courts viewpoint. I will pass these over to our Data Protection Officer of course but will ask if its ok for me to release them to you in the meantime before he does his official response.

I think we should also do the Letter of Indemnity and will send this across to you in the next few days, there’s no reason why you can't send this across now and it can do no harm.

I'm conscious we have not done a formal final response yet to your complaint, I intend to do this as soon as we receive full details of the recovery costs you incurred and can make a decision on compensation, I trust that’s acceptable.

If you need anything else or have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us.

I am keeping Andy in the loop as I am due to go on leave from 12/2/15 - 8/3/15 so he will need to pick up any issues that may arise during that time.

We will be in touch shortly and await details from you as above in due course.

King Regards Mr Peter Wood

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 26 January 2015 23:10:04 GMT

To: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com <complaints@lloyds.com>

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter Wood

Thank you for picking this up and taking the time to deal with this matter.

The date of the appeal I do not have yet.

I are waiting for this but the court and CPS said if I get the information needed before the court date then it could be sent to the court who found me guilty and the CPS and this would be linked to the case and addressed. In addition, there should be no need for the appeal court case.

I am trying to do this so that a next day is not got to be wasted of my time in court and getting to and from the court.

The day that the police officer pulled me and told KGM that I had tools in my van, which the police officer lied, and the police officer has said this in court so lied to the judge is 14/11/2013.

I think due to what the police officer said in court the CPS and judge would like to know the facts and what the police officer said on that phone call to KGM. In addition, when KGM spoke to the manager at the police compound and found out in fact there was not tools, I think the reason for this is the police officer committed perjury in the court.

That is why they asked me to get proof that my insurance was not void, section 9 witness statements as to what the police officer told KGM on the phone to try to void my insurance, In addition, the facts how KGM found out I had in fact done nothing wrong and my insurance should not be cancelled.

390,

However, if you think a Letter of Indemnity would sort this matter out then if this could be done I would be very grateful, but could you include in the letter only reason this has come about is due to what the police officer told KGM about the tools being in the van. In addition, this is the reason KGM told the police officer that I would not then be covered by the insurance policy I had in force with them.

This should cover it I hope as I really did nothing wrong and Kelly Tiller knows the police officer lied to get my insurance cancelled as she spoke to the police compound and they told her there was no tools.

The vehicle registration I was driving on the 14/11/2010 was CX52JRZ, this registration was included on my insurance. So should have shown on the database along with my car. However, none showed up as being insured on the MID database, this is what has caused me all the problems with the police.

As already aware yes, I was stopped around 8 or 9 times and had vehicles seized.

I do have some of the some of them here already like do have the receipt what I paid to get the vehicle out of the compound for the 14/11/2013 case I picked that up on the 16/11/2013.

I have the ones for the 08/04/2013, 29/10/2013, 16/11/2013, 03/01/2014 I just need to get the receipts for the other dates and also something that shows they was all sized due to no insurance from the police compound.

As for the Data Subject Access Request, I am most grateful that this is being addressed. If I had known a fee was, needed I would have paid that right away, but due to no one getting back to me about the ones that were put in, I did not know a fee was needed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a Ł10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a

391,

result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com <Andrew.Austin@canopius.com>

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

392,

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked

393,

out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@.llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

394,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | <http://www.kgminsurance.co.uk/> www.kgminsurance.co.uk | <http://www.canopius.com/> www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@,llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few

395,

missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data..

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

396,

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

1. Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman

when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

2. Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

3. Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

397,

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@.llovds. com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

398,

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police were off

--

399,400,401,402,403,404,405,406,407,408,409,410,411,412,413,

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 51

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_RE Case appeal

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 414

 

51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 51

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_RE Case appeal

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 414

--

414,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 31 January 2015 02:58

To: 'enquiries@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Case appeal

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to find out to whom I would have to send information to within the CPS in regard to a case I was found guilty off at Wimbledon magistrate's court of driving without insurance.

I put an appeal into Wimbledon magistrate's court on the same day, which was accepted by the Judge hearing my case in court.

I was told by the court and CPS if I got the information that was needed to prove that I did in fact have insurance then I could pass this to the CPS to look at.

I have yet to get the date of my appeal, but do have the information from my insurance company that I feel will prove I did in fact have insurance to drive on the day I was stopped by police and would like to forward that over by email to the CPS to address.

Would it please be possible to get an email address of where the data can be sent to so that this can be done?

Regards

Lorraine

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 52

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433

 

52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 52

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.31.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

31/01/2015

/ Page Numbers: 415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433

--

415,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 31 January 2015 01:47

To: 'Wood, Peter'

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Attachments: registration MA47LDY Corrected.pdf

Dear Peter

Thank you very much for the information you have sent, I do see some errors in your letter of Indemnity.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY

·         Ford Transit registration CX52JRZ

·         On the 8/4/13 at 11.05am the following vehicle was added to the policy -

·         Renault Clio registration NA57LDY.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY Renault Clio registration NA57LDY

This registration was always put in not correctly but was in fact given to Broadsure Direct correctly.

The registration should have been Ford Zetec registration MA57LDY

This was later correct after the 3rd time of telling the Ford Zetec registration as MA57LDY please see attached document.

This is the registration that should have been on the policy from the start.

We never knew it was not correct until 08/04/13 when again the correct registration was given.

However, it was put down as Renault Clio registration NA57LDY, we then believe it was put in correctly and not a new car added.

We were not sent any documents of that change so did not know there was again an error until the Oct 2013 when it was in fact corrected this time, we asked for new documents to be sent which they were so we could check.

But they kept on his policy Renault Clio registration NA57LDY we made a next call and told them this needed to be removed and was told it would be done.

It seems this was never done by what you have sent in your email.

I do believe I have emails also about this issue to Broadsure Direct and Martin Jenkins, can confirm this as he was the one, we dealt with at Broadsure Direct. He also should remember all the phone calls.

There is also a next issue Simon was not just covered with the basic trade insurance with KGM, Broadsure Direct had a special section with KGM which included in his insurance he was in fact covered for his work as a mechanic, not just standard insurance of trade buying and selling that KGM as a rule only deals with.

This has been discussed with the underwriters at KGM by Broadsure Direct re Martin Jenkins. This also caused issues with his insurance cover a few times. This was also meant to have been address and seems it was not. At the time we were not happy as we were told he was not covered when in fact he was. If you call Broadsure Direct and speak to Martin Jenkins, I feel that he can send you the paperwork and under writing of how Simon's insurance was meant to have been setup.

As you can see there was a number of issues with his insurance with KGM that lead to problems. and even with the issues of 14/11/2013 when a call was made to Kelly Tiller we asked did the police say what tools was meant to have been in the van as if there was mechanic tools in there his insurance should have in fact covered this. Kelly Tiller said no the police officer did not say which tools. But also said he was again not insured for this again Martin Jenkins got a rude call from us and again he had to make calls to address this issue.

Can you please confirm he was correctly insured with KGM and write this as I would like this addressed.

And one last thing could you please say in your letter on the date of the 14/11/2013 he was fully insured just so there cannot be any mistakes at court.

Sorry, this is causing such an issue and taking up your time but I really want to have something that is fully correct, as I do not want any other issues with courts, police and anything else that could cause my Son problems.

416,

Regards

Lorraine.

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 30 January 2015 17:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew; Donovan, Paul

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

Please find attached the following -

·         Recording of the original call made by the Police officer to KGM in which he advised that there were tools in your van.

·         Recording of the call between Kelly Tiller and the Police compound in which Kelly was advised that there were no tools in the vehicle.

·         Receipt showing purchase of the van.

·         E-Mail from Gareth Mullett from the compound confirming that there was nothing on the seizure notice to indicate that there were any tools removed from the vehicle or in the vehicle in the compound.

·         Letter of Indemnity for the CPS/Courts.

I believe these are the relevant items you were after and hope this will assist you to resolve the court matters. If you need anything else please let me know, or in my absence Andy Austin.

Paul Donovan will respond separately in respect of your data request but hopefully the attached will meet your requirements. As soon as I receive documentation from you to support costs incurred, I can consider our response on compensation.

No doubt I will hear from you shortly, in the meantime have a good weekend.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 27 January 2015 11:14

To: Wood, Peter

Cc: Austin, Andrew; complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Yes please could you send the tapes out and the Letter of Indemnity I would be most grateful as I think this would cover the courts and would like to get the information to them as soon as possible to the court and CPS.

As for the other information that is acceptable, as I not sure how long it will take the police compound to send me over the

417,

information, I will need to send to you they do take their time.

I am just happy this matter is getting address as said the most worrying thing was the court case and this is the information I needed. I hope you have a great time on leave.

I look forward to hearing from you and will pass the information over from the police compound as soon as I have it.

Regards

Simon

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 27 January 2015 10:05

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

I spent some time last Friday tracking down a number of calls and did find the original call that the Police made to Jessica and the calls Kelly made to the Compound so we can provide these and it sounds like these are the important calls from the CPS and Courts viewpoint. I will pass these over to our Data Protection Officer of course but will ask if its ok for me to release them to you in the meantime before he does his official response.

I think we should also do the Letter of Indemnity and will send this across to you in the next few days, there’s no reason why you can't send this across now and it can do no harm.

I'm conscious we have not done a formal final response yet to your complaint, I intend to do this as soon as we receive full details of the recovery costs you incurred and can make a decision on compensation, I trust that’s acceptable.

If you need anything else or have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us.

I am keeping Andy in the loop as I am due to go on leave from 12/2/15 - 8/3/15 so he will need to pick up any issues that may arise during that time.

We will be in touch shortly and await details from you as above in due course.

King Regards Mr Peter Wood

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 26 January 2015 23:10:04 GMT

To: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com <complaints@lloyds.com>

Subject: Re: MT3574694

Simon Cordell

Dear Peter Wood

Thank you for picking this up and taking the time to deal with this matter.

418,

The date of the appeal I do not have yet.

I are waiting for this but the court and CPS said if I get the information needed before the court date then it could be sent to the court who found me guilty and the CPS and this would be linked to the case and addressed. In addition, there should be no need for the appeal court case.

I am trying to do this so that a next day is not got to be wasted of my time in court and getting to and from the court.

The day that the police officer pulled me and told KGM that I had tools in my van, which the police officer lied, and the police officer has said this in court so lied to the judge is 14/11/2013.

I think due to what the police officer said in court the CPS and judge would like to know the facts and what the police officer said on that phone call to KGM. In addition, when KGM spoke to the manager at the police compound and found out in fact there was not tools, I think the reason for this is the police officer committed perjury in the court.

That is why they asked me to get proof that my insurance was not void, section 9 witness statements as to what the police officer told KGM on the phone to try to void my insurance, In addition, the facts how KGM found out I had in fact done nothing wrong and my insurance should not be cancelled.

However, if you think a Letter of Indemnity would sort this matter out then if this could be done I would be very grateful, but could you include in the letter only reason this has come about is due to what the police officer told KGM about the tools being in the van. In addition, this is the reason KGM told the police officer that I would not then be covered by the insurance policy I had in force with them.

This should cover it I hope as I really did nothing wrong and Kelly Tiller knows the police officer lied to get my insurance cancelled as she spoke to the police compound and they told her there was no tools.

The vehicle registration I was driving on the 14/11/2010 was CX52JRZ, this registration was included on my insurance. So should have shown on the database along with my car. However, none showed up as being insured on the MID database, this is what has caused me all the problems with the police.

As already aware yes, I was stopped around 8 or 9 times and had vehicles seized.

I do have some of the some of them here already like do have the receipt what I paid to get the vehicle out of the compound for the 14/11/2013 case I picked that up on the 16/11/2013.

I have the ones for the 08/04/2013, 29/10/2013, 16/11/2013, 03/01/2014 I just need to get the receipts for the other dates and also something that shows they was all sized due to no insurance from the police compound.

As for the Data Subject Access Request, I am most grateful that this is being addressed. If I had known a fee was, needed I would have paid that right away, but due to no one getting back to me about the ones that were put in, I did not know a fee was needed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

419,

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a Ł10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com <Andrew.Austin@canopius.com>

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

420,

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

421,

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

--

422,423,424,425,426,427,428,429,430,431,432,433,

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 53

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.02.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

02/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455

 

53.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 53

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.02.2015_RE MT3574694 Simon Cordell

02/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455

--

434,

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Sent: 02 February 2015 15:48

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf

Dear Lorraine,

Please review the attached revised LOI, once you confirm you are happy with it, I will put an original in the post today.

I think that's it for now but just shout if you need anything else.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 02 February 2015 15:08

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Thank you for the reply to my email

Yes, the below would cover everything I feel, so if you can go ahead and do this, I would be most grateful.

As said, I just do not want any way that the CSP and Court could have any confusion with anything.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 02 February 2015 14:56

To: Lorraine Cordell Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell Dear Lorraine,

Thanks for your comments, don't worry I want to get this resolved as much as you and Simon, it’s taken far too long already, so before I send an amended Indemnity Letter (LOI) please confirm my understanding as listed below -

1. I will amend the registration of the Ford Zetec to show MA57LDY. Broadsure originally gave us the incorrect registration and as you say it was a while before this error was corrected and our policy history was confusing due to the incorrect Clio that I was not aware of previously.

2. You are correct, looking back on the instructions from Broadsure I cannot see that they instructed Underwriters to delete the Renault Clio that was added in error following receipt of advices from Broadsure. I can amend the comment in the

435,

3. letter to show that this vehicle was added to the policy incorrectly following an effort on your part to correct the registration number of the Ford Zetec and was a broker error, are you happy with this?

1. The letter states cover was for Social Domestic & Pleasure and Motor Trade Use. Motor Trade use would cover Simon to carry a Motor Mechanics tools being used in connection with Motor Trade but not any tools that would typically be used for any other purposes such as perhaps, paint/brushes/ladders/plumbing/Electrical(domestic/commercial except auto electrical) and so on. This is standard cover; however I am happy to expand on this statement in the letter if you would like me to in order to clarify that point?

2. The Police officer asked if Simon would be covered for the carriage of tools to drive around doing "odd jobs". Later in the call he again confirmed that Simon was not covered "to drive around doing jobs". I sent you the call so you can listen to it yourself but the tone of the enquiry was suggesting that Simon was doing jobs not connected to the Motor Trade however I do feel there is plenty of room here for misunderstanding. If the question had been more specific with the officer stating that Simon had tools connected with the Motor Trade in the vehicle would he be covered - Yes. If he said that the tools were not connected to the Motor Trade (as per my comments above) then the answer is - No. Not something I can put into a Letter of Indemnity but certainly something to be argued with the CPS/Courts.

3. I'm happy to confirm in the letter that cover was in force under this policy on the 14/11/2013.

4. Once I hear back from you, I will revise the LOI accordingly and e-mail it across for you to sign off, I will also send an original in the post just in case!

5. If you need anything else please do not hesitate to drop me and Andy a line, I am keeping Andy in the loop as I will be on leave from 12/2/15 - 9/3/15 so he will need to deal with anything in my absence.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 31 January 2015 01:47

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Thank you very much for the information you have sent, I do see some errors in your letter of Indemnity.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY

1.      Ford Transit registration CX52JRZ

On the 8/4/13 at 11.05am the following vehicle was added to the policy -

2.      Renault Clio registration NA57LDY.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY Renault Clio registration NA57LDY

This registration was always put in not correctly but was in fact given to Broadsure Direct correctly.

The registration should have been Ford Zetec registration MA57LDY

This was later correct after the 3rd time of telling the Ford Zetec registration as MA57LDY please see attached document. This is the registration that should have been on the policy from the start.

We never knew it was not correct until 08/04/13 when again the correct registration was given.

436,

However, it was put down as Renault Clio registration NA57LDY, we then believe it was put in correctly and not a new car added.

We were not sent any documents of that change so did not know there was again an error until the Oct 2013 when it was in fact corrected this time, we asked for new documents to be sent which they were so we could check.

But they kept on his policy Renault Clio registration NA57LDY we made a next call and told them this needed to be removed and was told it would be done.

It seems this was never done by what you have sent in your email.

I do believe I have emails also about this issue to Broadsure Direct and Martin Jenkins, can confirm this as he was the one, we dealt with at Broadsure Direct. He also should remember all the phone calls.

There is also a next issue Simon was not just covered with the basic trade insurance with KGM, Broadsure Direct had a special section with KGM which included in his insurance he was in fact covered for his work as a mechanic, not just standard insurance of trade buying and selling that KGM as a rule only deals with.

This has been discussed with the underwriters at KGM by Broadsure Direct re Martin Jenkins. This also caused issues with his insurance cover a few times. This was also meant to have been address and seems it was not. At the time we were not happy as we were told he was not covered when in fact he was. If you call Broadsure Direct and speak to Martin Jenkins, I feel that he can send you the paperwork and under writing of how Simon's insurance was meant to have been setup.

As you can see there was a number of issues with his insurance with KGM that lead to problems. and even with the issues of 14/11/2013 when a call was made to Kelly Tiller we asked did the police say what tools was meant to have been in the van as if there was mechanic tools in there his insurance should have in fact covered this. Kelly Tiller said no the police officer did not say which tools. But also said he was again not insured for this again Martin Jenkins got a rude call from us and again he had to make calls to address this issue.

Can you please confirm he was correctly insured with KGM and write this as I would like this addressed.

And one last thing could you please say in your letter on the date of the 14/11/2013 he was fully insured just so there cannot be any mistakes at court.

Sorry, this is causing such an issue and taking up your time but I really want to have something that is fully correct, as I do not want any other issues with courts, police and anything else that could cause my Son problems.

Regards

Lorraine.

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 30 January 2015 17:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew; Donovan, Paul

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

Please find attached the following -

1.      Recording of the original call made by the Police officer to KGM in which he advised that there were tools in your van.

2.      Recording of the call between Kelly Tiller and the Police compound in which Kelly was advised that there were no tools in the vehicle.

3.      Receipt showing purchase of the van.

4.      E-Mail from Gareth Mullett from the compound confirming that there was nothing on the seizure notice to indicate that there were any tools removed from the vehicle or in the vehicle in the compound.

5.      Letter of Indemnity for the CPS/Courts.

6.      I believe these are the relevant items you were after and hope this will assist you to resolve the court matters. If you need anything else please let me know, or in my absence Andy Austin.

437,

Paul Donovan will respond separately in respect of your data request but hopefully the attached will meet your requirements.

As soon as I receive documentation from you to support costs incurred, I can consider our response on compensation. No doubt I will hear from you shortly, in the meantime have a good weekend.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 27 January 2015 11:14

To: Wood, Peter

Cc: Austin, Andrew; complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Yes please could you send the tapes out and the Letter of Indemnity I would be most grateful as I think this would cover the courts and would like to get the information to them as soon as possible to the court and CPS.

As for the other information that is acceptable, as I not sure how long it will take the police compound to send me over the information, I will need to send to you they do take their time.

I am just happy this matter is getting address as said the most worrying thing was the court case and this is the information I needed. I hope you have a great time on leave.

I look forward to hearing from you and will pass the information over from the police compound as soon as I have it.

Regards

Simon

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 27 January 2015 10:05

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

I spent some time last Friday tracking down a number of calls and did find the original call that the Police made to Jessica and the calls Kelly made to the Compound so we can provide these and it sounds like these are the important calls from the CPS and Courts viewpoint. I will pass these over to our Data Protection Officer of course but will ask if its ok for me to release them to you in the meantime before he does his official response.

438,

I think we should also do the Letter of Indemnity and will send this across to you in the next few days, threes no reason why you can't send this across now and it can do no harm.

I'm conscious we have not done a formal final response yet to your complaint, I intend to do this as soon as we receive full details of the recovery costs you incurred and can make a decision on compensation, I trust that’s acceptable.

If you need anything else or have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us.

I am keeping Andy in the loop as I am due to go on leave from 12/2/15 - 8/3/15 so he will need to pick up any issues that may arise during that time.

We will be in touch shortly and await details from you as above in due course.

King Regards Mr Peter Wood

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 26 January 2015 23:10:04 GMT

To: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com <complaints@lloyds.com>

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter Wood

Thank you for picking this up and taking the time to deal with this matter.

The date of the appeal I do not have yet.

I are waiting for this but the court and CPS said if I get the information needed before the court date then it could be sent to the court who found me guilty and the CPS and this would be linked to the case and addressed. In addition, there should be no need for the appeal court case.

I am trying to do this so that a next day is not got to be wasted of my time in court and getting to and from the court.

The day that the police officer pulled me and told KGM that I had tools in my van, which the police officer lied, and the police officer has said this in court so lied to the judge is 14/11/2013.

I think due to what the police officer said in court the CPS and judge would like to know the facts and what the police officer said on that phone call to KGM. In addition, when KGM spoke to the manager at the police compound and found out in fact there was not tools, I think the reason for this is the police officer committed perjury in the court.

That is why they asked me to get proof that my insurance was not void, section 9 witness statements as to what the police officer told KGM on the phone to try to void my insurance, In addition, the facts how KGM found out I had in fact done nothing wrong and my insurance should not be cancelled.

However, if you think a Letter of Indemnity would sort this matter out then if this could be done I would be very grateful, but could you include in the letter only reason this has come about is due to what the police officer told KGM about the tools being in the van. In addition, this is the reason KGM told the police officer that I would not then be covered by the insurance policy I had in force with them.

439,

This should cover it I hope as I really did nothing wrong and Kelly Tiller knows the police officer lied to get my insurance cancelled as she spoke to the police compound and they told her there was no tools.

The vehicle registration I was driving on the 14/11/2010 was CX52JRZ, this registration was included on my insurance. So should have shown on the database along with my car. However, none showed up as being insured on the MID database, this is what has caused me all the problems with the police.

As already aware yes, I was stopped around 8 or 9 times and had vehicles seized.

I do have some of the some of them here already like do have the receipt what I paid to get the vehicle out of the compound for the 14/11/2013 case I picked that up on the 16/11/2013.

I have the ones for the 08/04/2013, 29/10/2013, 16/11/2013, 03/01/2014 I just need to get the receipts for the other dates and also something that shows they was all sized due to no insurance from the police compound.

As for the Data Subject Access Request, I am most grateful that this is being addressed. If I had known a fee was, needed I would have paid that right away, but due to no one getting back to me about the ones that were put in, I did not know a fee was needed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a Ł10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

440,

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@,canopius.com <Andrew.Austin@canopius.com>

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all

441,

the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around Ł1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

442,

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com]

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Cc: complaints@.llovds. com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

443,

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 | M 07469 147743 | <http://www.kgminsurance.co.uk/> www.kgminsurance.co.uk | <http://www.canopius.com/> www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@,llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized, I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to

444,

you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get back to you with this information as there is a lot of data.

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

445,

From: Austin, Andrew [mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following: -

· Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman

when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

· Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

· Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following: -

446,

Following our initial investigations we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of Ł10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@.llovds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

447,

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

448,

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

449,

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summons the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

450,

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work.

Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of Ł180.00 to Ł200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

Regards

Simon Cordell

451,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered

452,

in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

453,

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

454,

455,

 

 

54.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 54

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.03.2015_Re Simon Cordell

03/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465

 

 

54.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 54

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.03.2015_Re Simon Cordell

03/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465

--

456,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 03 February 2015 12:57

To: 'London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: 'swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Appeal-Case-Driving-Tools-26-11-2014.pdf

S Cordell 020215.pdf.

MT Underwriting_ FW_ MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ.pdf

s Cordell call from police 141113.wma.

26_11_2013_13_53-Kelly-Tiller-Kelly call to compound.wav

Dear Debbie Barnett

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me today on the phone one the 02/02/2015. Could you please also confirm by email that you have this email.

As explained, there have been a number of issues with my son Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

The issues are one of not being insured. When in fact he was.

There was a case heard on the 26/11/2014 at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court where my son Simon Cordell was found guilty. Of using his vehicle for business purposes.

This was only the case due to the police officer lying. Not just to KGM who my son was insured with, but in his statement of facts, and also on oath to the judge and CPS.

The case is such that on the day my son was stopped the police office made a call to KGM the police office told KGM that my son Simon Cordell had lots of tools in his van and was doing odd jobs. Under my son insurance this would not have covered him, and the police officer would have known this already as my son had given the police officer his policy at the side of the road.

My son was arrested and taken to the police station. Due to him refusing to sign the seizer notice and telling the police officer he was lying and to arrest him.

My sons Van registration CX52JRZ was seized and taken to Chariton police vehicle pound, with no tools in there.

The police office when wrote his statement not with what he told KGM on the phone call but with something totally incorrect information. The judge asked the police office at court about the tools as he saw emails from KGM the police office told the judge he knew nothing about any tools.

The police officer I believed new he could not put tools down in his statement as calls was already being put into the police about complaints. So changed his story in his statement.

The facts are that there are audio tapes of what the police officer said to KGM, and also the call that was made to Chariton police vehicle pound as KGM record all calls.

I have both of the audio files from KGM and also a Letter of Indemnity and an email that a manager sent to Kelly Tiller at KGM.

How can a police officer act in such a manner. I really do not understand why he did this.

As also said on the phone there is a number of summons my son has not had regarding the other stops from police, these case he have gone to court without him knowing and he been found guilty when he did not even know there was a case in court.

I have sent many emails to get these cases set aside and sent his insurance documents to the court. 2 case we had to do statutory declarations one for Willesden and one for Bromley. The Willesden one seems to have been reheard at court on the 26/01/2015 without us knowing again he was found guilty but they put this case under a new case number looking at the letter so all the documents that were sent before was not with the court file I would have through. But with both statutory declarations we added a copy of his insurance.

I have been trying for some time to get all of this put together so it can all be addresses and so far, nothing has been done with all the emails I have sent to the court. We also asked at court when we went to Wimbledon Magistrates' Court, but nothing was done. Could you please tell us where we can sort this out about getting all the other cases addressed without the need to be going from one court to the next. This is a waste of courts time and money when clearly all that is needed to be is check my son's insurance that he was in fact insured.

457,

I am sure that the letter that has been sent of Indemnity from KGM would cover these other cases as proof he was in fact insured. Could you please advise what needs to be done with these other cases.

Please can you address the issues in this email and get back to me by email.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

458,

459,

460,

461,

462,

Re: Simon Cordell->MT Under writing_ FW_ MR SIMON CORDELL 4CX52 JRZ.pdf

From: MT Underwriting [MT.Underwriting@canopius.com]

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34

To: Gramlick, Les

Subject: FW: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly Tiller

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ D +44 (0) 20 8530 9116 | F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto:GARETH.MuNett@met.pnn.police.uk] On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 14:10

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly,

I have looked at the seizure notice nothing was taken at the roadside and nothing was registered as left in the vehicle Regards Gareth

From: Tiller, Kelly [ mailto: Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:28

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

I have been told by the police that you do a report on all items that was in the vehicle at the time it was ceased.

Can I have a copy of this report please?

Kind regards Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk mailto: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:26

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

We have no record what was in the vehicle, we do not touch the vehicles contents.

Regards F S Williams

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

463,

Page 2 of 4

From: Tiller, Kelly [mailto: Kelly.Tiller@eanopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:55

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Morning,

I need some assistance with regards to the above. We ensure Mr Simon Cordell and I need a copy of the report of the items that was in his vehicle at the time it was ceased.

We are due to cancel his policy @ noon today.

Your urgent advises are awaited.

Kind regards

Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative

of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

464,

Page 3 of 4

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

465,

Page 4 of 4

The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/ metpolice.uk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d...

30/01/2015

 

 

 

55.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 55

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.03.2017_Re Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

03/02/2015

/ Page Numbers:  466,467,468

 

 

55.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 55

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.03.2017_Re Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

03/02/2015

/ Page Numbers:  466,467,468

--

466,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:03 February 2017 14:16

To: info@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: Re: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

Attachments: Subject-access-request-Broadsure-Direct.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached document regarding a subject access request I would like address while Broadsure Direct was dealing with my insurance.

If this email with attachment has been sent to the wrong department that deals with data protection subject access requests could this, please be passed to the correct department that deals with it?

If there is a fee payable or you need ID can someone let me know as soon as possible via this email address.

Could you also let me know via this email address this email has been received along with the attachment?

Regards Simon Cordell

467,

Re: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell->Subject-access-request-Broadsure-Direct.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 03/02/2017

Broadsure Direct 4th Floor

The Argyle Centre York St Ramsgate Kent

CT11 9DS

Dear Sir or Madam

Subject access request

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Please supply the information about me I am entitled to under the Data Protection Act 1998 relating to: Mr Simon Cordell

If this has been passed to the incorrect department who deal with such requests, could this please be passed to the correct department who deals with data protection subject access requests please?

All data that Broadsure Direct hold on any systems or files about me since I held insurance with Broadsure Direct.

All audio call files that Broadsure Direct hold this would include when the police have called to check if I was insured.

• All account Information and amounts paid.

Reason as to why any insurance policies were cancelled, or Voided

1

468,

· Dates all policies started and ended and which company had the policies in force.

· If you are withholding any information, I have asked for please make me aware of this and the reason as to why the data is being denied.

If you need any more information from me, such as ID or a fee is payable, please let me know as soon as possible so this subject access request can be dealt with in a speedy manner. This can be done via my email: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

It may be helpful for you to know that a request for information under the Data Protection Act 1998 should be responded to within 40 days.

If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you and can be contacted on 0303 123 1113 or at www.ico.org.uk/

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

2

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 56

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.05.2015_FW Re Simon Cordell

05/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478

 

 

56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 56

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.05.2015_FW Re Simon Cordell

05/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478

--

469,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 05 February 2015 16:53

To: listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: FW: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Appeal-Case-Driving-Tools-26-11-2014.pdf

S Cordell 020215.pdf

MT-Under writing_ FW_ MR-SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ.pdf

S Cordell call from police-141113.wma

26_11_2013_13_53-Kelly-Tiller-Kelly call to compound.wav

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due today due to speaking to the CPS again about the case that was heard at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court on the 26/11/2014 where my son was found guilty.

My son's details are Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

An appeal was put in on the same date 26/11/2014 and we have been waiting for an appeal date. But today when speaking to the CSP they told us a date was already set for the 05/03/2015 at Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court, we have had no letters of a date being set could you please forward to this email any letters that have been sent.

At court when my son was found guilty the cps and the judge advised if we got the information needed from his insurance then it could be sent before we got a date for the appeal to the cps and court.

which I spoke to Debbie Barnett from the CPS on the 02/02/2015 and told her I was now able to send this data over.

She asked me to send this via email which was done on the 03/02/2015, please see below email.

Could you please link this email and all attachments to the court file. I do not know the case ref for the court due to not having any letters.

There are 3 PDF files and 2 Audio files from his insurance company. Could you also please explain what format the audio files should be in to be used in this case, also should they be on CD of tape. and would we need to bring something to court to play them on. The insurance company need to know this ASAP seeing as the case is listed for the 05/03/2015.

Could you also please tell us what time the case is listed for, and also reply to this email to let me know you have got it safely with the attached documents and audio files.

Regards Lorraine Cordell Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 03 February 2015 12:57

To: 'London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: 'swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me today on the phone one the 02/02/2015. Could you please also confirm by email that you have this email.

As explained, there have been a number of issues with my son Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

The issues are one of not being insured. When in fact he was.

There was a case heard on the 26/11/2014 at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court where my son Simon Cordell was found guilty. Of using his

470,

vehicle for business purposes.

This was only the case due to the police officer lying. Not just to KGM who my son was insured with, but in his statement of facts, and also on oath to the judge and CPS.

The case is such that on the day my son was stopped the police office made a call to KGM the police office told KGM that my son Simon Cordell had lots of tools in his van and was doing odd jobs. Under my son insurance this would not have covered him, and the police officer would have known this already as my son had given the police officer his policy at the side of the road.

My son was arrested and taken to the police station. Due to him refusing to sign the seizer notice and telling the police officer he was lying and to arrest him.

My sons Van registration CX52JRZ was seized and taken to Chariton police vehicle pound, with no tools in there.

The police office when wrote his statement not with what he told KGM on the phone call but with something totally incorrect information. The judge asked the police office at court about the tools as he saw emails from KGM the police office told the judge he knew nothing about any tools.

The police officer I believed new he could not put tools down in his statement as calls was already being put into the police about complaints. So changed his story in his statement.

The facts are that there are audio tapes of what the police officer said to KGM, and also the call that was made to Chariton police vehicle pound as KGM record all calls.

I have both of the audio files from KGM and also a Letter of Indemnity and an email that a manager sent to Kelly Tiller at KGM.

How can a police officer act in such a manner. I really do not understand why he did this.

As also said on the phone there is a number of summons my son has not had regarding the other stops from police, these case he have gone to court without him knowing and he been found guilty when he did not even know there was a case in court.

I have sent many emails to get these cases set aside and sent his insurance documents to the court. 2 case we had to do statutory declarations one for Willesden and one for Bromley. The Willesden one seems to have been reheard at court on the 26/01/2015 without us knowing again he was found guilty but they put this case under a new case number looking at the letter so all the documents that were sent before was not with the court file I would have through. But with both statutory declarations we added a copy of his insurance.

I have been trying for some time to get all of this put together so it can all be addresses and so far, nothing has been done with all the emails I have sent to the court. We also asked at court when we went to Wimbledon Magistrates' Court, but nothing was done. Could you please tell us where we can sort this out about getting all the other cases addressed without the need to be going from one court to the next. This is a waste of courts time and money when clearly all that is needed to be is check my son's insurance that he was in fact insured. I

 am sure that the letter that has been sent of Indemnity from KGM would cover these other cases as proof he was in fact insured. Could you please advise what needs to be done with these other cases.

Please can you address the issues in this email and get back to me by email.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

471,

472,

473,

474,

475,

FW: Re: Simon Cordell->MT Underwriting_ MR SMION CORDELL-4CX52 JRZ.pdf

From: MT Underwriting [MT.Underwriting@canopius.com]

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34

To: Gramlick, Les

Subject: FW: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly Tiller

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9116 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk

mailto: GARETH.MuNett@met.pnn.police.uk On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 14:10

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly,

I have looked at the seizure notice nothing was taken at the roadside and nothing was registered as left in the vehicle Regards Gareth

From: Tiller, Kelly mailto: Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:28

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

I have been told by the police that you do a report on all items that was in the vehicle at the time it was ceased.

Can I have a copy of this report please?

Kind regards Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk mailto: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:26

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

We have no record what was in the vehicle, we do not touch the vehicles contents.

Regards F S Williams

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

476,

Page 2 of 4

From: Tiller, Kelly mailto: Kelly.Tiller@eanopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:55

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Morning,

I need some assistance with regards to the above. We ensure Mr Simon Cordell and I need a copy of the report of the items that was in his vehicle at the time it was ceased.

We are due to cancel his policy @ noon today.

Your urgent advises are awaited.

Kind regards

Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 | F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative

of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

477,

Page 3 of 4

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

478,

Page 4 of 4

The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d...

30/01/2015

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 57

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.05.2015_FW Re Simon Cordell_001

05/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488

 

57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 57

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.05.2015_FW Re Simon Cordell_001

05/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488

--

479,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 05 February 2015 15:13

To: listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: FW: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Appeal-Case-Driving-Tools-26-11-2014.pdf.

S Cordell 020215.pdf.

MT Underwriting_ MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ.pdf

s Cordell call from police 141113.wma.

26_11_2013_13_53 Kelly Tiller Kelly call to compound.wav

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due today due to speaking to the CPS again about the case that was heard at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court on the 26/11/2014 where my son was found guilty.

My son's details are Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

An appeal was put in on the same date 26/11/2014 and we have been waiting for an appeal date. But today when speaking to the CSP they told us a date was already set for the 05/03/2015 at Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court, we have had no letters of a date being set could you please forward to this email any letters that have been sent.

At court when my son was found guilty the cps and the judge advised if we got the information needed from his insurance then it could be sent before we got a date for the appeal to the cps and court.

which I spoke to Debbie Barnett from the CPS on the 02/02/2015 and told her I was now able to send this data over.

She asked me to send this via email which was done on the 03/02/2015, please see below email.

Could you please link this email and all attachments to the court file. I do not know the case ref for the court due to not having any letters.

There are 3 PDF files and 2 Audio files from his insurance company. Could you also please explain what format the audio files should be in to be used in this case, also should they be on CD of tape. and would we need to bring something to court to play them on. The insurance company need to know this ASAP seeing as the case is listed for the 05/03/2015.

Could you also please tell us what time the case is listed for, and also reply to this email to let me know you have got it safely with the attached documents and audio files.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 03 February 2015 12:57

To: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me today on the phone one the 02/02/2015. Could you please also confirm by email that you have this email.

As explained, there have been a number of issues with my son Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

The issues are one of not being insured. When in fact he was.

480,481,482,483,484,485,486,487,488,

 

 

 

 

 

58.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 58

Listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk_02.06.2015_RE Re Simon Cordell

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491,492

 

 

 

58.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 58

Listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk_02.06.2015_RE Re Simon Cordell

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491,492

--

489,

From: Kingston Crown, Listing <Listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 February 2015 16:59

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: DOC008.PDF

Dear Lorraine

Please find enclosed letter that would have been sent via recorded delivery on 02.02.15.

Regards

Karen Mitchecc

Listing Team

Kingston upon Thames Crown Court (T) 020 8240 2500 (Gold fax) 0870 324 0157

listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means".

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 06 February 2015 16:27 To: Kingston Crown, Listing

Cc: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk; GL-SWESTERNMCENQ

Subject: RE: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett CPS: and Sheila from the Listing Office at the crown court.

It does seem I am having trouble with sending the audio files could you please tell me how I can send them I have put the other files in but not the audio which will need to be put with his case files.

Please read below emails.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 06 February 2015 15:41

To: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett CPS: and Sheila from the Listing Office at the crown court.

I did send the below email with all attachments, but I don't think anyone got it due to its size. I am resending it in 3 parts.

Part 1 of 3 email

490,

Please see Attached files and please read below email. could you please also let me know you have got this email.

I did also call yesterday and was told you was not in the office and spoke to someone who told me an appeal date has been set for the 05/03/2015 the crown court.

I have also spoke to Sheila today at the Crown court listing office where I told her that we had not had any letters from the crown court she also told me that they did not get any emails I sent over. I do not have the case number and asked her if she could send the letter that was sent out by email to this email address.

Could all attached documents be attached to the case files please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 03 February 2015 12:57

To: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me today on the phone one the 02/02/2015. Could you please also confirm by email that you have this email.

As explained, there have been a number of issues with my son Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

The issues are one of not being insured. When in fact he was.

There was a case heard on the 26/11/2014 at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court where my son Simon Cordell was found guilty. Of using his vehicle for business purposes.

This was only the case due to the police officer lying. Not just to KGM who my son was insured with, but in his statement of facts, and also on oath to the judge and CPS.

The case is such that on the day my son was stopped the police office made a call to KGM the police office told KGM that my son Simon Cordell had lots of tools in his van and was doing odd jobs. Under my son insurance this would not have covered him, and the police officer would have known this already as my son had given the police officer his policy at the side of the road.

My son was arrested and taken to the police station. Due to him refusing to sign the seizer notice and telling the police officer he was lying and to arrest him.

My sons Van registration CX52JRZ was seized and taken to Chariton police vehicle pound, with no tools in there.

The police office when wrote his statement not with what he told KGM on the phone call but with something totally incorrect information. The judge asked the police office at court about the tools as he saw emails from KGM the police office told the judge he knew nothing about any tools.

The police officer I believed new he could not put tools down in his statement as calls was already being put into the police about complaints. So changed his story in his statement.

The facts are that there are audio tapes of what the police officer said to KGM, and also the call that was made to Chariton police vehicle pound as KGM record all calls.

I have both of the audio files from KGM and also a Letter of Indemnity and an email that a manager sent to Kelly Tiller at KGM.

How can a police officer act in such a manner. I really do not understand why he did this.

As also said on the phone there is a number of summons my son has not had regarding the other stops from police, these case he have gone to court without him knowing and he been found guilty when he did not even know there was a case in court.

491,

I have sent many emails to get these cases set aside and sent his insurance documents to the court. 2 case we had to do statutory declarations one for Willesden and one for Bromley. The Willesden one seems to have been reheard at court on the 26/01/2015 without us knowing again he was found guilty but they put this case under a new case number looking at the letter so all the documents that were sent before was not with the court file I would have through. But with both statutory declarations we added a copy of his insurance.

I have been trying for some time to get all of this put together so it can all be addresses and so far, nothing has been done with all the emails I have sent to the court. We also asked at court when we went to Wimbledon Magistrates' Court, but nothing was done. Could you please tell us where we can sort this out about getting all the other cases addressed without the need to be going from one court to the next. This is a waste of courts time and money when clearly all that is needed to be is check my son's insurance that he was in fact insured.

I am sure that the letter that has been sent of Indemnity from KGM would cover these other cases as proof he was in fact insured. Could you please advise what needs to be done with these other cases.

Please can you address the issues in this email and get back to me by email.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

492,

RE: Re: Simon Cordell->DOC008.PDF

In the Crown Court at Kingston Upon Thames

KX 0661 4713 9GB

Case No: A20140377

Court Code: 427

Simon P Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue ENFIELD Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Notice of Hearing of Appeal

The appeal of Simon Paul Cordell against conviction and sentence by Wimbledon Magistrates' Court on the 29 August 2014

will be heard at the Crown Court at 6-8 Penrhyn Road, Kingston Upon Thames, Surrey, KT1 2BB on the 5 March 2015 at 10:00 AM

04/03/15 NON-ATTENDANCE MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

Important information:

· If you are not legally represented, you are advised to telephone the court (020 8240 2500) during the afternoon before the hearing of the appeal for confirmation of the time your case will be heard.

· If your appeal is likely to last LONGER THAN 1 HOUR, please tell us IMMEDIATELY.

· To abandon your appeal:

If you are appealing against a decision of a magistrates' court or licensing justices' you must give a written notice of your wish to abandon the appeal to the Clerk to Justices'; a copy of the notice to the Crown Court; a copy to every other party to the appeal.

If you are appealing against any other decision you must give a written notice to the Crown Court and a copy to every other party to the appeal.

Notice must be given at least 3 clear days (not counting Saturdays, Sundays, and Bank Holidays) before the date of the hearing. If you do not, or if you do not appear at the hearing, you may have to pay costs.

· If you are not successful in your appeal to the Crown Court, you may be ordered to pay the costs of the Respondent or at least a part of them. If you are successful you may be awarded costs.

Copy to:

Appellant Respondent Clerk to the Justices

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 59

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.06.2015_RE Re Simon Cordell_001

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 493,494,495,496,497,498

499,500,501,502      

 

59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 59

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.06.2015_RE Re Simon Cordell_001

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 493,494,495,496,497,498

499,500,501,502

--

493,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   06 February 2015 16:27

To: listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Appeal-Case-Driving-Tools-26-11-2014.pdf

S Cordell 020215.pdf

MT Underwriting-FW-MR-SIMON-CORDELL - CX52 JRZ.pdf

Dear Debbie Barnett CPS: and Sheila from the Listing Office at the crown court.

It does seem I am having trouble with sending the audio files could you please tell me how I can send them I have put the other files in but not the audio which will need to be put with his case files.

Please read below emails.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 06 February 2015 15:41

To: London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: listing@kingstonuponthames.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett CPS: and Sheila from the Listing Office at the crown court.

I did send the below email with all attachments, but I don't think anyone got it due to its size. I am resending it in 3 parts.

Part 1 of 3 email

Please see Attached files and please read below email. could you please also let me know you have got this email.

I did also call yesterday and was told you was not in the office and spoke to someone who told me an appeal date has been set for the 05/03/2015 the crown court.

I have also spoke to Sheila today at the Crown court listing office where I told her that we had not had any letters from the crown court she also told me that they did not get any emails I sent over. I do not have the case number and asked her if she could send the letter that was sent out by email to this email address.

Could all attached documents be attached to the case files please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 03 February 2015 12:57

To: 'London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: 'swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Debbie Barnett

Thank you for taking the time to talk to me today on the phone one the 02/02/2015. Could you please also confirm by email that you have this email.

494,

As explained, there have been a number of issues with my son Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

The issues are one of not being insured. When in fact he was.

There was a case heard on the 26/11/2014 at Wimbledon Magistrates' Court where my son Simon Cordell was found guilty. Of using his vehicle for business purposes.

This was only the case due to the police officer lying. Not just to KGM who my son was insured with, but in his statement of facts, and also on oath to the judge and CPS.

The case is such that on the day my son was stopped the police office made a call to KGM the police office told KGM that my son Simon Cordell had lots of tools in his van and was doing odd jobs. Under my son insurance this would not have covered him, and the police officer would have known this already as my son had given the police officer his policy at the side of the road.

My son was arrested and taken to the police station. Due to him refusing to sign the seizer notice and telling the police officer he was lying and to arrest him.

My sons Van registration CX52JRZ was seized and taken to Chariton police vehicle pound, with no tools in there.

The police office when wrote his statement not with what he told KGM on the phone call but with something totally incorrect information. The judge asked the police office at court about the tools as he saw emails from KGM the police office told the judge he knew nothing about any tools.

The police officer I believed new he could not put tools down in his statement as calls was already being put into the police about complaints. So changed his story in his statement.

The facts are that there are audio tapes of what the police officer said to KGM, and also the call that was made to Chariton police vehicle pound as KGM record all calls.

I have both of the audio files from KGM and also a Letter of Indemnity and an email that a manager sent to Kelly Tiller at KGM.

How can a police officer act in such a manner. I really do not understand why he did this.

As also said on the phone there is a number of summons my son has not had regarding the other stops from police, these case he have gone to court without him knowing and he been found guilty when he did not even know there was a case in court.

I have sent many emails to get these cases set aside and sent his insurance documents to the court. 2 case we had to do statutory declarations one for Willesden and one for Bromley. The Willesden one seems to have been reheard at court on the 26/01/2015 without us knowing again he was found guilty but they put this case under a new case number looking at the letter so all the documents that were sent before was not with the court file I would have through. But with both statutory declarations we added a copy of his insurance.

I have been trying for some time to get all of this put together so it can all be addresses and so far, nothing has been done with all the emails I have sent to the court. We also asked at court when we went to Wimbledon Magistrates' Court, but nothing was done. Could you please tell us where we can sort this out about getting all the other cases addressed without the need to be going from one court to the next. This is a waste of courts time and money when clearly all that is needed to be is check my son's insurance that he was in fact insured. I

 am sure that the letter that has been sent of Indemnity from KGM would cover these other cases as proof he was in fact insured. Could you please advise what needs to be done with these other cases.

Please can you address the issues in this email and get back to me by email.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

495,

496,

497,

498,

499,

RE: Re: Simon Cordell->MT Under writing_ FW_ MR SIMON CORDELL-4CX52 JRZ.pdf

From: MT Underwriting [MT.Underwriting@canopius.com]

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34

To: Gramlick, Les

Subject: FW: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly Tiller

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ D +44 (0) 20 8530 9116 | F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk

mailto: GARETH.MuNett@met.pnn.police.uk On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 14:10

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly,

I have looked at the seizure notice nothing was taken at the roadside and nothing was registered as left in the vehicle Regards Gareth

From: Tiller, Kelly [ mailto: Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:28

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

I have been told by the police that you do a report on all items that was in the vehicle at the time it was ceased.

Can I have a copy of this report please?

Kind regards Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 | F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk  On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:26

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

We have no record what was in the vehicle, we do not touch the vehicles contents.

Regards F S Williams

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

500,

Page 2 of 4

From: Tiller, Kelly [ mailto: Kelly.Tiller@eanopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:55

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Morning,

I need some assistance with regards to the above. We ensure Mr Simon Cordell and I need a copy of the report of the items that was in his vehicle at the time it was ceased.

We are due to cancel his policy @ noon today.

Your urgent advises are awaited.

Kind regards

Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative

of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

501,

Page 3 of 4

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

502,

Page 4 of 4

The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d...

30/01/2015

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 60

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.06.2015_Re Simon Cordell

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 503,504

505,506,507,508,509

 

 

60.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 60

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.06.2015_Re Simon Cordell

06/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 503,504

505,506,507,508,509 Should be 28 pages

--

503,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2015 15:24

To: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Cc: mc.mckee@michaelcarrollandco.com

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf.

MT Underwriting_ MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ.pdf.

RE_MT3574694 Simon Cordell_KGM.pdf

Part 1 of 3 email.

please see attached the way in which Simon has been treated by police and the lies one police office said to his insurance KGM this is due to be at Kingston upon Thames crown court on the 05/03/2013

and this is the information KGM has sent. I do have all the emails from KGM that has gone back and forward since Simon was pulled by police on the 14/11/2013

I have to send this in a few emails due to the size not sure if you are getting them

Regards

Lorraine

504,

505,

506,

Re: Simon Cordell->MT Underwriting_ MR SIMON.CX52 JRZ.pdf

From: MT Underwriting [MT.Underwriting@canopius.com]

Sent: 04 December 2014 15:34

To: Gramlick, Les

Subject: FW: MR SIMON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly Tiller

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopus Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9116 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: GARETH.Mullett@met.pnn.police.uk

mailto: GARETH.MuNett@met.pnn.police.uk

On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 26 November 2013 14:10

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Kelly,

I have looked at the seizure notice nothing was taken at the roadside and nothing was registered as left in the vehicle Regards Gareth

From: Tiller, Kelly mailto:  Kelly.Tiller@canopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:28

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

I have been told by the police that you do a report on all items that was in the vehicle at the time it was ceased.

Can I have a copy of this report please?

Kind regards Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto: Sarah.Williams6@met.pnn.police.uk  On Behalf Of

VresCharlton@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 25 November 2013 16:26

To: Tiller, Kelly

Subject: RE: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

We have no record what was in the vehicle, we do not touch the vehicles contents.

Regards Fpo S Williams

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

507,

Page 2 of 4

From: Tiller, Kelly [ mailto:  Kelly.Tiller@eanopius.com

Sent: 25 November 2013 10:55

To: VRES Mailbox - Charlton

Subject: MR SI MON CORDELL - CX52 JRZ

Morning,

I need some assistance with regards to the above. We ensure Mr Simon Cordell and I need a copy of the report of the items that was in his vehicle at the time it was ceased.

We are due to cancel his policy @ noon today.

Your urgent advises are awaited.

Kind regards

Kelly Tiller

Fleet Underwriting | KGM Motor Insurance - Member of the Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1818 |

F +44 (0) 20 8530 1841 www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative

of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

508,

Page 3 of 4

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Syndicate 260 which is managed by Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d... 30/01/2015

509,

Page 4 of 4

The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/3a5148a85fd442038750be9b13d...

30/01/2015

510+,

Re: Simon Cordell->RE_ SIMON COrdell_KGM.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent:06 February 2015 11:12

To: ’Wood, Peter’

Subject RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

I have sent the information over to the CSP I am waiting for a reply from them, I do believe however there is now an appeal date of the 05/03/2015 which I am trying to confirm due to not getting any letters from the court.

As for the data we need from the compound I have had to put a subject access request in, not sure how long this is going to take, but as soon as I heard anything, I will let you know,

Thank you again for dealing with this matter and I am sure we will talk soon; hope you have a great holiday.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 06 February 2015 10:41

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Lorraine/Simon,

Just a quick note to let you know that I will be on holiday from 12/2/15 returning on 9/3/15, so if you need anything in the meantime please communicate with Andy Austin.

Can you let me know how you get on with the CPS and let me know if there is anything else, we can do or that you might need from us?

Just to confirm, I'm sure you are onto this, but you are currently pulling together evidence of the costs incurred by Simon for various release fee's following Police stop and seizures. As soon as you have provided this evidence, I can consider the compensation aspect of your complaint. I would prefer to deal with this myself when I return after the 9/3/15, I hope that s acceptable to you but if not please let me know and I will put something in place so that this can be handled in my absence.

Finally, I would advise that the formal Data Subject Access Request you previously made has gone to our Data Protection Officer. He is aware that I have already provided the Indemnity Letter and some key call recordings to assist you. They are dealing with your request and he has asked that I send you his initial response, I have pasted this in below for your information-

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

511+,

Page 2 of21

Global Data Protection Officer | Canopius Holdings UK Limited |

Gallery 9 | One Lime Street | London | EC3M 7HA

D +44 (0) 20 7337 3796 |

M +44 (0) 7584 102572 www.canopius.com l

I trust that's everything for now, have a good weekend and no doubt we will be in contact soon. If you need anything else, just shout!

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 02 February 2015 15:08

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Thank you for the reply to my email

Yes, the below would cover everything I feel, so if you can go ahead and do this, I would be most grateful. As said, I just do not want any way that the CSP and Court could have any confusion with anything. Regards Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter

mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 02 February 2015 14:56

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Lorraine,

Thanks for your comments, don't worry I want to get this resolved as much as you and Simon, it’s taken far too long already, so before I send an amended Indemnity Letter (LOI) please confirm my understanding as listed below -

· I will amend the registration of the Ford Zetec to show MA57LDY. Broadsure originally gave us the incorrect registration and as you say it was a while before this error was corrected and our policy history was confusing due to the incorrect Clio that I was not aware of previously.

· You are correct, looking back on the instructions from Broadsure I cannot see that they instructed Underwriters to delete the Renault Clio that was added in error following receipt of advices from Broadsure. I can amend the comment in the letter to show that this vehicle was added to the policy

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

512+,

Page 3 of21

incorrectly following an effort on your part to correct the registration number of the Ford Zetec and was a broker error, are you happy with this?

· The letter states cover was for Social Domestic & Pleasure and Motor Trade Use. Motor Trade use would cover Simon to carry a Motor Mechanics tools being used in connection with Motor Trade but not any tools that would typically be used for any other purposes such as perhaps, paint/brushes/ladders/plumbing/Electrical(domestic/commercial except auto electrical) and so on. This is standard cover; however, I am happy to expand on this statement in the letter if you would like me to in order to clarify that point?

· The Police officer asked if Simon would be covered for the carriage of tools to drive around doing "odd jobs". Later in the call he again confirmed that Simon was not covered "to drive around doing jobs". I sent you the call so you can listen to it yourself but the tone of the enquiry was suggesting that Simon was doing jobs not connected to the Motor Trade however I do feel there is plenty of room here for misunderstanding. If the question had been more specific with the officer stating that Simon had tools connected with the Motor Trade in the vehicle would he be covered- Yes. If he said that the tools were not connected to the Motor Trade (as per my comments above) then the answer is - No. Not something I can put into a Letter of Indemnity but certainly something to be argued with the CPS/Courts.

· I'm happy to confirm in the letter that cover was in force under this policy on the 14/11/2013.

Once I hear back from you, I will revise the LOI accordingly and e-mail it across for you to sign off, I will also send an original in the post just in case!

If you need anything else please do not hesitate to drop me and Andy a line, I am keeping Andy in the loop as I will be on leave from 12/2/15 - 9/3/15 so he will need to deal with anything in my absence.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 31 January 2015 01:47

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Thank you very much for the information you have sent, I do see some errors in your letter of Indemnity.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY

· Ford Transit registration CX52JRZ

On the 8/4/13 at 11.05am the following vehicle was added to the policy -

· Renault Clio registration NA57LDY.

Ford Zetec registration MA47LDY Renault Clio registration NA57LDY

This registration was always put in not correctly but was in fact given to Broadsure Direct correctly.

The registration should have been Ford Zetec registration MA57LDY

This was later correct after the 3rd time of telling the Ford Zetec registration as MA57LDY please see attached

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

513+,

Page 4 of21

document.

This is the registration that should have been on the policy from the start.

We never knew it was not correct until 08/04/13 when again the correct registration was given.

However, it was put down as Renault Clio registration NA57LDY, we then believe it was put in correctly and not a new car added.

We were not sent any documents of that change so did not know there was again an error until the Oct 2013 when it was in fact corrected this time, we asked for new documents to be sent which they were so we could check.

But they kept on his policy Renault Clio registration NA57LDY we made a next call and told them this needed to be removed and was told it would be done.

It seems this was never done by what you have sent in your email.

I do believe I have emails also about this issue to Broadsure Direct and Martin Jenkins, can confirm this as he was the one, we dealt with at Broadsure Direct. He also should remember all the phone calls.

There is also a next issue Simon was not just covered with the basic trade insurance with KGM, Broadsure Direct had a special section with KGM which included in his insurance he was in fact covered for his work as a mechanic, not just standard insurance of trade buying and selling that KGM as a rule only deals with.

This has been discussed with the underwriters at KGM by Broadsure Direct re Martin Jenkins. This also caused issues with his insurance cover a few times. This was also meant to have been address and seems it was not. At the time we were not happy as we were told he was not covered when in fact he was. If you call Broadsure Direct and speak to Martin Jenkins, I feel that he can send you the paperwork and under writing of how Simon’s insurance was meant to have been setup.

As you can see there was a number of issues with his insurance with KGM that lead to problems. and even with the issues of 14/11/2013 when a call was made to Kelly Tiller we asked did the police say what tools was meant to have been in the van as if there was mechanic tools in there his insurance should have in fact covered this. Kelly Tiller said no the police officer did not say which tools. But also said he was again not insured for this again Martin Jenkins got a rude call from us and again he had to make calls to address this issue.

Can you please confirm he was correctly insured with KGM and write this as I would like this addressed.

And one last thing could you please say in your letter on the date of the 14/11/2013 he was fully insured just so there cannot be any mistakes at court.

Sorry, this is causing such an issue and taking up your time but I really want to have something that is fully correct, as I do not want any other issues with courts, police and anything else that could cause my Son problems.

Regards

Lorraine.

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 30 January 2015 17:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Austin, Andrew; Donovan, Paul

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Simon,

Please find attached the following -

·         Recording of the original call made by the Police officer to KGM in which he advised that there were tools in your van.

·         Recording of the call between Kelly Tiller and the Police compound in which Kelly was advised that there were no tools in the vehicle.

·         Receipt showing purchase of the van.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

514+,

Page 5 of21

·         E-Mail from Gareth Mullett from the compound confirming that there was nothing on the seizure notice to indicate that there were any tools removed from the vehicle or in the vehicle in the compound.

·         Letter of Indemnity for the CPS/Courts.

I believe these are the relevant items you were after and hope this will assist you to resolve the court matters. If you need anything else please let me know, or in my absence Andy Austin.

Paul Donovan will respond separately in respect of your data request but hopefully the attached will meet your requirements.

As soon as I receive documentation from you to support costs incurred, I can consider our response on compensation.

No doubt I will hear from you shortly, in the meantime have a good weekend.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 27 January 2015 11:14

To: Wood, Peter

Cc: Austin, Andrew; complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter

Yes please could you send the tapes out and the Letter of Indemnity I would be most grateful as I think this would cover the courts and would like to get the information to them as soon as possible to the court and CPS.

As for the other information that is acceptable, as I not sure how long it will take the police compound to send me over the information, I will need to send to you they do take their time.

I am just happy this matter is getting address as said the most worrying thing was the court case and this is the information I needed. I hope you have a great time on leave.

I look forward to hearing from you and will pass the information over from the police compound as soon as I have it.

Regards

Simon

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 27 January 2015 10:05

To: Lorraine Cordell

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

515+,

Page 6 of21

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: Re: MT3574694 Simon Cordell Dear Simon,

I spent some time last Friday tracking down a number of calls and did find the original call that the Police made to Jessica and the calls Kelly made to the Compound so we can provide these and it sounds like these are the important calls from the CPS and Courts viewpoint. I will pass these over to our Data Protection Officer of course but will ask if its ok for me to release them to you in the meantime before he does his official response.

I think we should also do the Letter of Indemnity and will send this across to you in the next few days, threes no reason why you can't send this across now and it can do no harm.

I'm conscious we have not done a formal final response yet to your complaint, I intend to do this as soon as we receive full details of the recovery costs you incurred and can make a decision on compensation, I trust that’s acceptable.

If you need anything else or have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us.

I am keeping Andy in the loop as I am due to go on leave from 12/2/15 - 8/3/15 so he will need to pick up any issues that may arise during that time.

We will be in touch shortly and await details from you as above in due course.

King Regards Mr Peter Wo

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 26 January 2015 23:10:04 GMT

To: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com <complaints@lloyds.com>

Subject: MT3574694 Simon Cordell

Dear Peter Wood

Thank you for picking this up and taking the time to deal with this matter.

The date of the appeal I do not have yet.

I are waiting for this but the court and CPS said if I get the information needed before the court date then it could be sent to the court who found me guilty and the CPS and this would be linked to the case and addressed. In addition, there should be no need for the appeal court case.

I am trying to do this so that a next day is not got to be wasted of my time in court and getting to and from the court.

The day that the police officer pulled me and told KGM that I had tools in my van, which the police officer lied, and the police officer has said this in court so lied to the judge is 14/11/2013.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

516+,

Page 7 of21

I think due to what the police officer said in court the CPS and judge would like to know the facts and what the police officer said on that phone call to KGM. In addition, when KGM spoke to the manager at the police compound and found out in fact there was not tools, I think the reason for this is the police officer committed perjury in the court.

That is why they asked me to get proof that my insurance was not void, section 9 witness statements as to what the police officer told KGM on the phone to try to void my insurance, In addition, the facts how KGM found out I had in fact done nothing wrong and my insurance should not be cancelled.

However, if you think a Letter of Indemnity would sort this matter out then if this could be done I would be very grateful, but could you include in the letter only reason this has come about is due to what the police officer told KGM about the tools being in the van. In addition, this is the reason KGM told the police officer that I would not then be covered by the insurance policy I had in force with them.

This should cover it I hope as I really did nothing wrong and Kelly Tiller knows the police officer lied to get my insurance cancelled as she spoke to the police compound and they told her there was no tools.

The vehicle registration I was driving on the 14/11/2010 was CX52JRZ, this registration was included on my insurance. So should have shown on the database along with my car. However, none showed up as being insured on the MID database, this is what has caused me all the problems with the police.

As already aware yes, I was stopped around 8 or 9 times and had vehicles seized.

I do have some of the some of them here already like do have the receipt what I paid to get the vehicle out of the compound for the 14/11/2013 case I picked that up on the 16/11/2013.

I have the ones for the 08/04/2013, 29/10/2013, 16/11/2013, 03/01/2014 I just need to get the receipts for the other dates and also something that shows they was all sized due to no insurance from the police compound.

As for the Data Subject Access Request, I am most grateful that this is being addressed. If I had known a fee was, needed I would have paid that right away, but due to no one getting back to me about the ones that were put in, I did not know a fee was needed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Wood, Peter [mailto:Peter.Wood@canopius.com]

Sent: 23 January 2015 17:19

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: FW: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

Unfortunately Andy has been called away due to a family emergency, in his absence I have picked this matter up.

The first order of business to my mind is dealing with the Court case, can you confirm when the date has been set for the hearing please? My thought is that we provide a Letter of Indemnity that basically confirms that you had a valid policy in force between said dates and on what vehicles, this

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

517+,

Page 8 of21

should satisfy the Courts but if they need anything else, we will be happy to assist, just let me know what you require.

I understand you were stopped several times and had vehicles seized, you are in the process of obtaining evidence of these vehicle seizures and the costs incurred by you as a result for us to consider compensation. When you have gathered this please forward the evidence to us as soon as possible.

There is also the matter of your Data Subject Access Request. I have spent some time today tracking down recorded calls and various communications and hove notified our Data Protection Officer of your request. I can see that you have made a request, any request should correctly be sent on for the attention of the Data Protection Officer along with a 10 fee. Your request was addressed generally to KGM with no fee and it would appear not actioned. The underwriter dealing with your request should have asked immediately for the fee payment and escalated your request accordingly. This was not done for which I must apologise, as a result we will waive the fee requirement and I would confirm this is now in hand.

We have yet to issue a final response to your complaint and I would assure you we will do this as soon as we have received your response to the above points.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

To: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com <Andrew.Austin@canopius.com>

Subject: FW: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

Please see attached Insurance, which will show you full details of his insurance policy and dates covered.

Yes, we do want full discloser so this mater can be sorted out by the court and I can send the information over to the CPS for the case of the 14/11/2013 where the police officer told KGM I had tools in my van to void my insurance. Kelly Tiller from the trade section and Jessica know fully what went on and it was Jessica that took the phone call from the police officer. After this I believe Kelly Tiller took over dealing with my policy and she was the one that had the say to cancel my policy and she was the one that believed the police until I went to the police compound and spoke to the manager there where he spoke to Kelly Tiller. If I had not done this Kelly Tiller would have cancelled my policy of insurance and I have all the

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

518+,

Page 9 of21

emails to prove this.

After Kelly Tiller found out I was not lying about having no tools in my van the insurance policy was kept in place, I did ask Kelly Tiller on more than once to send me the information and put data requests in which was not replied to. Now I have been found guilty when Kelly Tiller knows the truth that there was not tools and the police officer lied to KGM on the phone call.

I am the one that has suffered over all this not just on this case but all the times I have been taken to court for no insurance over the year my policy run with KGM due to it not showing on the MID database.

You should have all the emails already from Broadsure Direct and many was sent by them to KGM as I was told KGM could not talk to me and I had to deal with Broadsure Direct about my policy Martin Jenkins from Broadsure Direct should also have copies of all emails as I do.

I have spoken to DVLA today and asked for the data of how many times points was put on my licence due to not getting summons from police and then dealing with cases I knew nothing about and then I had to get the cases reopened, I have to write them a letter and they will send the data I have asked for in the post.

I do have a lot of letters which I will sort out scan and send over. But the 1st part I want to deal with is the court case I was found guilty at and have put an appeal in that is the most important to me right now.

We can deal with everything else once I get all the data scanned as there is really a lot and it was all due to KGM not sorting out why my insurance was not showing on the MID database. The seizers alone have left me out of pocket by around 1700.00. That is without all the days I have not been able to work due to my driving licence being messed up and showing points for no insurance. All the time going back and forward to the compound to collect my vehicles, and everything else I have had to deal with the courts when in fact I had done nothing wrong.

I have tried to deal with this for months and months without going to the ombudsman and KGM has taken no notice, it has taken me to go to the ombudsman for KGM to take any notice and I don’t feel anyone would be happy with the this sort of service from KGM let alone any company doing this and

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

519+,

Page 10 of 21

causing someone so much suffering.

It was one of the police in the end at the compound who in the end worked out why it was not showing up on the MID and that was because there had been a space put within my Reg Numbers. It was that bad two police compounds new me and said each time not again.

As you can see, I am not very happy about all of this, but I do not think anyone would be when they paid for their insurance and had done nothing wrong to suffer all this.

Therefore could you please get the information I need to send to the CPS; I have written what was needed from Nov 2014 and way before this, and it still has not been sent and I have this hanging over my head. I did not just get points on my licence I got disqualified from driving for 6 months due to repeat offending of no insurance please tell me why when I have paid for my insurance from KGM? The reason it has not been enforced is due to me putting an appeal in.

You can contact my mother on 0208 245 7454 or 07961 833021

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 16:13

To: ’Lorraine Cordell’

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell,

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

520+,

Page 11 of 21

I have detailed the process for requesting information under the subject access request and if you wish to proceed with this please confirm.

In the meantime I am keen to assist you if I can in confirming when cover was in force.

Please can you confirm if there is a contact number, I can call you or your Mother on and a time that is acceptable so that I can try and help resolve this particular issue for you.

I look forward to hearing from you with this information.

Regards,

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 1806 |

M 07469 147743 |

http://www.kgminsurance.co.uk/> www.kgminsurance.co.uk | <http://www.canopius.com/> www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 13:22

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Andrew

I will forward this to you within a few days I will ask the police compound to do a full print out as to all the tickets as I believe there is a few missing.

I do have around 6 of the tickets here when the vehicles were sized I also do have court letters, and letters from DVLA, which I will forward over to you once I have scanned then in so please give me a few days and I will get

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

521+,

Page 12 of 21

back to you with this information as there is a lot of data.

The main one at this time I am worried about is the case where the vehicle was sized due to the police lying and me being found guilty at court you did have an email on the 30 November 2014 about what was needed and I do have the court letter showing I was found guilty and about the appeal.

This data should have been given under the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I put in, so was wondering what you can do about this and if you will need a new Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 I have already sent 3 in so to do a 4th I do not feel I should need to do.

KGM have in fact not followed the protocol for the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 which has been put in 3 times already to KGM, I will be addressing this with the Information Commissioner’s Office as I do not see any reason you would have to stop the information I have asked for under this act to prove I was not in fact guilty of no insurance.

And now say to deal with this you need information from me. I can understand you want the information for the complaint that has been put in, but not the information I asked for to show I was in fact I was insured for an appeal that is ongoing. And in fact, would not have been ongoing if the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 as I would not have been found guilty.

I would like the data sent to the court as soon as possible in regards to this so they can look at the facts and see if fact I was insured so there should be no need for the appeal to go ahead with more of my time wasted going to court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Austin, Andrew

mailto: Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:54

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

522+,

Page 13 of 21

To: ’Lorraine Cordell’ Subject: RE: MT3574694

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email.

My letter dated 22/12/14 requests the following documentary evidence from you

With regards to any losses that may have been incurred as a result of the above, I confirm as detailed in my previous letter, I require the following:

· Confirmation of the points you raised to the Financial Ombudsman

when you verbally submitted your complaint and the outcome you are looking to achieve.

· Full details of the losses that you have incurred as a direct result of your complaint and full documentary evidence supporting this.

· Confirmation of dates of any convictions or costs imposed directly as a result of your complaint, including full documentary evidence supporting this.

Once I receive all of the above, I will be happy to consider this further.

With regards to your subject access request. My letter of the 9/12/14 advised the following:

Following our initial investigations, we note that you submitted a subject access request to your Broker. Should you wish to proceed with this, please can you formally request this in writing to our Data Protection Officer at the address detailed at the foot of the letter including a cheque payable to KGM Insurance for the sum of 10.00. Alternatively, you may wish to wait until our full investigations have been finalised.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

515+,

Page 14 of 21

Can you please confirm how you wish to proceed with that request.

Should you not be in receipt of any of the letters I refer to advise me above, please and I will ensure copies are sent to you immediately.

I await your reply

Andrew Austin

Deputy Underwriting Operations Manager | KGM Motor Insurance

Member of the UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 January 2015 11:31

To: Austin, Andrew

Cc: complaints@lloyds.com

Subject: RE: MT3574694

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing due to the complaint I put in. I have forwarded emails to Broadsure Direct and spoken to Broadsure Direct who took the policy of insurance out policy no: MT3574694

I have been asking for information from KGM since 2013 and have heard nothing back.

When the policy was taken out there was some reason it did not show up on the MID database Broadsure Direct and KGM was aware of this.

Due to this fact I had my vehicles were sized a number of times I believe 8 or 9 times in all, where I had to pay the costs to get my vehicles out the compound each time. In the week when I was pulled by police it was not so

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

523+,

Page 15 of 21

bad as the insurance company was opened so when I showed the police my policy, they could call the insurance company.

The seizers happened mostly at the weekend mostly due to the insurance company being closed and the police could not talk to anyone even when I had my policy on me at all times to prove I did in fact have insurance.

I made many calls to the police, Broadsure Direct, KGM and the people who run the MID database, but the issue did not go away, and my vehicles still did not show up on the MID database.

There was also a time in Nov 2013 when my van was sized this was due to KGM telling the police I was not insured due to the police telling KGM that I had tools in my van. Which was a lie by the police as I did not have anything in my van. Kelly Tiller from the trade section was dealing with this and a few days later I got a letter from KGM saying they was going to cancel my policy. As you can understand I was very upset over this as I had done nothing wrong.

At this time lots of calls was both made to KMG and Broadsure to stop the cancelation of my insurance policy, I spoke to Kelly Tiller many times, but she believed the police and I had no say in the matter. The police was off duty so I could not speak to them and Kelly Tiller was saying unless I could prove I did not have any tools in my van then the insurance policy would be cancelled which was very unfair as I had done nothing wrong I knew I never had any tools.

But I also asked Kelly Tiller did the police tell her what tools was meant to be in my van, to which she said no. KGM was not even aware I had mechanics trade on my policy so if my mechanics tools had been in my van at the time my insurance would still have been cancelled which to me what was the point in having insurance?

I then spoke to a wonderful operator at the police when I called told her what had gone on and was told by her to go to the police compound as when any vehicles are taken there they have to do a full list of items that are in the vehicles as they are in fact legible if something goes missing. Over that weekend I sent emails to the compound and forwarded them to Broadsure as my insurance was due to be cancelled on the Monday. On Monday I got an email from Broadsure direct asking me to go to the compound as Kelly Tiller had no luck getting a reply from them also, and once there to call Kelly Tiller due to the time on the Monday I got the email it would have been too late to go the compound and get a call to Kelly Tiller as she would have

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

524+,

Page 16 of 21

ended work for that day so I sent an email saying I would be going there early the next morning.

I went the next day and asked to speak to the manager of the compound who in fact looked up my van and said nothing was in there, there was not tools I called Kelly Tiller and the manager of the compound spoke to her and confirmed there was nothing in the van when it was taken there by police and that I had put thing in the van when I had taken it out of the compound.

At this point Kelly tiller believed me and said the policy would not be cancelled. But on my way back from the compound driving my phone ring and I stopped to pick it up and it was Broadsure direct saying my policy had in fact been cancelled I was very upset at this and told them what had happened, I was asked to hold on they was called KGM back and would call me right back. I waited till Broadsure direct called me back and confirmed my insurance policy had not been cancelled then drove home.

From this point I have been asking for all information and putting data protection acts in which have not been dealt with and I have heard nothing from KGM.

I have been back and forward to court due to no insurance and in fact 4 cases I did not get any summons so was in fact found guilty as I did not know it was even going to court.

I have had points put on my driving licence for no reason and had to go back and forward to court many times when this should not have been the case.

Then the case come up for the seizer when the police said I had tools in my van I went to court with all my documents but due to not having the information I had asked for from KGM many times about that case I was found guilty. I am very upset about the whole policy with KGM. I have put an appeal in, and this case will be going to crown court I have again asked for information and again heard nothing. These matters need to be addressed as I am suffering due to all of this.

Martin Jenkins at Broadsure Direct knows everything that has gone on as he was my main contact.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

525+,

Page 17 of 21

I also have all the emails the last one that I will enclose again, which I have heard nothing about and the 1st Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 that I sent on the 26/11/2013. I did in fact send the Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998 about time times and asked Martin Jenkins to look into why I had heard nothing about more than once.

Once I get the appeal date for crown court, I will ask the court to summon the people at KGM to deal with this matter as they know I was insurance and did nothing wrong and the police lied. All I have asked for is the data so there will be no need to summons people this way I can send the section 9 witness statements over to the crown and the other information and this case should be dropped against me.

It just seemed that KGM does not want to do anything and give me the information I need to prove in fact I was insurance and the police lied to KGM to in fact make it that I was not insurance.

There is a lot more I could say about the insurance I had with KGM, but this insurance policy was my worst nightmare. It has messed my clean driving licence up and in fact got to the point I could not drive so could not work.

Due to the fact, KGM could not send me the information over that was needed to prove I did have insurance.

If you need o can send over all the emails that has been sent back and forward to Broadsure who sent them to KGM.

I have lost a lot of money, and time due to this insurance policy I have had to pay for my vehicles to be taken out of the police compound around 8 to 9 times at a cost of 180.00 to 200.00 a time. All the loss of work due to having to take time to go to the police compound, and all the times I have had to go to court for no insurance when in fact I had insurance. And points put on my driving licence to the fact I could not drive, this has all been costs to myself.

My Mother Lorraine Cordell has also written many of the emails and is fine with dealing with this issue.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

526+,

Page 18 of 21

Regards

Simon Cordell

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

527+,

Page 19 of 21

received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised

by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial

Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed

representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius

Managing Agents Limited

Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

529+,

Page 20 of 21

Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba... 06/02/2015

530+,

Page 21 of 21

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of

Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/2bf34c458f384c308de555fb3d6efba...

06/02/2015

 

 

 

 

61.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 61

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.09.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

09/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 510

511,512,513,514

 

61.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 61

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.09.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

09/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 510

511,512,513,514

--

510,

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Sent: 09 February 2015 11:30

To: Josephine Ward

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Attachments: Witness Statement 060215 S Cordell.docx

Dear Ms Ward,

I have drafted a section 9 statement as requested. Before I sign it off can you review it and confirm it satisfies all of your requirements please? As soon as you do so I will sign it off, scan a copy over to you and put the original in the post.

Let me know if you need anything else and of course if you need me to amend the attached in any way.

Lorraine/Andy - FYI.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Josephine Ward mailto: josie@michaelcarroHandco.com

Sent: 08 February 2015 19:02

To: Wood, Peter; Austin, Andrew

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Mr Wood

I have been instructed by Mr Simon Paul Cordell and Miss Lorraine Cordell to assist in the appeal against conviction that is due to be heard at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court on 5th March 2015 at 10am.

Miss Cordell has played two recordings that she received from KGM which are pertinent to the appeal but at present as the telephone recordings have not been produced as an exhibit by KGM they will not be admissible at court.

Can you therefore please write a section 9 statement confirming that:

·         all recording equipment was working correctly

·         KGM produced two recordings at the request of Ms Lorraine Cordell

·         Confirmation that the recording of S Cordell call from police 141113 Recording was provided by KGM from their recorded calls and is authentic

·         Confirmation that the recording between the Car Pound and Kelly Tiller was also provided from the KGM recorded calls and is authentic

If we are in possession of a section 9 statement producing the recordings, then we will not have to apply to the court for a Third-Party Summons to compel an employee from KGM to attend to produce the recordings. This would be a complete waste of your time when all we require is a section 9 attesting to the recordings being retrieved from the system and exhibited as two separates

511,

recordings.

If you require assistance with drafting a section 9 statement, then we would be happy to draft it and email it over. We would require the name of the person who retrieved the recordings. the dates that the recordings were retrieved, the dates the recordings relate to, confirmation that the recordings were sent to Lorraine Cordell by email so that she can produce CD's of the recordings so that they can be played in court and specifically refer to the email containing the recordings so that there is continuity in the chain of evidence. Ideally, we would like KGM to produce the CD's and exhibit them but failing this we will try to get the CPS to agree the CD's as produced from the email of Miss Cordell. We stress that the section in relation to the search and retrieval of the KGM database is essential and critical to ensuring that the chain of evidence is intact.

We can serve these recordings on the CPS and the Court so that they are agreed in advance of the Appeal hearing.

We thank you in advance for your anticipated co-operation in this matter and hope that we do not have to apply for a Third-party Witness Summons to compel the attendance of a KGM employee at the Appeal on the 5th March 2015.

We confirm that Miss Cordell is forwarding an email confirming that we are instructed and authorised to request this information.

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

512,

513,

514,

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 62

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.10.2015_RE Simon Cordell Information

10/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

523,524,525,526,527,528

529

 

 

62.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 62

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.10.2015_RE Simon Cordell Information

10/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

523,524,525,526,527,528

529

--

515,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 10 February 2015 15:33

To: 'Martin Jenkin'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf

Witness Statement 060215 S Cordell.docx

REGINA V. SIMON CORDELL APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION AT KINGSTON UPON THAMES CROWN COURT 080215.doc.

Witness Statement 060215 S Cordell.docx

Hi Martin

Just giving you an update Simon has called to try and speak to you today to make a late payment on his insurance as he was a day late. could you please make sure someone calls us to make the payment.

As for KGM they are now dealing and addressing the issues, but it took me to start cc my emails to them to Lloyds.

He has been having it really hard due to all this insurance with KGM and the courts, and not being able to drive half the time this policy has been in place due to them keep revoking his driving licence, until the courts then sort it and put it back in place. They have again revoked his driving licence this is the 3 time. I have had to get a solicitor now to help with the cases of no insurance because I seem to be getting nowhere. And also to deal with the appeal case for the 14/11/2013. I do have the audio now from KGM that proves the police officer lied and some letters I will attach to this email just so you are updated.

I can't send the audio due to most places will not accept that file type. So I have included the transcript that the solicitor done

Could you please also address doing your section 9 witness statement about the calls for the 14/11/2013 as the appeal case is due to be heard on the 05/03/2015.

Could you also please send over a copy of Simon no claims please?

Regards

Lorraine

From: Martin Jenkin [mailto:martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com]

Sent: 07 January 2015 09:06

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Good Morning Lorraine,

Apologies for the lack of contact, I have been in and out of the office.

Have you received any correspondence from KGM? we spoke to them prior to Christmas regarding the issues and they have been looking into the situation and as far as I am aware, they were going to respond directly.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards

Martin Jenkin DDI 01843 598744

Broadsure direct

INSURANCE INTERMEDIARY

t: 01843 594477

f: 01843 594488

516,

Broadsure Direct - Telephone number: 01843 594477 - Fax Number: 01843 594488

This e-mail transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender as soon as possible and delete the message. Please note that we are able to, and reserve the right to, monitor e-mail communications passing through our network.

Broadsure Direct Is Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 28 December 2014 23:59

To: martinjenkin@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Information

Hello Martin

Can you please get back to me with an update as I not heard anything from KGM about the email I sent over to you on the 30/11/2014 with the data that would be needed. I also have not heard anything from you about the section 9 witness statement. Please can you get back to me as soon as possible.

Regards

Lorraine

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

517,

518,

519,

520,

521,

522,

RE: Simon Cordell Information->REGINA V. SIMON CORDELL APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION AT KINGSTON UPON THAMES CROWN COURT 080215.doc

REGINA V. SIMON CORDELL

APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION IN RELATION TO AN ALLEGATION OF NO INSURANCE AT WIMBLEDON MAGISTRATES COURT ON 26th NOVEMBER 2014

PARTICULARS OF THE CHARGE - 14th November 2013 at Brixton Hill

Police approached and said enquiries re no insurance, SC explained problems insurance not showing up on the MOTOR INSURANCE DATABASE

Call made to SC insurance broker Broadshaw. Police not happy with this. He made phone calls to KGM stating that there were lots of tools in the vehicle.

PC Geoghan Metropolitan Police. Clarify limitation on use MT3574694.

S Cordell call from police 141113 Recording

Thank you for calling KGM introduction select correct dept from the

following:

Thank you for calling KGN accounts department to speak to an account handler please press 1

Female: Hello KGM

PC G: Hi there it is PC Geoghan from the Met Police I need to speak to someone about a policy of insurance a gentleman claims to have with you

Female: Okay if you hold the line, I will pass you through to our underwriting department Carl KGM: Good afternoon Carl speaking how can I help

PC G: Hi there it’s PC Geoghan from the Metropolitan Police I’ve got a gentleman stopped and he has produced a certificate of insurance from KGM and I just wanted to clarify some of the limitation on the use.

Carl: Okay do you have a policy number

PC G: Yeah, I do it’s MT3574694.

Carl: It’s a Motor trade policy. Yeah, I might have to forward you to another Department

PC G: Yeah sure

Jessica: Hi you have been passed through to Jessica from KGM how I can help

PC G: I have a gentleman here who has been stopped with an insurance certificate issued by KGM. I’ve got a policy number and other details

Jessica: Okay I can see that from my screen

PC G: Basically it says motor trade and SDWP and use motor trade purposes- Looking at vehicle it’s got a load of tools in and they appear to be workmen doing sort of work odd jobs here and there. Is that something motor trade would cover?

Jessica: No, he just covered for road trade, road risk only and SDWP and would not cover for any other occupation

PC G: Okay right, right. He’s claimed he bought the vehicle today or yesterday and he’s not able to produce any proof that he has done that

523,

Jessica: Rights

PC G: Em does he have to notify you of any vehicles

Jessica: When a client purchases a vehicle, they have 14 days to make us aware. If they didn’t within 14 days they don’t make us aware then they’re not covered but anything like this happened we do need proof to show that he had only had it within the 14 days otherwise it would not cover it we need to obviously we would not ask for proof normally but say if he has like pulled over now we would ask because he could just say he bought it yesterday or a week ago and we would still cover him.

PC G So it definitely does not cover him on the if he literally going around with tools in the van doing jobs that is not something, he is covered for Jessica Certainly not

PC G: That’s not something he is covered for

Jessica: No certainly not

PC G Can I just get your name obviously for my notes

Name: Jessica Kempton DOB 02.02.1992

Phone: 0208 530 1822

Underwriting Department

PC G Thanks very much for your help

22.11.2013 Emails:

vrescharlton@met.police.uk at 17.14 hrs - no reply

charltondocuments@met.police.uk - forwarded email of 22.11.2013. This email was sent on 24.11.2013 at 13.33 hrs

Email read on 24.11.2013 by Rob.Guy@met.pnn.police.uk read the email on 24.11.2013 at 17.02 hrs

Emailed broker on 25.11.2013 at 10.06 hrs email martinienkins@broadshawdirect.com - all emails sent to compound forwarded.

Spoke to PS complaint made on CAD6768/14NOV/13 Cost of recovering the van Ł190

Ref: 474782

Details of search of van: KGM recording. (FROM RECORDING 26_11_2013_11_53_Kelly Tiller Kelly call to compound

Thank you for calling KGM   introduction hold whilst we connect you to our underwriters

Charlton Car pound: Good afternoon James speaking

James KMG: Hello James is Kelly there please. Who’s calling please?

Charlton Car pound - Car pound Metropolitan police service

James KMG: Yeah one second please. Okay I will just put you through

Kelly Tiller - Hello Kelly speaking

Gareth: Hello Kelly my name is Gareth, Manager of Charlton Car Pound Metropolitan Police Service I’m dealing with a Mr Simon Paul Cordell something about the tools in the back of his vehicle Kelly: Correct yeah

524,

Gareth: All I can do is I’ve looked at the seizure notice which would be given to Paul at the time and any property left was blank so if there was any tools in the back normally that would be registered as tools in the rear of the vehicle

Kelly: Right okay because we had a call from the police

Gareth: Yeah

Kelly: He advised that there were tools in the vehicle

Gareth: Do you want to speak to him a moment

Kelly: Who Sorry

Gareth: Paul because I have got him in front of me

Kelly: Yeah that’s fine

SC Hello

Kelly: Hello

SC: You alright Kelly

Kelly: Okay what have they given you there

SC: They have not given me anything, but he did explain to you on the phone that threes’ no tools on the vehicle on their CADs and in any case, they would write that down tools in the vehicle and so forth

Kelly: Right okay and has he gives you a printout of this.

SC: No you will have to ask him yourself

Kelly: Right can you pass me back to him

Gareth: Hello Kelly

Kelly: Hello, right okay so if there was any kind of tools in the vehicle it would be stated on there

Gareth: Well yeah what happens on the roadside a police officer will issue a seizure notice and he will say do you want to take any property out of the vehicle, normally they take satnavs, wallets, money whatever

Kelly: He could have taken the tools out of the vehicle

Gareth: Well I do not know I am not going to comment on that to be perfectly frank with you all I can do is comment on the paperwork that I see in front of me Right okay

Gareth: And there was nothing left in the vehicle

Kelly: At the time of when it come in but obviously Yeah

Kelly: He’s had the opportunity to take items out of that vehicle

Gareth: But then it would have been mentioned that he had done that and there is nothing there saying that he had, and it would have also mentioned what was taken on the seizure notice yeah

Kelly: Is there any chance you can forward me a copy of this

Gareth: No we are not allowed to under the Police Act and God knows what else. All I

can confirm is what I have seen on the seizure notice

Kelly: Can you confirm that in an email to me please

Gareth: Right what you do

Kelly: I have already emailed yourselves and

Right

You’ve replied to say you would not have anything like that on record and I just need you to pop me over an email to say that

525,

Gareth: If you go to Charlton car Charlton documents and I can reply from there because

we have firewalls and God knows what else

Kelly: So you don’t use the vcse one of whatever it is called

Gareth: No if you do charltondocuments@met.police.uk. What I am going to do I am going to bring up a copy of this seizure notice just double check that I have done everything right for you

Kelly: Are you a police officer

Gareth: No I work at the compound I am just one of the little plebs

Kelly: I have just forwarded you over a copy of the email and the reply that I got from the

vres Charlton@met.pnn.police.co.uk

Gareth: What I will do I can only go on what we have got here and I’m just bringing it up now if you bear with me. I am looking at the copy of

Kelly: Is that from a PC Geoghan

Gareth: Bear with me at the end of the day it is just a signature

Kelly: Oh alright okay

Gareth: All I can say is property left in the vehicle there is nothing in their Property removed from driver that is blank as well but obviously he did not remove anything else as that would have been registered

Kelly: Yeah

Gareth: He would have told the officer there’s tools in there be careful as they’re part of me trade

Kelly: Yeah

Gareth: Then that would have been registered they were within there. We take them out and put them into our property store for safe-keeping and then when he comes to collect them, they get given back then

Kelly: Right okay that fine it is just when we got a call from the officer when he has Mr Cordell at the road side he has advised us that he is carrying tools in his vehicle Gareth: Well I can’t comment on that I can only go on the information on that seizure notice and there was nothing been entered that the gentleman removed anything or there was anything left. That’s all I can say

Kelly: That’s fine no worries so if you can just reply to my email there and then that will be great. Thanks for your help.

Email from Kelly Tiller to compound. Case Number: 011401009802

REQUEST FROM MAGISTRATES COURT VIA EMAIL - smglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Summons reply sent in by email on 22nd May 2014 at 14.19 hours with not guilty plea attached

526,

Receipt from 23rd May 2014 GL-SWESTERNMCENQ [smglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk]

Phone call from Simon’s mother who confirmed receipt of the email. Convicted in absence on Application to re-open case email sent on 11th September 2014 Email acknowledged from the court to

527,

528,

529,

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 63

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.10.2015_RE Simon Cordell

10/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 530,531,532,533,534

535,536

 

 

63.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 63

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.10.2015_RE Simon Cordell

10/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 530,531,532,533,534

535,536

--

530,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:06

To: 'GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: London.magistratescentralwest@cps.gsi.gov.uk

London.magistratessouth@cps.gsi.gov.uk

london.magistratesnortheast@cps.gsi.gov.uk

gl-bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf

Found  Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf

S Cordell Cert.GE-2013-2014.pdf.

image2014-05-20-184559.pdf

To whom it may concern:

I am writing this email due to the number of problems I have been having due to a policy of insurance I had with KGM insurance which did not show up on the MID database in the week it was fine as I carried my insurance documents with me at all times and the insurance company could be called, but the problems was when the insurance company was closed as the police could not contact them.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have sent many emails to the courts with my insurance documents, but there have been cases where I have not had a summons. So did not know about cases and they have been heard at court and I was found guilty of no insurance.

I have done statutory declarations at court including my insurance documents and this still has not corrected anything.

One of the statutory declarations was again heard at court on the 26/01/2015 which again I did not know about for Willesden Magistrates' Court. But I have sent so many emails to this court with all documents and asked for them to be checked with the police officer at court to show I was insured to drive. This has not been done I have just again been found guilty due to not getting letters of a court hearing date.

I have now also got a letter of Indemnity from KGM who I was insured with under policy number MT3574694. 00.01 AM on the 23/2/13 and was in force until Midnight on the 22/2/14 when it lapsed.

Most of the cases are with the KGM policy you will see the reason as to why in the Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

I also believe there was one case for Covea Insurance PLC policy number MT10 021608047 it was not showing on the MID due to the stop was the day after I took the policy out.

Please can any cases be set aside and reopened and looked into and any other cases that have been heard for no insurance under these policies of insurance be addressed.

You will in due cause be hearing from my solicitor, she is trying to address all the cases, but this is taking time. She has seen all the emails I have sent trying to address these issues and feels more should have been done as it would have only taken for the insurance policies to be checked and this would have stopped a waste of time and money for the courts, and myself at this time she wants to just appeal all cases to the crown court. which would again be a waste of money for the courts. and again of my time.

But this is having an effect on my life my driving licence has been revoked 3 times for no insurance, when in fact I have always had insurance to drive and would not drive if I did not have insurance.

Please see attached documents

Could you get back to me as soon as possible by way of email, as it does seem there is an issue with my post and not getting letters that was meant to be sent to me? I am taking this up with the royal mail.

Regards

Simon Cordell

DOB: 26/01/1981

531,

Blank Page!

532,

533,

534,

535,

536,

 

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 64

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_FW Simon Cordell

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544

 

64.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 64

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_FW Simon Cordell

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544

--

537,

From: O'Sullivan Emma <Emma.O'Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 11 February 2015 15:24

To: CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

Southcju (CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionCju@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionCJU@met.pnn.police.uk

Cc: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf

Found Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf

S Cordell Cert.GE-2013-2014.pdf.

image2014-05-20-184559.pdf

Dear All,

Please could you kindly assist Lorraine Cordell on behalf of her son Simon Cordell. They believe that a number of summons have been issued against Simon for the offence of no insurance since 2013 due to an error made by the insurance company as per the attached letter. Unfortunately due to Simon not always receiving the summons/adjournment notice they are unsure how many cases have been issued against him and are trying to get them all reopened and listed before court to be heard together in light of the above. Please would you be able to check your database and confirm to the email address below the number of cases with reference number, court, and conviction date.

I have also spoken to her on the phone and informed Lorraine that she will need to contact the court directly to make application to reopen/stat decs, which she can only do so once the information has been obtained.

The only matter the cps are currently aware of is for the case ref J63181495 which is listed for appeal at Kingston Crown Court 05/03/15.

If you are unable to advise her on summons that have been issued on her son, please could you kindly advise her where she could obtain the information.

Kind Regards,

Emma O'Sullivan

London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604           

Rose Court,

4th Floor

2 Southwark Bridge, London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

From: London traffic team

Sent: 10 February 2015 14:41

To: O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

From: London magistrates central west

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:25

To: London traffic team

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

538,

FYI

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:06

To: GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London magistrates central west

London magistrates south

London magistrate’s northeast

gl-bromlevmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To whom it may concern:

I am writing this email due to the number of problems I have been having due to a policy of insurance I had with KGM insurance which did not show up on the MID database in the week it was fine as I carried my insurance documents with me at all times and the insurance company could be called, but the problems was when the insurance company was closed as the police could not contact them.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have sent many emails to the courts with my insurance documents, but there have been cases where I have not had a summons. So did not know about cases and they have been heard at court and I was found guilty of no insurance.

I have done statutory declarations at court including my insurance documents and this still has not corrected anything.

One of the statutory declarations was again heard at court on the 26/01/2015 which again I did not know about for Willesden Magistrates' Court. But I have sent so many emails to this court with all documents and asked for them to be checked with the police officer at court to show I was insured to drive. This has not been done I have just again been found guilty due to not getting letters of a court hearing date.

I have now also got a letter of Indemnity from KGM who I was insured with under policy number MT3574694. 00.01 AM on the 23/2/13 and was in force until Midnight on the 22/2/14 when it lapsed.

Most of the cases are with the KGM policy you will see the reason as to why in the Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

I also believe there was one case for Covea Insurance PLC policy number MT10 021608047 it was not showing on the MID due to the stop was the day after I took the policy out.

Please can any cases be set aside and reopened and looked into and any other cases that have been heard for no insurance under these policies of insurance be addressed.

You will in due cause be hearing from my solicitor, she is trying to address all the cases, but this is taking time. She has seen all the emails I have sent trying to address these issues and feels more should have been done as it would have only taken for the insurance policies to be checked and this would have stopped a waste of time and money for the courts, and myself at this time she wants to just appeal all cases to the crown court. which would again be a waste of money for the courts. and again of my time.

But this is having an effect on my life my driving licence has been revoked 3 times for no insurance, when in fact I have always had insurance to drive and would not drive if I did not have insurance.

Please see attached documents

Could you get back to me as soon as possible by way of email, as it does seem there is an issue with my post and not getting letters that was meant to be sent to me? I am taking this up with the royal mail.

Regards

Simon Cordell

DOB: 26/01/1981

539,

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.svmanteccloud.com

*********************************************************************+

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

*********************************************************************

540,

Documents!

541,

Documents!

542,

Documents!

543,

Documents!

544,

Documents!

 

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 65

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Thank you for your email

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 545

 

65.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 65

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Thank you for your email

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 545

--

545,

From: London VR R and complaints           

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 11 February 2015 12:01

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Thank you for your email

Dear Recipient,

Thank you for your email to CPS London.

If your e-mail concerns a request for review under the Victims' Right to Review scheme

This is a formal acknowledgment that we have received your request. We will provide a response within 10 working days and, in the meantime, we will contact you if there is anything we need to clarify or if we need any additional information.

If your email is a complaint against the CPS

This is a formal acknowledgement that your complaint has been received. We will provide a full response to your complaint within 20 working days. If we are unable to respond within this timescale, we will contact you to advise when a response will be received. We will contact you either by email or phone if there is anything we need to clarify or if we need any additional information.

If your email provides positive or negative feedback

This is a formal acknowledgement that we have received your positive or negative feedback, and a reply may be given where required. All feedback received is logged and analysed in order to identify service improvements. The CPS is committed to delivering excellent service standards and will utilise public feedback to identify and develop good practice.

We thank you for taking the time to write to us.

Please find below a link to the Feedback and Complaints Guidance:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/contact/feedback_and_complaints/complaints_guidance_english.pdf This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.

If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

 

 

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 66

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Ser

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 546,547

 

66.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 66

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Ser

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 546,547

--

546,

From: London VR R and complaints

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 11 February 2015 16:36

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service

Attachments: Letter to Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see the attached in regard to your recent correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service. Kind regards,

T. Pates

London VRR and Complaints

Crown Prosecution Service, London

5th Floor

Rose Court

2 Southwark Bridge

London

SE1 9HS

Tel: 0203 357 0000

Email: London VR R and complaints @cps.asi.aov.uk

Web: www.cps.gov.uk/London

*********************************************************************+

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

*********************************************************************

547,

CPS

Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service->Letter to Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 11 February 2015

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email of 11 February 2015.

I have looked on our Case Management System and note that the Appeal hearing in respect of a driving with no insurance against Simon Cordell is fixed for 5 March 2015 at Kingston Crown Court.

As stated in my letter to Ms Lorraine Cordell, please forward a copy of the letter from your insurers as proof that you were insured to drive at the relevant time in order for me to review the case.

Please retain any original insurance documents and only send copies marked for my attention to the address below.

Yours sincerely

Ms Yetunde Martins

Head of the CPS London

Appeals and Committals for sentence Team

Crown Prosecution Service

3rd Floor

Drummond Gate

Pimlico

London SW1V 2QZ

Early Guilty Plea London Team

Third Floor One Drummond Gate Pimlico London SW1V 2QZ

DX: 161330 Victoria 19

Email: EGP.London@cps.gsi.gov.uk

 

 

 

67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 67

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Ser_001

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 548,549

 

67.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 67

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk_02.11.2015_Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Ser_001

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 548,549

--

548,

From: London VR R and complaints 

London VR R and complaints @cps.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 11 February 2015 11:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service

Attachments: Letter to Mrs Lorraine Cordell.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see the attached in regard to your recent correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service. Kind regards,

T. Pates

London VRR and Complaints

Crown Prosecution Service, London

5th Floor

Rose Court

2 Southwark Bridge

London

SE1 9HS

Tel: 0203 357 0000

Email: London VR R and complaints @cps.asi.aov.uk Web: www.cps.gov.uk/London

*********************************************************************+

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

*********************************************************************

549,

CPS

Your correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service->Letter to Mrs Lorraine Cordell.pdf

Mrs Lorraine Cordell 10 February 2015

Dear Mrs Cordell

Thank you for your email of 31 January 2015, sent to our complaints team in relation to a case in which you were the defendant at Wimbledon Magistrates Court.

I am the Legal Manager responsible for the team which deals with all appeals Magistrates Court to the Crown Court.

I have looked through our Case Management System and cannot find any case of driving with no insurance in which Lorraine Cordell is the defendant.

I would be grateful if you can provide me with further details to assist me in identifying the case to which you refer.

Please also forward to me a copy of the letter from your insurers as proof that you were insured to drive at the relevant time.

Please retain any original insurance documents and only send copies marked for my attention to the address below.

Yours sincerely

Ms Yetunde Martins

Head of the CPS London

Appeals and Committals for sentence Team

Crown Prosecution Service

3rd Floor

Drummond Gate

Pimlico

London SW1V 2QZ

Early Guilty Plea London Team

Third Floor One Drummond Gate Pimlico London SW1V 2QZ

DX: 161330 Victoria 19

Email: EGP.London@cps.gsi.gov.uk

 

 

 

68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 68

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.11.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 550,551,552

553,554,555

 

68.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 68

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_02.11.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 550,551,552

553,554,555

--

550,

From: Wood, Peter

Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Sent: 11 February 2015 11:40

To: Lorraine Cordell; Josephine Ward josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Attachments: S Cordell statement.pdf

Hello,

Please find attached signed statement as requested.

The original is in the post to the Burncroft Ave address.

If you need anything else, please ask Andy in my absence.

Regards Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 18:07

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Peter

Sorry for the late reply yes Josephine Ward has said this is fine and can be signed off. thank you for all the help in this matter.

I hope you have a great time on holiday.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter

mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 10 February 2015 16:38

To: Josephine Ward; Wood, Peter

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Good Afternoon,

Please can I have your confirmation that the draft section 9 statement is acceptable asap? If I do not hear back by 11.30 tomorrow, I will have to assume it is and sign it off and send out as I will be in meetings and on holiday after that time.

Thanks

Pete Wood

551,

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Date: 9 February 2015 11:29:00 GMT

To: Josephine Ward

Josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Ms Ward,

I have drafted a section 9 statement as requested. Before I sign it off can you review it and confirm it satisfies all of your requirements please? As soon as you do so I will sign it off, scan a copy over to you and put the original in the post.

Let me know if you need anything else and of course if you need me to amend the attached in any way.

Lorraine/Andy - FYI.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Josephine Ward [mailto:josie@michaelcarroHandco.com]

Sent: 08 February 2015 19:02

To: Wood, Peter; Austin, Andrew

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Mr Wood

I have been instructed by Mr Simon Paul Cordell and Miss Lorraine Cordell to assist in the appeal against conviction that is due to be heard at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court on 5th March 2015 at 10am.

Miss Cordell has played two recordings that she received from KGM which are pertinent to the appeal but at present as the telephone recordings have not been produced as an exhibit by KGM they will not be admissible at court.

Can you therefore please write a section 9 statement confirming that:

· all recording equipment was working correctly

· KGM produced two recordings at the request of Ms Lorraine Cordell

· Confirmation that the recording of S Cordell call from police 141113 Recording was provided by KGM from their recorded calls and is authentic

· Confirmation that the recording between the Car Pound and Kelly Tiller was also provided from the KGM recorded calls and is authentic

If we are in possession of a section 9 statement producing the recordings, then we will not have to apply to the court for a Third-Party Summons to compel an employee from KGM to attend to produce the recordings. This would be a complete waste of your

552,

time when all we require is a section 9 attesting to the recordings being retrieved from the system and exhibited as two separate recordings.

If you require assistance with drafting a section 9 statement, then we would be happy to draft it and email it over. We would require the name of the person who retrieved the recordings. the dates that the recordings were retrieved, the dates the recordings relate to, confirmation that the recordings were sent to Lorraine Cordell by email so that she can produce CD's of the recordings so that they can be played in court and specifically refer to the email containing the recordings so that there is continuity in the chain of evidence. Ideally, we would like KGM to produce the CD's and exhibit them but failing this we will try to get the CPS to agree the CD's as produced from the email of Miss Cordell. We stress that the section in relation to the search and retrieval of the KGM database is essential and critical to ensuring that the chain of evidence is intact.

We can serve these recordings on the CPS and the Court so that they are agreed in advance of the Appeal hearing.

We thank you in advance for your anticipated co-operation in this matter and hope that we do not have to apply for a Third-party Witness Summons to compel the attendance of a KGM employee at the Appeal on the 5th March 2015.

We confirm that Miss Cordell is forwarding an email confirming that we are instructed and authorised to request this information.

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents

553,

Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

554,

555,

 

 

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 69

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.11.2015_RE Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Tha_001

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 556,557,558

559,560,561

 

69.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 69

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.11.2015_RE Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Tha_001

11/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 556,557,558

559,560,561

--

556,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 February 2015 14:39

To: JOSEPHINE WARD

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Attachments: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.pdf

S Cordell statement.pdf

Hi Josey

The dates of conviction were the 26/11/2014 Wimbledon magistrate’s court.

Appeal date is 05/03/2015 at 10:00 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

I will try and put emails to something and bring them to the office do you need all the ones for all the driving with no insurance of just the ones for the appeal?

The complaints started on the phone to the police on the day this happened which was the 14/11/2013 I am sure I have the person’s name here in my files I will try and find the name of the officer who was dealing with this matter on the phone calls as she called me back a number of times..

But I wrote to the IPCC on their form from there website on the 03/12/2013, I got the reply email for that form on 03/12/2013 at 13:30 please see attached email. But this will need to be updated now due to what has happened in this case with the police officer.

Please also see attached Peter Wood Statement.

I will bring all emails I can what I can do is export the emails to PDF like the one I have done in the attached from the IPCC then put them to disc as there is a real lot of emails and in outlook just saving them does not save them with all details. so, as a rule I export to PDF. is this ok?

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD

mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 11 February 2015 13:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court Lorraine

Can you transfer all from server onto a USB as this may be the easiest way of accessing the data. I suggested my office so that everything can be printed off and put in bundles and scanned and sent in the DX. Re the discs you can burn off and exhibit, but I will deal with this in your section 9 statement.

I will have to request the data from the court re the trial notes so all I will need is the date of conviction and the appeal date and I will send that email off in the next ten minutes. I need these for two reasons (a) accurate transcript of what was said for the appeal hearing in Kingston Upon Thames (b) for when the formal complaint to the IPCC is made.

I am snowed under at the moment to please keep Monday appointment if you can and likewise, I hope that I do not have to re­arrange.

Can you confirm with Simon whether he wants to apply to set aside the conviction which is the correct way to go about it. Time runs from date of conviction so 21 days so lodge appeal against conviction as I believe only a Crown Court Judge can sort out the licence being revoked.

557,

You also mentioned that there was another court in East London or South East London can you bring whatever you need doing on that also.

Regards

Josephine

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Josey

· APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION - NO INSURANCE I think the 17th will be fine just give me a time.

Not sure what you mean below about the CD should I burn a copy off and bring them with me to the office or do they need to be burned off at the office.

I can access emails that are being sent to me from the office if I make sure I close outlook on my computer, but would have no access to the emails that are already in outlook as these have been directly downloaded to outlook from the virgin media server and I have that setup to del once they have been downloaded.

Is it you who needs to ask for the Legal Adviser's notes re what was recorded as part of PC Geoghan's evidence and his officer's pocketbook or me?

· APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION / SET ASIDE CONVICTION FOR 26.01.2015

On the 2nd part as I have already taken my emails to outlook, they are not on a server so the only way to access them is from my computer.

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD

mailto:iosephinewardsolicitor@gmail.coml

Sent: 11 February 2015 11:54

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court Lorraine

1. APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION - NO INSURANCE

I need to draft a section 9 statement re transcribing the recordings onto CD. I need to draft a section 9 statement for you also so that you can exhibit them. I will also need to obtain a copy of the Legal Adviser's notes re what was recorded as part of PC Geoghan's evidence. I need to obtain copies of the officer's pocketbook also.

Can you access your email from my office in terms of files as emails will have to be printed off? A bundle will have to be prepared for the CPS and the Crown Court.

What is your availability 16th or 17th February 2015. I am flying home the next two weekends. I am then on duty quite a lot and will have murder case papers served so I will be hectically busy.

2. APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION / SET ASIDE CONVICTION FOR 26.01.2015

558,

Again, Lorraine it will take 1 -2 hours to go through this, but I will need access to emails sent and received etc. I await hearing from you.

Regards

Josephine

559,

RE: Appeal against conviction at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court Re

From: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 03 December 2013 13:30

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Complaint form Thank you.

Your completed form has been sent to the appropriate authority you have selected in the complaint form for them to consider.

They will be in contact with you directly in due course.

Regards,

Independent Police Complaints Commission

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

file:///C:/Users/Alienware/AppData/Local/Temp/35e4ec5458fd4329a943f31b23681c5...

11/02/2015

560,

561,

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 70

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.13.2015_RE Simon Cordell 011403134612_001

13/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578

 

70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 70

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.13.2015_RE Simon Cordell 011403134612_001

13/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578

--

562,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 February 2015 11:05

To: GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

Southcju (CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionCju@met.pnn.police.uk)

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionCJU@met.pnn.police.uk

London.magistratescentralwest@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 011403134612

Attachments: Found Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf.

S -Cordell -020215.pdf.

S -Cordell- Cert.GE-2013-2014.pdf.

RE-urgent- Simon -CORDELL- 011401596899-01.pdf.

RE-urgent- Simon -CORDELL- 011401596899.pdf

RE-urgent -Simon -CORDELL- 011401596899-03.pdf

RE-urgent -Simon -CORDELL -011401596899-04.pdf

Lorraine Cordell-RE-Simon Cordell.pdf

Appeal-Notice-Signed.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Complaint

I am writing this email again due to a case being heard at court and me being found guilty. On the 26/01/2015 Case number: 011403134612, I believe the old case number was 011401596899.

I have emailed the court many times due to this case I and in my emails attached my insurance documents.

I Have done a statutory declaration which I included my insurance documents.

I know my file must have had my insurance document within there as it was included in many emails to the court and asked for my emails and documents to be put on my file.

I had no letters from the court to say a date of a hearing of the 26/01/2015, I have asked in emails that have been sent for any dates to be also copied over to me by email, as there does seem to be an issue with my post.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have asked in many emails and phone calls to the court for the police officer who checks documents to get him to check my documents which will confirm I am insured.

None of this has been done and again I have been found guilty at court for no insurance when I was insured to drive.

I am making this request to have my case listed in order that I can do the following.

A. Application to set aside the conviction

B. Re-open the case

My name: Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

Address: 109 Burncroft Av

Enfield

Middlesex

EN3 7JQ

I am including in this email

1. Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

2. Policy of insurance form KGM.

3. List of emails sent to Court.

4. Email dates Tue 10/02/2015 13:06 which I have not had a reply to as yet.

563,

· Appeal Form

Could you please get back to me today by return email to lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk as I would like to know what can be done about this case?

I have 21 days to appeal to the crown court and this date is running out very fast so I am also including the form so I do not run out of time to appeal to the Crown Court as I feel I will run out of time in this matter. But feel it would be a waste of time and money for the court and me to address it this way and take it to appeal at the crown court.

I am not sure what CPS dealt with this case and I do now that the appeal form needs to be addressed to them also, so I have included all that I know off. If I have not included the right Email for the CPS who dealt with this case can it be forwarded to them. Or could you please get back to me by email at lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk and let me know the correct email address this needs to be sent to.

Regards Simon Cordell

564,

Document!

565,

Document!

566,

Document!

567,

Document!

568,

Document!

569,

RE: Simon Cordell 011403134612->RE urgent Simon Cordell596899-1.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 08 October 2014 18:24

To: gl-brentmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Attachments: S Cordell Cert._ GE_ 2013-2014.pdf

Dear sir or Madam

I am writing this email due to the reply dated the 01/10/2014 I got in the post on 06/10/2014 about the email I sent to you on the 12/09/2014 please see below email dated 12/09/2014.

Above is a picture of the court processing.

I did not know about this not be there.

In the email dated the 12/09/2014, I asked for my case to be listed in order that I could do the following

Application to set aside the conviction

Re-open the case

The reason for this is because I have been wrongfully convicted as I did in fact have insurance. As shown in the attached file.

Please can you list my case in court so I can put the Application to set aside the conviction, Re-open the case that I

reply where you say I have 21 days to file a statutory declaration due to me being unaware of court case. I have been wrongfully convicted and have points on my licence, which should

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/a37e51b1bbcc4e63a3e87e6ea4d... 31/01/2015

570,571,572,573,574,575,576,577,578,

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 71

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.13.2015_RE Simon Cordell

13/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 579,580,581

 

 

 

71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 71

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.13.2015_RE Simon Cordell

13/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 579,580,581

--

579,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 February 2015 14:57

To: O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Emma

Thank you so much for your help in this matter I had an email today from Sharon Burns from the North section and she has been really helpful.

Once again thank you for the help in this matter

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: O'Sullivan Emma

mailto: Emma.O'Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 11 February 2015 15:24

To: CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

Southcju (CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionCju@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionCJU@met.pnn.police.uk

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Dear All,

Please could you kindly assist Lorraine Cordell on behalf of her son Simon Cordell. They believe that a number of summons have been issued against Simon for the offence of no insurance since 2013 due to an error made by the insurance company as per the attached letter. Unfortunately, due to Simon not always receiving the summons/adjournment notice they are unsure how many cases have been issued against him and are trying to get them all reopened and listed before court to be heard together in light of the above. Please would you be able to check your database and confirm to the email address below the number of cases with reference number, court, and conviction date.

I have also spoken to her on the phone and informed Lorraine that she will need to contact the court directly to make application to reopen/stat decs, which she can only do so once the information has been obtained.

The only matter the cps are currently aware of is for the case ref J63181495 which is listed for appeal at Kingston Crown Court 05/03/15.

If you are unable to advise her on summons that have been issued on her son, please could you kindly advise her where she could obtain the information.

Kind Regards,

Emma O'Sullivan London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604

Rose Court,

4th Floor

2 Southwark Bridge, London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

580,

From: London traffic team

Sent: 10 February 2015 14:41

To: O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

From: London magistrates central west

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:25

To: London traffic team

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

FYI

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:06

To: GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London magistrates central west

London magistrates south

London magistrate’s northeast

gl-bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To whom it may concern:

I am writing this email due to the number of problems I have been having due to a policy of insurance I had with KGM insurance which did not show up on the MID database in the week it was fine as I carried my insurance documents with me at all times and the insurance company could be called, but the problems was when the insurance company was closed as the police could not contact them.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have sent many emails to the courts with my insurance documents, but there have been cases where I have not had a summons. So did not know about cases and they have been heard at court and I was found guilty of no insurance.

I have done statutory declarations at court including my insurance documents and this still has not corrected anything.

One of the statutory declarations was again heard at court on the 26/01/2015 which again I did not know about for Willesden Magistrates' Court. But I have sent so many emails to this court with all documents and asked for them to be checked with the police officer at court to show I was insured to drive. This has not been done I have just again been found guilty due to not getting letters of a court hearing date.

I have now also got a letter of Indemnity from KGM who I was insured with under policy number MT3574694. 00.01 AM on the 23/2/13 and was in force until Midnight on the 22/2/14 when it lapsed.

Most of the cases are with the KGM policy you will see the reason as to why in the Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

I also believe there was one case for Covea Insurance PLC policy number MT10 021608047 it was not showing on the MID due to the stop was the day after I took the policy out.

Please can any cases be set aside and reopened and looked into and any other cases that have been heard for no insurance under these policies of insurance be addressed.

You will in due cause be hearing from my solicitor, she is trying to address all the cases, but this is taking time. She has seen all the emails I have sent trying to address these issues and feels more should have been done as it would have only taken for the insurance policies to be checked and this would have stopped a waste of time and money for the courts, and myself at this time she wants to just appeal all cases to the crown court. which would again be a waste of money for the courts. and again, of my time.

But this is having an effect on my life my driving licence has been revoked 3 times for no insurance, when in fact I have always had insurance to drive and would not drive if I did not have insurance.

Please see attached documents

Could you get back to me as soon as possible by way of email, as it does seem there is an issue with my post and not getting letters that was meant to be sent to me? I am taking this up with the royal mail.

581,

Regards Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.svmanteccloud.com

*********************************************************************+

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

*********************************************************************

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 72

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_02.16.2015_Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell

16/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 582

583,584,585,586

 

72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 72

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_02.16.2015_Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell

16/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 582

583,584,585,586

--

582,

From: GL-SWESTERNMCENQ <swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 16 February 2015 09:57

To: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: Clerks Notes for Simon Cordell

Attachments: DOC034.pdf

With reference to your e-mail of the 10th February please find attached clerks notes from the trial on the 26th November as requested.

Miss J Lee

Administration Officer Lavender Hill Magistrates' Court 176a Lavender Hill, London, SW11 1JU

Tel: 020 7805 1470

*Please note: As of June 2nd, 2014 Our fax will be GOLDFAX No: 0870 324 0299*

'I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means'.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

583,

584,

585,

586,

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 73

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_RE Simon Cordell Appeal

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 587

 

 

73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 73

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_RE Simon Cordell Appeal

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 587

--

587,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:26 February 2015 23:28

To: Sharon.Bums@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Appeal

Dear Sharon

Would it please be possible if you can call me on 07961 833021 re Simon Cordell appeal please. Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 74

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_RE Simon Cordell Appeal_001

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598

 

74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 74

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_RE Simon Cordell Appeal_001

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598

--

588,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 26 February 2015 22:23

To: 'listing@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: 'Sharon.Burns@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Appeal

Attachments: Simon-Cordell-Appeal-Willesden-Harrow-Crown-Court.pdf

S-Cordell Cert.GE-2013-2014.pdf

S-Cordell 020215.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached documents re Appeal could all documents be placed on file. Regards

589,

RE: Simon Cordell Appeal->Simon_Cordell_Appeal_Willesden_Harrow_Crown_Court.pdf

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

CROWN COURT AT HARROW

Hailsham Drive Harrow, Middlesex HA1 4TU

DX 97335 HARROW 5

Telephone 020 8424 2294

Ext.

Fax 020 8424 2209

Mr Simon Paul Cordell

24th February 2015

109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield

Middx

EN3 7JQ

Dear Sirs

Re: Yourself-v-Central Driving Offences Unit Case number A20150049

The Crown Court has received a set of appeal papers from the magistrate’s court at Willesden.

In order to assist you, a copy of the memorandum of conviction and sentence is enclosed.

The court is committed to processing appeals as quickly as possible and it would greatly help the listing of this appeal if you would complete this form and return it to the Crown Court by the 10 March 2015

If the court does not have a reply by this date your appeal will be listed without further consultation.

Please note if you fail to attend that hearing your appeal may be dismissed and further costs can be awarded against you.

If you do not wish to proceed with your appeal you should contact the court in writing before this date.

·         Please confirm that the appeal is against Conviction/Sentence/Conviction & Sentence:

Conviction and Sentence

·         Please estimate the time the Appeal’s hearing will take:

I was not there I am not sure how long these cases take but I would think no more than one hour.

3.

Number & names of prosecution witnesses you require:

590,

I don’t have any names as I have never had a summons for this case, and I have had no Dates for court I don’t know the CPS name that dealt with this case.

Number & names of defence witnesses you require:

Not justified to show my insurance documents and that I was insured to drive by KGM Insurance.

Name of counsel: MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Dates to avoid: 05/03/2015,.10/03/2015, 17/03/2013 and could this please be listed for the afternoon as I need to be able to get to court.

Please confirm if an interpreter is required: No

Your reference: I don’t know this.  

Your telephone/mobile number: 07961 833021 this is my mother’s number she can talk re this case, also the email is lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

These details can be faxed to 0870 324 0194 or emailed to listing@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk Yours sincerely,

Mary Graham Appeals Clerk List Office

NOTE:

Once an appeal has been allocated a hearing date it will NOT be changed, save for the most exceptional reasons.

It is, therefore, essential that all dates to avoid are provided to the court by the date specified above.

Any subsequent application to move a fixture date will have to be listed before a judge, which does not automatically mean your application will be granted and may lead to wasted costs.

It has also just been noted that the court passed a driving disqualification until test passed was issued for this case which we have only just been made aware of by the paper work that has been served and seeing the Memorandum of ENTRY, If this had been known then I would have asked that the this be suspended until the appeal was heard in my appeal application.

We were only told by the court that 6 points and a fine had been given by the Judge and also the letter the court sent shows this Please see letter included within this paperwork.

Can we still ask that the driving disqualification be suspended until the Appeal is heard.?

2

591,

592,

593,

594,

595,

596,

597,

598,

 

 

 

75.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 75

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_Re Simon Cordell

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607

 

 

75.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 75

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.26.2015_Re Simon Cordell

26/02/2015

/ Page Numbers: 599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607

--

599,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   26 February 2015 22:31

To: 'GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: 'Sharon.Burns@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Simon-Cordell-Appeal-Willesden-Harrow-Crown-Court.pdf

Found  Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf

Dear Annabel Jereniah

I have just seen the Memorandum of Entry that the Crown Court has sent and on that it says there was a Disqualification until test passed.

But when we contacted the court, we were only told about 6 points and a fine for this case and this was also on the letter from the court.

If I knew a Disqualification until test passed when I filed my appeal on the 13/02/2015 I would have ticked this be suspended until appeal was heard.

Can you please look into this and see if the appeal could include the suspension of the Disqualification until the appeal is heard.

Please see attached document

Simon Cordell Appeal Willesden Harrow Crown Court Found Guilty again 26-01-2015

As you will see the letter Found Guilty again 26-01-2015 does not show any disqualification and this was confirmed by the court when we called that there were 6 points added and a fine.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

600,601,602,603,604,605,606,607,

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 76

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.01.2015_FW RE Simon Cordell 011403134612

01/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

 

76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 76

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.01.2015_FW RE Simon Cordell 011403134612

01/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

--

608,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 01 March 2015 15:24

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell 011403134612

Attachments: Found Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf

S Cordell 020215.pdf

S Cordell Cert-GE-2013-2014.pdf.

RE_ urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899-01.pdf

RE_ urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899.pdf

RE_ urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899-03.pdf

RE_ urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899-04.pdf

Lorraine Cordell-RE-Simon Cordell.pdf; Appeal-Notice-Signed.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 February 2015 11:05

To: 'GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk'

Cc: 'CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

Southcju CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionCju@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionCJU@met.pnn.police.uk

London.magistratescentralwest@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 011403134612

To Whom It May Concern:

Complaint

I am writing this email again due to a case being heard at court and me being found guilty. On the 26/01/2015 Case number: 011403134612, I believe the old case number was 011401596899.

I have emailed the court many times due to this case I and in my emails attached my insurance documents.

I Have done a statutory declaration which I included my insurance documents.

I know my file must have had my insurance document within there as it was included in many emails to the court and asked for my emails and documents to be put on my file.

I had no letters from the court to say a date of a hearing of the 26/01/2015, I have asked in emails that have been sent for any dates to be also copied over to me by email, as there does seem to be an issue with my post.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have asked in many emails and phone calls to the court for the police officer who checks documents to get him to check my documents which will confirm I am insured.

None of this has been done and again I have been found guilty at court for no insurance when I was insured to drive.

I am making this request to have my case listed in order that I can do the following: -

1. Application to set aside the conviction

2. Re-open the case

My name: Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981.

Address: 109 Burncroft Av

Enfield

Middlesex

EN3 7JQ

I am including in this email

609,

· Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

· Policy of insurance form KGM.

· List of emails sent to Court.

· Email dates Tue 10/02/2015 13:06 which I have not had a reply to as yet.

· Appeal Form

Could you please get back to me today by return email to lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk as I would like to know what can be done about this case?

I have 21 days to appeal to the crown court and this date is running out very fast so I am also including the form so I do not run out of time to appeal to the Crown Court as I feel I will run out of time in this matter. But feel it would be a waste of time and money for the court and me to address it this way and take it to appeal at the crown court.

I am not sure what CPS dealt with this case and I do now that the appeal form needs to be addressed to them also, so I have included all that I know off. If I have not included the right Email for the CPS who dealt with this case can it be forwarded to them. Or could you please get back to me by email at lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk and let me know the correct email address this needs to be sent to.

Regards Simon Cordell

610,

611,

612,

613,

FW: RE: Simon Cordell 011403134612->RE_ urgent Simon Corrdell.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell

[lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk 

Sent: 08 October 2014 18:24

To: gl-brentmcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: urgent Simon CORDELL 011401596899

Attachments: S Cordell Cert-GE- 2013-2014.pdf

Dear sir or Madam

I am writing this email due to the reply dated the 01/10/2014 I got in the post on 06/10/2014 about the email I sent to you on the 12/09/2014 please see below email dated 12/09/2014.

Above is a picture of the court processing.

I did not know about this not be there.

In the email dated the 12/09/2014, I asked for my case to be listed in order that I could do the following

Application to set aside the conviction

Re-open the case

The reason for this is because I have been wrongfully convicted as I did in fact have insurance. As shown in the attached file.

Please can you list my case in court so I can put the Application to set aside the conviction, Re-open the case that I

reply where you say I have 21 days to file a statutory declaration due to me being unaware of court case. I have been wrongfully convicted and have points on my licence, which should

file:///C:/Users/Alienware_PC/AppData/Local/Temp/a37e51b1bbcc4e63a3e87e6ea4d... 31/01/2015

 

614,615,616,617,618,619,620,621,622,623,624,

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 77

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2015_Re Data Protection team

17/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 625,626,627

 

 

 

77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 77

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.13.2015_Re Data Protection team

17/03/2015       13/03/2015 – 22-32

/ Page Numbers: 625,626,627

--

625,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 March 2015 22:32

To: info@broadsuredirect.com

Subject: Re: Data Protection team

Attachments: Data-Protection-Broadsure.doc

To Whom It May Concern:

Could you please forward the attached document to your team that deals with subject access requests under the data protection Act 1998

Could you please confirm by return email that this has been done and if there will be a fee needed?

Regards Simon Cordell

626,

Re: Data Protection team->Data-Protection-Broadsure.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 13/03/2015

Broadsure Direct 4th Floor

The Argyle Centre York St Ramsgate Kent

CT11 9DS Dear Sir or Madam

Subject access request

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Please supply the information about me I am entitled to under the Data Protection Act 1998 relating to:

1. All data that Broadsure Direct hold on any systems or files about me.

2. All audio call files that Broadsure Direct hold this would include when the police have called to check if I was insured.

3. All account Information and amounts paid.

4. Reason as to why any insurance policies were cancelled.

Dates all policies started and ended and which company had the policies in force.

All data that is being asked for would be within the period of the last 6 years. This would include any data that is being held by the whole of Enfield Council ASB Response Team.

627

If you are withholding any information, I have asked for please make me aware of this and the reason as to why the data is being denied.

If you need any more information from me, or a fee, please let me know as soon as possible.

It may be helpful for you to know that a request for information under the Data Protection Act 1998 should be responded to within 40 days.

If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you and can be contacted on 0303 123 1113 or at www.ico.org.uk/

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

78.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 78

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.14.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell

14/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 628,629,630

631,632,

 

78.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 78

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.14.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell

14/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 628,629,630

631,632,

--

628,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 14 March 2015 00:31

To: 'Tracy Bullock'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Attachments: appeal-driving-outcome.pdf.

S Cordell 020215.pdf

Dear Tracey Bullock

Thank you for the email I did in fact get your letter today dated the 09/03/2015

ref: 29597142

I would like to ask if you have had the above update as of yet for the case listed in your letter as 26/11/2014, as noted in your letter. The appeal hearing was heard on the 05/03/2015 and I won my appeal.

So this case is dealt with please see attached document from the crown court re the appeal hearing but on their letter even they have put the date not correct they put the 29/08/2014 as noted that was removed by the court on the 06/10/2014, and I was again found guilty on the 26/11/2014. The appeal was for this date and not the 29/08/2014 as I had already had this date reopened and that was removed. I am contacting the court and asking for a new letter to be sent with the right date on it as this is just a mess.

I have also noted you said that the licence was revoked on the 07/02/2015 by DVLA. Due to all the mess-up with my insurance with KGM from the 2013/2014 and it not showing up on the MID database, there were a list of cases that I did not get a summon for so did not know I had to attend court, and was found guilty due to not attending court, a number of calls have been made to DVLA in regards to this, this is why cases have been reopened due to the mess up with the courts and also appeals put in to the courts due to I could not take no more of the mess ups .

Could you also please tell me how many points are on my licence and if it is still revoked? I believe the revoke was for the case I have just won on appeal and would believe that DVLA should have been updated to this already, so believe the revoke should not still be in place as the court has now seen the error and corrected this so I should never have been convicted and then you would never have revoked my licence, could you please confirm this by email so I know if I can drive or not and if all the points are off my licence or I still have points on there.

I was trying to address all the wrong convictions against my name due to the errors in the MID I have really done nothing wrong to lose my driving licence I was insured to drive please see KGM LOI. I do understand that this will need to come from a court, but I am very upset due to everything that has happened when I had paid for my insurance to drive.

I am in fact paying for insurance right now which due to this mess with the KGM insurance and the courts this has caused me to suffer badly when I should not have had to I am in fact paying for insurance from 2014 to 2015 that I can’t even use due to all this mess. So, I am insured but cannot drive. My insurance is not cheap it is costing me around Ł1600.00 this is not a small amount to be paying yet I cannot drive due to this mess.

I do have an appeal date for the case you have dated 26/01/2015 that is in May 2015, but I am really suffering here due to all these errors due to the MID database not showing me as being insured. I am trying to address all of these issues and have sent 100's of emails to courts CPS and have even had to file Appeals because the cases have not been addressed correctly by the courts, I have sent my insurance documents to the courts so many times.

Even the last appeal case the judge was appalled due to what has happened to me.

I also know there is more dates when the courts added points etc to my driving licence and then they were removed due to me proving I was insured. I do have a claim ongoing and need to show how much this has affected my life. These have not been included in your letter, could you please look at my driving record from 2013 to date of all cases that the court added points etc and then they were removed as I need to prove the impact this has had on my life I also know there were I believe 1 or 2 more times my Licence was revoked and then put back in place due to the court updating DVLA and I do know there is more dates you have not included in your letter.

Could you please get back to me by email ASAP to tell me if I am now allowed to drive or if my licence is still revoked due to the errors of the courts and Insurance Company and if any points are still on there?

Could you also please confirm everything also in writing, so I do have a letter confirming everything as things are still being addressed also with the courts and there is still one appeal date?

Regards

Simon Cordell

629,

From: Tracy Bullock

mailto: tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2015 11:18

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, I would like to inform you that full details of your driver record will be sent to you by post. Many Thanks

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Case work 1D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213 Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.gov.uk/dvla/nomorecounterpart

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

630,

631,

632,

 

 

 

79.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 79

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.17.2015_FW DVLA, Mr Cordell

17/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 633,634,635,636

637

 

79.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 79

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.17.2015_FW DVLA, Mr Cordell

17/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 633,634,635,636

637

--

633,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   17 March 2015 13:12

To: 'tracey.bollock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: FW: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Attachments: appeal-driving-outcome.pdf; S Cordell-020215.pdf

Dear Tracey Bullock

I have not had a reply to my below email and therefore was wondering if there were any updates.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 14 March 2015 00:31

To: 'Tracy Bullock'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Tracey Bullock

Thank you for the email I did in fact get your letter today dated the 09/03/2015

ref: 29597142

I would like to ask if you have had the above update as of yet for the case listed in your letter as 26/11/2014, as noted in your letter. The appeal hearing was heard on the 05/03/2015 and I won my appeal.

So this case is dealt with please see attached document from the crown court re the appeal hearing but on their letter even they have put the date not correct they put the 29/08/2014 as noted that was removed by the court on the 06/10/2014, and I was again found guilty on the 26/11/2014. The appeal was for this date and not the 29/08/2014 as I had already had this date reopened and that was removed. I am contacting the court and asking for a new letter to be sent with the right date on it as this is just a mess.

I have also noted you said that the licence was revoked on the 07/02/2015 by DVLA. Due to all the mess-up with my insurance with KGM from the 2013/2014 and it not showing up on the MID database, there were a list of cases that I did not get a summon for so did not know I had to attend court, and was found guilty due to not attending court, a number of calls have been made to DVLA in regards to this, this is why cases have been reopened due to the mess up with the courts and also appeals put in to the courts due to I could not take no more of the mess ups .

Could you also please tell me how many points are on my licence and if it is still revoked? I believe the revoke was for the case I have just won on appeal and would believe that DVLA should have been updated to this already, so believe the revoke should not still be in place as the court has now seen the error and corrected this so I should never have been convicted and then you would never have revoked my licence, could you please confirm this by email so I know if I can drive or not and if all the points are off my licence or I still have points on there.

I was trying to address all the wrong convictions against my name due to the errors in the MID I have really done nothing wrong to lose my driving licence I was insured to drive please see KGM LOI. I do understand that this will need to come from a court, but I am very upset due to everything that has happened when I had paid for my insurance to drive.

I am in fact paying for insurance right now which due to this mess with the KGM insurance and the courts this has caused me to suffer badly when I should not have had to I am in fact paying for insurance from 2014 to 2015 that I can’t even use due to all this mess. So, I am insured but cannot drive. My insurance is not cheap it is costing me around Ł1600.00 this is not a small amount to be paying yet I cannot drive due to this mess.

I do have an appeal date for the case you have dated 26/01/2015 that is in May 2015, but I am really suffering here due to all these errors due to the MID database not showing me as being insured. I am trying to address all of these issues and have sent 100's of emails to courts CPS and have even had to file Appeals because the cases have not been addressed correctly by the courts, I have sent my insurance documents to the courts so many times.

Even the last appeal case the judge was appalled due to what has happened to me.

I also know there is more dates when the courts added points etc. to my driving licence and then they were removed due to me proving I was insured. I do have a claim ongoing and need to show how much this has affected my life. These have not been included in your letter, could you please look at my driving record from 2013 to date of all cases that the court added points etc. and then they were

634,

removed as I need to prove the impact this has had on my life I also know there were I believe 1 or 2 more times my Licence was revoked and then put back in place due to the court updating DVLA and I do know there is more dates you have not included in your letter.

Could you please get back to me by email ASAP to tell me if I am now allowed to drive or if my licence is still revoked due to the errors of the courts and Insurance Company and if any points are still on there?

Could you also please confirm everything also in writing, so I do have a letter confirming everything as things are still being addressed also with the courts and there is still one appeal date?

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Tracy Bullock

mailto: tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2015 11:18

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, I would like to inform you that full details of your driver record will be sent to you by post. Many Thanks

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Casework1 D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213 Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.gov.uk/dvla/nomorecounterpart

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

635,636,637,

 

 

 

 

80.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 80

tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk_03.18.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell_001

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 638,639,640,641

 

80.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 80

tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk_03.18.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell_001

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 638,639,640,641

--

638,

From: Tracy Bullock

tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 18 March 2015 12:46

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Attachments: Cordell.doc

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, please see attached letter to the Crown Court to which we are awaiting a reply.

Your driving licence was revoked due to it not being returned for updating with the latest hearing details of the 26/01/2015, however as a gesture of goodwill due to incorrect information being provided by the Crown Court we will lift this revocation to enable you to drive pending the outcome of your case. In the meantime you will need to forward your licence to us for updating, we appreciate you are returning to court regarding this offence in May, however by law the information needs to be updated onto your current driving licence until this date.

Should your appeal be successful we will then issue you with a free replacement licence.

In reply to your query regarding the points on your record I can confirm there are 6 points for the IN10 offence of the 20/05/2014 and 6 points for the IN10 offence for the 01/01/2014, however these can be removed when instructed by the Court.

I hope this information will be helpful.

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Case work lD9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213 Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.gov.uk/dvla/nomorecounterpart

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 March 2015 13:12

To: Tracy Bullock

Subject: FW: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Tracey Bullock

I have not had a reply to my below email and therefore was wondering if there were any updates.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 14 March 2015 00:31

To: 'Tracy Bullock'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

639,

Dear Tracey Bullock

Thank you for the email I did in fact get your letter today dated the 09/03/2015

ref: 29597142

I would like to ask if you have had the above update as of yet for the case listed in your letter as 26/11/2014, as noted in your letter. The appeal hearing was heard on the 05/03/2015 and I won my appeal.

So this case is dealt with please see attached document from the crown court re the appeal hearing but on their letter even they have put the date not correct they put the 29/08/2014 as noted that was removed by the court on the 06/10/2014, and I was again found guilty on the 26/11/2014. The appeal was for this date and not the 29/08/2014 as I had already had this date reopened and that was removed. I am contacting the court and asking for a new letter to be sent with the right date on it as this is just a mess.

I have also noted you said that the licence was revoked on the 07/02/2015 by DVLA. Due to all the mess-up with my insurance with KGM from the 2013/2014 and it not showing up on the MID database, there were a list of cases that I did not get a summon for so did not know I had to attend court, and was found guilty due to not attending court, a number of calls have been made to DVLA in regards to this, this is why cases have been reopened due to the mess up with the courts and also appeals put in to the courts due to I could not take no more of the mess ups .

Could you also please tell me how many points are on my licence and if it is still revoked? I believe the revoke was for the case I have just won on appeal and would believe that DVLA should have been updated to this already, so believe the revoke should not still be in place as the court has now seen the error and corrected this so I should never have been convicted and then you would never have revoked my licence, could you please confirm this by email so I know if I can drive or not and if all the points are off my licence or I still have points on there.

I was trying to address all the wrong convictions against my name due to the errors in the MID I have really done nothing wrong to lose my driving licence I was insured to drive please see KGM LOI. I do understand that this will need to come from a court, but I am very upset due to everything that has happened when I had paid for my insurance to drive.

I am in fact paying for insurance right now which due to this mess with the KGM insurance and the courts this has caused me to suffer badly when I should not have had to I am in fact paying for insurance from 2014 to 2015 that I can’t even use due to all this mess. So, I am insured but cannot drive. My insurance is not cheap it is costing me around Ł1600.00 this is not a small amount to be paying yet I cannot drive due to this mess.

I do have an appeal date for the case you have dated 26/01/2015 that is in May 2015, but I am really suffering here due to all these errors due to the MID database not showing me as being insured. I am trying to address all of these issues and have sent 100's of emails to courts CPS and have even had to file Appeals because the cases have not been addressed correctly by the courts, I have sent my insurance documents to the courts so many times.

Even the last appeal case the judge was appalled due to what has happened to me.

I also know there is more dates when the courts added points etc. to my driving licence and then they were removed due to me proving I was insured. I do have a claim ongoing and need to show how much this has affected my life. These have not been included in your letter, could you please look at my driving record from 2013 to date of all cases that the court added points etc. and then they were removed as I need to prove the impact this has had on my life I also know there were I believe 1 or 2 more times my Licence was revoked and then put back in place due to the court updating DVLA and I do know there is more dates you have not included in your letter.

Could you please get back to me by email ASAP to tell me if I am now allowed to drive or if my licence is still revoked due to the errors of the courts and Insurance Company and if any points are still on there?

Could you also please confirm everything also in writing, so I do have a letter confirming everything as things are still being addressed also with the courts and there is still one appeal date?

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Tracy Bullock

mailto: tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2015 11:18

To: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: DVLA, Mr Cordell

640,

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, I would like to inform you that full details of your driver record will be sent to you by post. Many Thanks

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Case work

l D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213

Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.aov.uk/dvia/nomorecounterpart

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

641,

EXCELLENCE

INVESTORS IN PEOPLE

RE: DVLA,

Mr Cordell->Cordell.doc

Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency CCU/CCG

CRTSCWK1 Longview Road Swansea SA6 7JL

swglondonmc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk      

Telephone 01792 384522

Fax 01792 782748

Minicom 01792 766366

Web Site www.gov.uk/browse/driving

Our reference: 29597142

Date: 16 March 2015

Dear Sir or Madam,

Mr Simon Paul Cordell 26-Jan-1981

The above-named driver has contacted DVLA claiming to have successfully appealed on the 05/03/2015 against a conviction at your Court on the 26/11/2014.

Would you please forward a copy of the result of the appeal to DVLA, quoting our reference number on all correspondence?

Failure to remove this conviction from DVLA records may result in the revocation of entitlement to drive.

Yours faithfully

Tracy Bullock

 

 

 

 

81.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.81

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.18.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell_001

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 642

643,644,645,646

 

 

 

81.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.81

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.18.2015_RE DVLA, Mr Cordell_001

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 642

643,644,645,646

--

642,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 18 March 2015 13:56

To: 'Tracy Bullock'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Attachments: Appeal-Harrow-14-05-2015.pdf

Dear Tracey Bullock

Thank you for the reply to my email.

Can you please tell me which case the 20/05/2014 was for and what court dealt with it please and what date it was dealt on by the court as this was not included in your letter and I knew nothing about this case until today so I will have to contact the court who dealt with this and get it addressed, as I was insured.

I know about the date of the 01/01/2014 as this one is going to appeal please see the appeal date letter attached. This one is going to appeal on the 14/05/2015 at Harrow crown court.

The date of the 14/11/2013 has had the appeal hearing and this was won on the 05/03/2015 which you should have had the information from the court to remove this case from your records.

But I know there were more dates that cases was heard at court and I was found guilty and points were added and then removed since 2013 to date it is these dates I would like included to show the problems I have had when paying for insurance and errors due to it not showing on the MID database as I was in fact insured.

Sorry for the time this is taking it is such a mess as dates was not sent nor summons and I was found guilty when I was insured, I have written so many emails to the courts and CPS but don't get replies all I want is to get all these cases sorted so there is no points on my licence and back to normal.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Tracy Bullock [mailto:tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk]

Sent: 18 March 2015 12:46

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: DVLA,

Mr Cordell

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, please see attached letter to the Crown Court to which we are awaiting a reply.

Your driving licence was revoked due to it not being returned for updating with the latest hearing details of the 26/01/2015, however as a gesture of goodwill due to incorrect information being provided by the Crown Court we will lift this revocation to enable you to drive pending the outcome of your case. In the meantime you will need to forward your licence to us for updating, we appreciate you are returning to court regarding this offence in May, however by law the information needs to be updated onto your current driving licence until this date.

Should your appeal be successful we will then issue you with a free replacement licence.

In reply to your query regarding the points on your record I can confirm there are 6 points for the IN10 offence of the 20/05/2014 and 6 points for the IN10 offence for the 01/01/2014, however these can be removed when instructed by the Court.

I hope this information will be helpful.

643,

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Case work lD9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213

Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.gov.uk/dvla/nomorecounterpart

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 March 2015 13:12

To: Tracy Bullock

Subject: FW: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Tracey Bullock

I have not had a reply to my below email and therefore was wondering if there were any updates.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 14 March 2015 00:31

To: 'Tracy Bullock'

Subject: RE: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Tracey Bullock

Thank you for the email I did in fact get your letter today dated the 09/03/2015

ref: 29597142

I would like to ask if you have had the above update as of yet for the case listed in your letter as 26/11/2014, as noted in your letter. The appeal hearing was heard on the 05/03/2015 and I won my appeal.

So this case is dealt with please see attached document from the crown court re the appeal hearing but on their letter even they have put the date not correct they put the 29/08/2014 as noted that was removed by the court on the 06/10/2014, and I was again found guilty on the 26/11/2014. The appeal was for this date and not the 29/08/2014 as I had already had this date reopened and that was removed. I am contacting the court and asking for a new letter to be sent with the right date on it as this is just a mess.

I have also noted you said that the licence was revoked on the 07/02/2015 by DVLA. Due to all the mess-up with my insurance with KGM from the 2013/2014 and it not showing up on the MID database, there were a list of cases that I did not get a summon for so did not know I had to attend court, and was found guilty due to not attending court, a number of calls have been made to DVLA in regards to this, this is why cases have been reopened due to the mess up with the courts and also appeals put in to the courts due to I could not take no more of the mess ups .

Could you also please tell me how many points are on my licence and if it is still revoked? I believe the revoke was for the case I have just won on appeal and would believe that DVLA should have been updated to this already, so believe the revoke should not still be in place as the court has now seen the error and corrected this so I should never have been convicted and then you would never have revoked my licence, could you please confirm this by email so I know if I can drive or not and if all the points are off my licence or I still have points on there.

I was trying to address all the wrong convictions against my name due to the errors in the MID I have really done nothing wrong to lose my driving licence I was insured to drive please see KGM LOI. I do understand that this will need to come from a court, but I am very upset due to everything that has happened when I had paid for my insurance to drive.

644,

I am in fact paying for insurance right now which due to this mess with the KGM insurance and the courts this has caused me to suffer badly when I should not have had to I am in fact paying for insurance from 2014 to 2015 that I can’t even use due to all this mess. So, I am insured but cannot drive. My insurance is not cheap it is costing me around Ł1600.00 this is not a small amount to be paying yet I cannot drive due to this mess.

I do have an appeal date for the case you have dated 26/01/2015 that is in May 2015, but I am really suffering here due to all these errors due to the MID database not showing me as being insured. I am trying to address all of these issues and have sent 100's of emails to courts CPS and have even had to file Appeals because the cases have not been addressed correctly by the courts, I have sent my insurance documents to the courts so many times.

Even the last appeal case the judge was appalled due to what has happened to me.

I also know there is more dates when the courts added points etc. to my driving licence and then they were removed due to me proving I was insured. I do have a claim ongoing and need to show how much this has affected my life. These have not been included in your letter, could you please look at my driving record from 2013 to date of all cases that the court added points etc. and then they were removed as I need to prove the impact this has had on my life I also know there were I believe 1 or 2 more times my Licence was revoked and then put back in place due to the court updating DVLA and I do know there is more dates you have not included in your letter.

Could you please get back to me by email ASAP to tell me if I am now allowed to drive or if my licence is still revoked due to the errors of the courts and Insurance Company and if any points are still on there?

Could you also please confirm everything also in writing, so I do have a letter confirming everything as things are still being addressed also with the courts and there is still one appeal date?

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Tracy Bullock

mailto: tracey.bullock@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 10 March 2015 11:18

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: DVLA, Mr Cordell

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your Email, I would like to inform you that full details of your driver record will be sent to you by post. Many Thanks

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Casework

1 D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY GTN 1213 Ext. 86326

(01792) 786326

Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

8 June 2015 - the counterpart is abolished

Find out more at: www.gov.uk/dvla/nomorecounterpart

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

645,646,

 

 

 

82.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 82

 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.18.2015_RE Simon Cordell 1403116916

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 647,648

649,650,651,652,653

 

82.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 82

 lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.18.2015_RE Simon Cordell 1403116916

18/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 647,648

649,650,651,652,653

--

647,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 18 March 2015 17:38

To: 'GL-BROMLEYMCENQ'

Cc: 'CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

SouthcjuCO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionCju@met.pnn.police.uk

O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Attachments: Insurance-2014-05-20-184559.pd

Emma-O'Sullivan-Simon Cordell.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Complaint

I am writing this email due to many problems with a case that has been ongoing for no insurance the old case number was 1402647845 the new case number is 1403116916.

The Problem I have been having is not getting a summon this was the 1st thing so did not know a court date and was found guilty when I did not know I was due to attend court.

Many emails have been sent including my insurance I had a list of cases due to an insurance policy I had with KGM this insurance did not show up on the MID database and I had my vehicles seized around 9 times when in fact I had paid for my insurance.

Then this case happened on the 20/5/2014 this was on a new policy with a new insurance company please see attached insurance document. The insurance started on the 19/05/2014 and I believe this is why this one was not showing on the MID on the 20/05/2014 as it was too short a time.

I have sent many emails to the CPS who do not reply but I do get the read replies so I know the emails are getting opened the only reason I got the above emails addresses was due to all the email I was sending to the main CPS and calls I was making one day I was put though to a manager of traffic CPS as I was so upset on the phone to what was going on. I explained all the problems I was having all the calls and emails that were being sent, her name was Emma O'Sullivan please see attached email. The only traffic CPS that have replied was from CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk a wonderful lady called Sharon Burns.

I have also been sending emails to the court for the above listed case and have been including my insurance policy, I have been getting replies to my emails were I was told to file a statutory declaration which I did for this case on the 02/12/2014 at Highbury Magistrates Court.

When I came out of court, I was told to go to the court office where a lady took all the papers for the statutory declaration including a copy of my insurance papers. I was told I would get a date in the post with a new date hearing. I have been waiting for the date to come but as of, yet I did not get one for this case.

I also did not get a date for the other statutory declaration I done on the same date and that case was heard again on the 26/01/2015 again I was found guilty and was very upset and just filed an appeal which will be heard on the 14/05/2015 at Harrow crown court.

But for the Bromley Magistrates' Court case I not had anything.

For the past 4 weeks I been dealing with a lady called Tracey Bullock Administrative Officer, Court Casework1 D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY due to the CPS not getting back to me with what was on my driving licence. today she sent me this over

Dear Mr Cordell

The Court case with the offence date of the 20/05/2014 is as follows:

South East London Magistrates' Court Date of Conviction - 06/11/2014 Offence - IN10 Date of Offence - 20/05/2014

648,

Fine - Ł600 Points - 6

South East London Magistrates' Court Bromley Magistrates' Court London Road Bromley Kent BR1 IRQ

Telephone no - 020 8437 3500 Hope this information is of help to you

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Case work

lD9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY

Now I got very upset as I knew I had filed the statutory declaration for this case and seeing the conviction date this was clearly wrong as I had filed the statutory declaration after this date. I made a call to the court and was told that the statutory declaration filed in error and was closed, so was never reopened. The lady I spoke to said she was going to get the file out and get the right person to call me but give me an update call just to let me know it had been done.

I then got a call from a lady called Donna and while on the phone to her the other lady called me from the court to say it had been done. I told her I was on the phone to Donna and she told me that is who I needed to speak to.

I was shocked to hear the lady say to me that the case was heard on the 18/12/2014 and I was found guilty again as I did not turn up, but I have had no letters so how was I meant to show up when I did not know I needed to. But this cannot be right as looking at the information DVLA hold it is the old information to the 1st hearing, as far as I have been told by the court when a statutory declaration is filed the court would have to contact DVLA and remove the old conviction they had on file this has not been done by the court. so how could the case have been heard on the 18/12/2014. something is really not right here at all as it is all the old information that DVLA have on file which should have been removed when the statutory declaration was filed on the 02/12/2014.

I would like this case looked into and set aside and it to be reopened.

I would also like the summons sent to me for this case that was meant to have been sent out to me which I have never had and the letter of a hearing for the 18/12/2014 could this please be sent via email to this email address.

Also, if the court is not willing to deal with this could you please give me the right to appeal to the crown court and I will file the correct paperwork to the court.

Could it also be made sure that the right CPS get the files and my insurance policy so it can be checked I was in fact insured.

And an update as to what will happen as it is very upsetting that I am been found guilty for no insurance when in fact I do pay for my insurance.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Simon Cordell

649,

Blank Page!

650,

651,

RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916->Emma O'Sullivan-Simon Cordell.pdf

From: O Sullivan Emma

To: CO16Mailbox-. NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk:

CO16Mailbox- SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk:

Southcju (CO16Mailbox- SouthProsecutionCiu@met.pnn.police.uk

CO16Mailbox-. NorthProsecutionCJU@met.pnn.police.uk

Cc: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Date: 11 February 2015 15:24:41

Attachments: S Cordell 020215.pdf

Found Guilty again 26-01-2015.pdf

S Cordell Cert._ GE 2013-2014.pdf

 image2014-05-20-184559.pdf

Dear All,

Please could you kindly assist Lorraine Cordell on behalf of her son Simon Cordell. They believe that a number of summons have been issued against Simon for the offence of no insurance since 2013 due to an error made by the insurance company as per the attached letter. Unfortunately, due to Simon not always receiving the summons/adjournment notice they are unsure how many cases have been issued against him and are trying to get them all reopened and listed before court to be heard together in light of the above. Please would you be able to check your database and confirm to the email address below the number of cases with reference number, court, and conviction date.

have also spoken to her on the phone and informed Lorraine that she will need to contact the court directly to make application to reopen/stat decs, which she can only do so once the information has been obtained.

The only matter the cps are currently aware of is for the case ref J63181495 which is listed for appeal at Kingston Crown Court 05/03/15.

If you are unable to advise her on summons that have been issued on her son, please could you kindly advise her where she could obtain the information.

Kind Regards,

Emma O'Sullivan London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604

Rose Court,

4th Floor

Southwark Bridge,

London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

From: London traffic team

Sent: 10 February 2015 14:41

To: O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

652,

From: London magistrates central west

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:25

To: London traffic team

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

FYI

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 13:06

To: GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: London magistrates central west

London magistrates south

London magistrate’s northeast.

gl-bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

To whom it may concern:

I am writing this email due to the number of problems I have been having due to a policy of insurance I had with KGM insurance which did not show up on the MID database in the week it was fine as I carried my insurance documents with me at all times and the insurance company could be called, but the problems was when the insurance company was closed as the police could not contact them.

My mum Lorraine Cordell and I have sent many emails to the courts with my insurance documents, but there have been cases where I have not had a summons. So did not know about cases and they have been heard at court and I was found guilty of no insurance.

I have done statutory declarations at court including my insurance documents and this still has not corrected anything.

One of the statutory declarations was again heard at court on the 26/01/2015 which again I did not know about for Willesden Magistrates' Court. But I have sent so many emails to this court with all documents and asked for them to be checked with the police officer at court to show I was insured to drive. This has not been done I have just again been found guilty due to not getting letters of a court hearing date.

I have now also got a letter of Indemnity from KGM who I was insured with under policy number MT3574694. 00.01 AM on the 23/2/13 and was in force until Midnight on the 22/2/14 when it lapsed.

Most of the cases are with the KGM policy you will see the reason as to why in the Letter of Indemnity from KGM.

I also believe there was one case for Covea Insurance PLC policy number MT10 021608047 it was not showing on the MID due to the stop was the day after I took the policy out.

Please can any cases be set aside and reopened and looked into and any other cases that have been heard for no insurance under these policies of insurance be addressed.

You will in due cause be hearing from my solicitor, she is trying to address all the cases, but this is taking time. She has seen all the emails I have sent trying to address these issues and feels more should have been done as it would have only taken for the insurance policies to be checked and this would have stopped a waste of time and money for the courts, and myself at this time she wants to just appeal all cases to the crown court. which would again be a waste of money for the courts. and again, of my time.

But this is having an effect on my life my driving licence has been revoked 3 times for no insurance, when in fact I have always had insurance to drive and would not drive if I did not have insurance.

Please see attached documents

653,

Could you get back to me as soon as possible by way of email, as it does seem there is an issue with my post and not getting letters that was meant to be sent to me? I am taking this up with the royal mail.

Regards

Simon Cordell

DOB: 26/01/1981

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

*********************************************************************

This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.

If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply

e-mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.

Activity and use of CPS Connect systems, the Government Secure Intranet, and the

Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored to secure their effective operation and for

other lawful business purposes. Communications using these systems will also be

monitored and may be recorded to secure effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.

*********************************************************************

 

 

 

83.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 83

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_03.23.2015_FW Simon Cordell 1403116916

23/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661

 

 

83.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 83

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_03.23.2015_FW Simon Cordell 1403116916

23/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661

--

654,

From: O'Sullivan Emma

Emma.O'Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 23 March 2015 10:15

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Attachments: Insurance-2014-05-20-184559.pdf.

Emma O'Sullivan-Simon Cordell.pdf

Hi Lorraine,

Apologies the email address for the team is below.

CO16Mailbox- SouthProsecutionFPN@met.police.uk

sent it to the north team in error but they have confirmed it has been forwarded on to the south team.

Kind Regards,

Emma O'Sullivan London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604          

Rose Court,

4th Floor

Southwark Bridge,

London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

From: O'Sullivan Emma

Sent: 23 March 2015 09:55

To: CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

Cc: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Dear South Team,

Please see below email.

Simon Cordell is waiting for a date from the court to hear the application to reopen. Please ensure the attached documents have been placed on file and dealt with once the case has been relisted. Please could someone kindly ring Lorraine Cordell once her correspondence has been dealt with - 02082457454/07961833021.

Thank you

Emma O'Sullivan London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604          

Rose Court,

4th Floor

2 Southwark Bridge,

London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

--

655,656,657,658,659,660,661,

 

 

 

 

84.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 84

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_03.23.2015_FW Simon Cordell 1403116916_001

23/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 662,663,664,665,666

667,668

 

84.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 84

Emma.O’Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk_

03.23.2015_FW Simon Cordell 1403116916_001

23/03/2015

/ Page Numbers: 662,663,664,665,666

667,668

--

662,

From: O'Sullivan Emma

Emma.O'Sullivan@cps.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 23 March 2015 09:55

To: CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Attachments: Insurance-2014-05-20-184559.pdf.

Emma O'Sullivan-Simon Cordell.pdf

Dear South Team,

Please see below email.

Simon Cordell is waiting for a date from the court to hear the application to reopen. Please ensure the attached documents have been placed on file and dealt with once the case has been relisted. Please could someone kindly ring Lorraine Cordell once her correspondence has been dealt with - 02082457454/07961833021.

Thank you

Emma O'Sullivan London Traffic Unit Admin Line Manager 02033571604   

Rose Court,

4th Floor

2 Southwark Bridge, London,

SE1 9HS,

DX 154263 Southwark 12.

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 18 March 2015 17:38

To: 'GL-BROMLEYMCENQ'

Cc: CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk;

Southcju'; O'Sullivan Emma

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

To Whom It May Concern:

Complaint

I am writing this email due to many problems with a case that has been ongoing for no insurance the old case number was 1402647845 the new case number is 1403116916.

The Problem I have been having is not getting a summon this was the 1st thing so did not know a court date and was found guilty when I did not know I was due to attend court.

Many emails have been sent including my insurance I had a list of cases due to an insurance policy I had with KGM this insurance did not show up on the MID database and I had my vehicles seized around 9 times when in fact I had paid for my insurance.

Then this case happened on the 20/5/2014 this was on a new policy with a new insurance company please see attached insurance document. The insurance started on the 19/05/2014 and I believe this is why this one was not showing on the MID on the 20/05/2014 as it was too short a time.

I have sent many emails to the CPS who do not reply but I do get the read replies so I know the emails are getting opened the only reason I got the above emails addresses was due to all the email I was sending to the main CPS and calls I was making one day I was put though to a manager of traffic CPS as I was so upset on the phone to what was going on. I explained all the problems I was having all the calls and emails that were being sent, her name was Emma O'Sullivan please see attached email. The only traffic CPS

--

663,664,665,666,667,668,

 

 

 

 

 

85.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 85

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_04.01.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

01/04/2015

/ Page Numbers: 669,670,671,672

673,674

 

85.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 85

Peter.Wood@canopius.com_04.01.2015_RE Appeal against conviction for no insurance Reg

01/04/2015

/ Page Numbers: 669,670,671,672

673,674

--

669,

From: Wood, Peter

Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 01 April 2015 16:02

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015

at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Hi Lorraine,

Fantastic holiday thanks, really great time, went by far too quickly and now it’s back to normal, took me a while to get my head back in the game I must say.

I didn't realise there was more than 1 court case! This is going to take some time to sort out but I'm glad to hear you got the right result on the recent case.

I guess all I can say for the moment is let me know how things go and of course I will respond again after I have received and considered details of the Police stops/vehicle seizures we are waiting on.

All the best.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 01 April 2015 15:00

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Peter

Thank you for the email and I hope you had a great holiday.

I am waiting for the police compound to get back to us with the data for the seizers, but they just take so long with everything.

There are still court cases for no insurance that are still ongoing there are 2 left where Simon did not get any summons form the court and was found guilty due to not knowing. One is due to be heard in May 2015 and we are waiting for the last date.

DVLA have now taken of the ban on the 18/03/2015 so the insurance my son has been paying for the last year and could not be used due to this can now be used as he can drive now. But there is still the 12 points on his licence due to the other 2 court cases for no insurance DVLA do know the 12 points should not be on there in fact they have also been in contact with the courts they are not happy, but they cannot remove the points until the cases are heard in court.

But an update to what happened in court case were the police officer lied was Simon won the case and the judge was very upset at the police officer and put notes that it needed addressing.

The complaint is ongoing with the police office that lied, at this time that may take some time as the police officer may be charged. We won't know fully until the Serious Misconduct Investigation Unit Directorate of Professional Standards completes there investigation into what the police officer did and what the crown court judge said as the judge knows he lied to 2 judges and Simon was found guilty when he had done nothing wrong. We had a meeting about this on the 26/03/2015 but the person dealing with this is waiting for the crown court documents as to what the judge said, we should have the court transcript from Kingston Crown Court just after the Easter holidays.

I will keep you updated as to the data you need it’s just waiting for it from the police compound as requests had to be made for the data,

670,

Simon did try to get the information without the requests, but the police was not having it, so the request had to be put in for it.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 31 March 2015 09:25

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Hello Lorraine,

I trust you and Simon are well.

I was wondering if you could update me on what’s been happening please? I would like to make sure there is nothing else we can do and of course to bring this matter to a conclusion if we can.

Regards

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 |

www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 February 2015 12:45

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Hi Peter

Thank you so much for all your help, and I hope you have a wonderful holiday.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter [mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 11 February 2015 11:40

To: Lorraine Cordell; Josephine Ward (josie@michaelcarrollandco.com)

Cc: Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Hello,

Please find attached signed statement as requested.

The original is in the post to the Burncroft Ave address.

If you need anything else, please ask Andy in my absence.

Regards

671,

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 February 2015 18:07

To: Wood, Peter

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Peter

Sorry for the late reply yes Josephine Ward has said this is fine and can be signed off. thank you for all the help in this matter.

I hope you have a great time on holiday.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Wood, Peter [mailto: Peter.Wood@canopius.com

Sent: 10 February 2015 16:38

To: Josephine Ward; Wood, Peter

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Austin, Andrew

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Good Afternoon,

Please can I have your confirmation that the draft section 9 statement is acceptable asap? If I do not hear back by 11.30 tomorrow, I will have to assume it is and sign it off and send out as I will be in meetings and on holiday after that time.

Thanks

Pete Wood

From: Wood, Peter <Peter.Wood@canopius.com>

Date: 9 February 2015 11:29:00 GMT

To: Josephine Ward Josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Cc: Austin, Andrew Andrew.Austin@canopius.com

lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Ms Ward,

I have drafted a section 9 statement as requested. Before I sign it off can you review it and confirm it satisfies all of your requirements please? As soon as you do so I will sign it off, scan a copy over to you and put the original in the post.

Let me know if you need anything else and of course if you need me to amend the attached in any way.

Lorraine/Andy - FYI.

Regards

672,

Peter Wood

UK Specialty Operations Manager |

UK Specialty Division of Canopius Group

KGM House | 14 Eastwood Close | London | E18 1RZ

D +44 (0) 20 8530 9120 | www.kgminsurance.co.uk | www.canopius.com

From: Josephine Ward [mailto: Josie@michaelcarroHandco.com

Sent: 08 February 2015 19:02

To: Wood, Peter; Austin, Andrew

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Appeal against conviction for no insurance Regina v. Simon Paul Cordell on 5th March 2015 at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court

Dear Mr Wood

I have been instructed by Mr Simon Paul Cordell and Miss Lorraine Cordell to assist in the appeal against conviction that is due to be heard at Kingston Upon Thames Crown Court on 5th March 2015 at 10am.

Miss Cordell has played two recordings that she received from KGM which are pertinent to the appeal but at present as the telephone recordings have not been produced as an exhibit by KGM they will not be admissible at court.

Can you therefore please write a section 9 statement confirming that:

all recording equipment was working correctly

KGM produced two recordings at the request of Ms Lorraine Cordell

Confirmation that the recording of S Cordell call from police 141113 Recording was provided by KGM from their recorded calls and is authentic

Confirmation that the recording between the Car Pound and Kelly Tiller was also provided from the KGM recorded calls and is authentic

If we are in possession of a section 9 statement producing the recordings, then we will not have to apply to the court for a Third-Party Summons to compel an employee from KGM to attend to produce the recordings. This would be a complete waste of your time when all we require is a section 9 attesting to the recordings being retrieved from the system and exhibited as two separate recordings.

If you require assistance with drafting a section 9 statement, then we would be happy to draft it and email it over. We would require the name of the person who retrieved the recordings. the dates that the recordings were retrieved, the dates the recordings relate to, confirmation that the recordings were sent to Lorraine Cordell by email so that she can produce CD's of the recordings so that they can be played in court and specifically refer to the email containing the recordings so that there is continuity in the chain of evidence. Ideally, we would like KGM to produce the CD's and exhibit them but failing this we will try to get the CPS to agree the CD's as produced from the email of Miss Cordell. We stress that the section in relation to the search and retrieval of the KGM database is essential and critical to ensuring that the chain of evidence is intact.

We can serve these recordings on the CPS and the Court so that they are agreed in advance of the Appeal hearing.

We thank you in advance for your anticipated co-operation in this matter and hope that we do not have to apply for a Third-party Witness Summons to compel the attendance of a KGM employee at the Appeal on the 5th March 2015.

We confirm that Miss Cordell is forwarding an email confirming that we are instructed and authorised to request this information.

673,

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

PROUD SPONSOR of TRAIL

LONDON

25 MAY

28 MAR

674,

Confidentiality Caution

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

PROUD SPONSOR of

LONDON TRAIL

28 MAR - 25 MAY

CITY SUPPORTING IN HOSPITALS

® Shaun 1he Streep is a registered trademark of Aardman Ammaliens Ltd.

Grand Anneal / Aardman A Gromits, Children's Charily

Reg. LC4J&G1. AH rights res-c

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and notify the sender immediately. Canopius may monitor the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for viruses, unauthorised use, or other lawful business purposes. E-mail sent for and on behalf of a member of Canopius Group, which includes:

Canopius Holdings UK Limited | registered number 04818520

Canopius Managing Agents Limited | registered number 01514453 | Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

Canopius Underwriting Limited | registered number 02473672 | appointed representative of Canopius Managing Agents Limited

Canopius Services Limited | registered number 02733994

KGM Motor Insurance is a brand name for business written by Canopius Managing Agents Limited Registered office: Gallery 9, One Lime Street, London, EC3M 7HA | Registered in England and Wales

 

 

 

 

86.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 86

sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_04.02.2015_RE Simon Cordell 1403116916

04/04/2015

/ Page Numbers: 675,676,677,678

 

86.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 86

sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_04.02.2015_RE Simon Cordell 1403116916

04/04/2015 02/04/2015

/ Page Numbers: 675,676,677,678

--

675,

From: Leslie, Sandra <sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk> on behalf of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

bromleymcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 02 April 2015 11:04

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Morning Mrs Cordell,

I have received a decision from the Clerk he has advised that the case be put in court as an application to be re-opened Mr Cordell will be sent a date in due course to attend, I apologise for the delay.

Regards

Miss S E Leslie

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 01 April 2015 17:13

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Dear Miss S E Leslie

I still have not had any update to this case could you please get back to me with what is going on as I would like to get this addressed.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Leslie, Sandra [mailto:sandra.leslie@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk] On Behalf Of GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Sent: 20 March 2015 14:42

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

Good afternoon Mrs Cordell,

Thank you for your email and may to your query I apologise for the delay in replying to your query.

I have referred your complaint to a Clerk of the court.

Regards

Miss S E Leslie

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 18 March 2015 17:38

To: GL-BROMLEYMCENQ

Cc: CO16Mailbox-.SouthProsecutionFN@met.pnn.police.uk

Southcju'; 'O'Sullivan Emma'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 1403116916

To Whom It May Concern:

Complaint

I am writing this email due to many problems with a case that has been ongoing for no insurance the old case number was 1402647845 the new case number is 1403116916.

The Problem I have been having is not getting a summon this was the 1st thing so did not know a court date and was found guilty

676,

when I did not know I was due to attend court.

Many emails have been sent including my insurance I had a list of cases due to an insurance policy I had with KGM this insurance did not show up on the MID database and I had my vehicles seized around 9 times when in fact I had paid for my insurance.

Then this case happened on the 20/5/2014 this was on a new policy with a new insurance company please see attached insurance document. The insurance started on the 19/05/2014 and I believe this is why this one was not showing on the MID on the 20/05/2014 as it was too short a time.

I have sent many emails to the CPS who do not reply but I do get the read replies so I know the emails are getting opened the only reason I got the above emails addresses was due to all the email I was sending to the main CPS and calls I was making one day I was put though to a manager of traffic CPS as I was so upset on the phone to what was going on. I explained all the problems I was having all the calls and emails that were being sent, her name was Emma O'Sullivan please see attached email. The only traffic CPS that have replied was from CO16Mailbox-.NorthProsecutionFPN@met.pnn.police.uk a wonderful lady called Sharon Burns.

I have also been sending emails to the court for the above listed case and have been including my insurance policy, I have been getting replies to my emails were I was told to file a statutory declaration which I did for this case on the 02/12/2014 at Highbury Magistrates Court.

When I came out of court, I was told to go to the court office where a lady took all the papers for the statutory declaration including a copy of my insurance papers. I was told I would get a date in the post with a new date hearing. I have been waiting for the date to come but as of, yet I did not get one for this case.

I also did not get a date for the other statutory declaration I done on the same date and that case was heard again on the 26/01/2015 again I was found guilty and was very upset and just filed an appeal which will be heard on the 14/05/2015 at Harrow crown court.

But for the Bromley Magistrates' Court case I not had anything.

For the past 4 weeks I been dealing with a lady called Tracey Bullock Administrative Officer, Court Casework1 D9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY due to the CPS not getting back to me with what was on my driving licence. today she sent me this over

Dear Mr Cordell

The Court case with the offence date of the 20/05/2014 is as follows: -

South East London Magistrates' Court

Date of Conviction - 06/11/2014

Offence - IN10

Date of Offence - 20/05/2014

Fine - Ł600

Points - 6

South East London Magistrates' Court Bromley Magistrates' Court London Road Bromley Kent BR1 1RQ

Telephone no - 020 8437 3500 Hope this information is of help to you

Tracey Bullock

Administrative Officer

Court Casework

lD9 | DVLA | Swansea | SA99 1AY

677,

Now I got very upset as I knew I had filed the statutory declaration for this case and seeing the conviction date this was clearly wrong as I had filed the statutory declaration after this date. I made a call to the court and was told that the statutory declaration filed in error and was closed, so was never reopened. The lady I spoke to said she was going to get the file out and get the right person to call me but give me an update call just to let me know it had been done.

I then got a call from a lady called Donna and while on the phone to her the other lady called me from the court to say it had been done. I told her I was on the phone to Donna and she told me that is who I needed to speak to.

I was shocked to hear the lady say to me that the case was heard on the 18/12/2014 and I was found guilty again as I did not turn up, but I have had no letters so how was I meant to show up when I did not know I needed to. But this cannot be right as looking at the information DVLA hold it is the old information to the 1st hearing, as far as I have been told by the court when a statutory declaration is filed the court would have to contact DVLA and remove the old conviction they had on file this has not been done by the court. so how could the case have been heard on the 18/12/2014. something is really not right here at all as it is all the old information that DVLA have on file which should have been removed when the statutory declaration was filed on the 02/12/2014.

I would like this case looked into and set aside and it to be reopened.

I would also like the summons sent to me for this case that was meant to have been sent out to me which I have never had and the letter of a hearing for the 18/12/2014 could this please be sent via email to this email address.

Also if the court is not willing to deal with this could you please give me the right to appeal to the crown court and I will file the correct paperwork to the court.

Could it also be made sure that the right CPS get the files and my insurance policy so it can be checked I was in fact insured.

And an update as to what will happen as it is very upsetting that I am been found guilty for no insurance when in fact I do pay for my insurance.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Simon Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

678,

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

87.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 87

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.11.2015_FW RE CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

11/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 679,680

 

87.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 87

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.11.2015_FW RE CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

11/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 679,680

--

679,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 11 May 2015 15:17

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: FW: RE: CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

Attachments: CPS-for-Appeal.pdf

Dear Josey

Please see attached letter from CPS I made a mistake the other day thinking it was the court.

But how funny after me sending Simon insurance to them about 100 and them finding him guilty 3 times at Willesden mag court they are now saying oh you have insurance we will not be opposing the Appeal. What a waste of money and time.

I should think this will mean Simon does not need to attend court thank god but I will call the court to check I just called them and they say he will still need to attend can you check if that is correct for me please .

Regards

Lorraine

680,

 

 

 

 

 

88.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 88

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.11.2015_RE CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

05/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 681,682

 

88.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 88

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.11.2015_RE CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

05/05/2015    11/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 681,682

--

681,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 11 May 2015 15:10

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: CPS Letter for Appeal-Case Simon

Attachments: CPS-for-Appeal.pdf

Dear Josie

Please see attached letter from CPS I made a mistake the other day thinking it was the court.

But how funny after me sending Simon insurance to them about 100 and them finding him guilty 3 times at Willesden mag court t are now saying oh you have insurance; we will not be opposing the Appeal. What a waste of money and time.

I should think this will mean Simon does not need to attend court thank god, but I will call the court to check.

Regards

Lorraine

682,

 

 

 

 

89.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 89

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.19.2015_Re Simon Cordell

05/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 683,684

 

89.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 89

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_05.19.2015_Re Simon Cordell

05/05/2015   19/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 683,684

--

683,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 19 May 2015 17:13

To: enquiries@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

GL-BrentMCenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk  

LCCCCollectionUnit@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Won-Appeal.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a case for using a vehicle without insurance that was heard at Harrow Crown Court on the 14 May 2015 Case Number A20150049 the appeal against conviction was allowed. Please see attached document from the court

When I was found guilty for this case at Willesden Magistrates' Court the case numbers were 011403134612 and the old case number to that was 011401596899.

When I was found guilty at Willesden Magistrates' Court, I was given

Fine Ł600.00

Victim surcharge Ł60.00

Licence endorsed: 6 penalty points

I am not sure who is to address the points being removed from my driving licence and the Victim surcharge Ł60.00 therefore could someone please explain if I need to do anything for this.

Also, the fine of Ł600.00 the court arranged this to be taken out of my benefits each week. this is still being taken out I have today made a call to find out what I can do to get this stopped to Willesden court and got cut of the phone. Also, I called the fines people up who are collecting this fine and it is still being collected.

Could someone please get the fine to be stopped being taken out of my benefits and also the money they have collected from this fine which I believe started in Aug 2014 to be paid back to me. I am not sure even how it would be paid back to me as it has been taken direct from my benefit which has made me suffer when I did nothing wrong and did in fact have insurance, could someone get back to me if I need to deal with anything to get this fine stopped being taken and also the money that has been taken paid back to me..

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ DOB: 26/01/1981

Regards

Simon Cordell

684,

 

 

90.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 90

enquiries@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk_05.20.2015_FW Simon Cordell

20/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 685,686,687,688

 

90.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 90

enquiries@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk_05.20.2015_FW Simon Cordell

20/05/2015

/ Page Numbers: 685,686,687,688

--

685,

From: Harrow Crown, Enquiries

enquines@harrow.crowncourt.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 May 2015 13:03

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: GL-BRENTMCENQ.

LCCC Collection Unit.

LCCC Enforcement Unit.

LCCC Compliance Unit

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell

Attachments:   Won-Appeal.pdf

Hello Mr Cordell

Your email has been forwarded to Willesden Magistrates Court.

When an appeal is finished, the results go back to Magistrates Court and they are supposed to send notification to London Collection and Compliance Centre and stop the payment of fine etc.

Please contact them to get this amended.

Regards Bharti Shah Harrow Crown Court 020 8424 2294

e-mail - bharti.shah@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

TO ENABLE US TO DEAL PROMPTLY WITH YOUR ENQUIRY, PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE CASE NUMBER / INDICTMENT NUMBER IS QUOTED IN ALL COMMUNICATIONS AND URGENT EMAILS ARE MARKED WITH "HIGH PRIORITY".

COMMUNICATION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THIS COURT VIA ONLY ONE MEANS OF CONTACT AND TO ONLY ONE EMAIL ADDRESS. PLEASE REFRAIN FROM COPYING IT TO ADDITIONAL EMAIL ADDRESSES, FACSIMILE AND POST.

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 May 2015 17:13

To: Harrow Crown, Enquiries

GL-BRENTMCENQ LCCC Collection Unit

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email due to a case for using a vehicle without insurance that was heard at Harrow Crown Court on the 14 May 2015 Case Number A20150049 the appeal against conviction was allowed. Please see attached document from the court

When I was found guilty for this case at Willesden Magistrates' Court the case numbers were 011403134612 and the old case number to that was 011401596899.

When I was found guilty at Willesden Magistrates' Court, I was given

Fine Ł600.00

Victim surcharge Ł60.00

Licence endorsed: 6 penalty points

I am not sure who is to address the points being removed from my driving licence and the Victim surcharge Ł60.00 therefore could someone please explain if I need to do anything for this.

686,

Also, the fine of Ł600.00 the court arranged this to be taken out of my benefits each week. this is still being taken out I have today made a call to find out what I can do to get this stopped to Willesden court and got cut of the phone. Also, I called the fines people up who are collecting this fine and it is still being collected.

Could someone please get the fine to be stopped being taken out of my benefits and also the money they have collected from this fine which I believe started in Aug 2014 to be paid back to me. I am not sure even how it would be paid back to me as it has been taken direct from my benefit which has made me suffer when I did nothing wrong and did in fact have insurance, could someone get back to me if I need to deal with anything to get this fine stopped being taken and also the money that has been taken paid back to me..

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ DOB: 26/01/1981

Regards

Simon Cordell

This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisations IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by

687,

Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

688,

 

 

 

 

 

91.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 91

William.Slade@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_06.18.2015_Simon Cordell 22.07.13 Waltham Forest MC

18/06/2015

/ Page Numbers: 689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697

 

 

91.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 91

William.Slade@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk_06.18.2015_Simon Cordell 22.07.13 Waltham Forest MC

18/06/2015

/ Page Numbers: 689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697

--

689,

From: Slade, William

William.Slade@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk> on behalf of London East MC

<LondonEastMC@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: 18 June 2015 16:28

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Simon Cordell 22.07.13

Waltham Forest MC

Attachments: Cordell.pdf

Good Afternoon Lorraine,

Following our conversation earlier today, please find attached details relating to your sons’ case to assist you in making a Statutory Declaration. If your son decides to attend court to make the declaration your sons local magistrates court is Tottenham MC and the details are : https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/courts/tottenham-magistrates-court-formerlyenfield-magistrates-court?aol=All&postcode=en3%207jq

Your sons case number is 1301713036 and it was heard at Waltham Forest MC on 22.07.13.

I hope you and your son are able to get to the bottom of this matter.

Kind Regards

William Thames CSU

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

690,

Simon Cordell 22.07.13

Waltham Forest MC Cordell

MG4E

CHARGE(S)

On 05/02/2013 at Burncroft Avenue EN3 7JQ having been required by or on behalf of the Chief Officer of Police for METROPOLIS, failed to give information relating to the identification of the driver of a vehicle , namely a FORD(EUROPE) VRM MA57LDY, who was alleged to have been guilty of an offence. Contrary to section 172(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988

[This offence carries penalty points.]

[Statement of facts]

A brief statement of the case is set out below. This statement may be used as a summary of the prosecution case if you plead guilty.

On 05/02/2013 the defendant having been required by or on behalf of Police for METROPOLIS failed to give information relating to the identification of the driver of a vehicle, namely 

FORD(EUROPE) VRM MA57LDY, who was alleged to have been guilty of an offence

If you are convicted the Prosecution in this case will apply to the court for costs in the sum of Ł85.00

Charge Authorised by Niki Manson for the Metropolitan Police Prosecution contact details:

Metropolitan Police, Camera Offences Prosecution Section, PO Box 510 DA15 0BQ Date: Thursday, 20 June 2013

Post FTC

691,

692,

693,

694,

695,

696,

697,

 

 

92.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 92

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.18.2015_RE Simon Cordell

18/09/2015

/ Page Numbers: 698,699

 

92.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 92

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_09.18.2015_RE Simon Cordell

18/09/2015

/ Page Numbers: 698,699

--

698,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 18 September 2015 15:00

To: benedicta.odjida@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Court-List-From-Benedicta.pdf

Dear Benedicta Odjida

Mr Simon Paul Cordell DOB 26/01/1981

I am writing this Email due to some work you curry out in February/March 2014 in regard to looking up records that are on my PNC record.

There was a list that took some time for you to go over, and then my mother Lorraine Cordell came to the court to pick them up once you had looked every up.

Since this time we have been trying to get this addressed as there were a number that was not in the court record, you gave my mother a print out that you had done with stars on the ones that was not in the courts register, please see attached document.

Since this time, we have been dealing with Flo at Highbury Corner court to get a letter done by you to say you did in fact look at the court register and did not find these records on the court register.

My Mother and I have sent many emails to Highbury Corner Court and have gone to the court and spoke with Flo and we see to not be able to get this issue addressed.

Therefore my mother came to Enfield court on the 15/09/2015 to see if she could speak to you, but you was on leave so she asked for your direct email, I am writing this email directly to you to see if this issue can be addressed and a letter written saying you looked at the courts registers and did not find the ones marked on the list you gave my mother. As it seems the printout you gave her is not enough and it does need a court headed letter to show in fact the work that you carried out looking into my data the court holds.

Could you please look into this issue and let me know if a court headed letter can be made up and if so my mother Lorraine Cordell could come to the court and pick it up, if you could let me know by replying to this email I would be most grateful.

Regards

Simon Cordell

699

 

 

 

93.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 93

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_10.20.2015_RE SIMON CORDELL

20/10/2015

/ Page Numbers: 700,701

 

93.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 93

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_10.20.2015_RE SIMON CORDELL

20/10/2015

/ Page Numbers: 700,701

--

700,

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 October 2015 17:48

To: 'Forster, John

Subject: RE: SIMON CORDELL

Dear Mr Dear Forster

Could you please put this email in front of the legal adviser, the alleged erroneous entries on my PNC as you have put it, are made up from the court as the police would not be able to put records on a person’s PNC record without a case being put in front of the courts.

My Mother has asked the court to check all the registries at the court against the records the police hold on my PNC record. This showed the errors and as you said to my mother at the court if a case is not listed at the court then it was never heard at the court.

There are 5 errors of no listing on my PNC that the court does not have in the court register how can this be?

My mother has been to the police who do not want to address this issue this is why she came to the court as the court should hold all records.

By the legal adviser not wanting to write a letter showing my records have been checked by the court what is this saying. why should a person be able to ask the court to check their records, yet the court does not want to get involved in errors they found?

This is a miscarriage of justice; the court has not found records in the court registries that are on my PNC record, yet the court does not want to do anything about it.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Forster, John mailto: john.forster@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: 20 October 2015 16:03

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SIMON CORDELL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Further to your request for a letter from the court regarding the alleged erroneous entries on the PNC, the legal adviser has stated that the court cannot supply this information: you must make your request through the police.

Regards,

Customer Services Unit (8)

Highbury Corner Magistrates Court 51 Holloway Road LONDON N7 8JA

701,

DX: 153700 Highbury 4

Tel: 0207-506 3109

e-mail: gl-hcornermcenq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Gold fax: 0870 739 5768

I am neither authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Headers

2016

 

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2

Too Smooth DPR Wholesalers - 03-01-2016 08-06 

03/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 1

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2

Too Smooth DPR Wholesalers - 03-01-2016 08-06 

03/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 1

--

1

From: DPR Wholesalers <sales@dprwholesalers.com>

Sent time: 03/01/2016 08:06:23 AM

T0: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Sale now on at DPR Alpha Road

Sale now on at our Alpha Road branch    

Happy New Year!

Wholesalers 020 8443 5221

Sales@DPRWholesalers.com

Discounts on purchases at Alpha Road

Our Alpha Road branch will be closing early in 2016 and with this in mind, we're offering all our customers discounts on any purchase that totals over Ł100 plus VAT at this location.

Up to 20% off any purchase invoice over Ł100+VAT *

*Minimum spend applies. Discount dependent on total value of purchase. Please bring this email in to qualify. This discount does not extend to our new home at Suez Road, where you will find many other offers and multi-buy deals on new and expanded lines.

We're now back to normal hours at both locations, which you can find on our website DPRWholesalers.com. As always, last entry is 30 mins before the listed closing times.

Happy New Year!

Wishing you a Very Happy & Successful 2016

Stock up now with everything needed to get the New Year started, including:

Diaries, calendars & planners.

Household & cleaning; and Happy new year!

Plastics & storage containers.                        

For more offers, news and information, find us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter and also please visit our website www.DPRWholesalers.com.

Sales@DPRWholesalers.com

020 8443 5221

This email was sent to re_wired@ymail.com because you registered with us in store or on-line. Copyright © 2015 DPR Wholesalers Ltd. All rights reserved. Our mailing address is DPR Wholesalers Ltd., 17 Suez Road, Off Mollison Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7SN,

UK.

Click here to unsubscribe Sales@DPRWholesalers.com | 020 8443 5221

 

 

 

 

 

2.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2

 LBE Right to buy -07-01-2016 03-00 

07/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 2,3,4

 

2

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2

 LBE Right to buy -07-01-2016 03-00 

07/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 2,3,4

--

2,

3,

4,

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -FW Simon o be done now 28-01-2016 11-46 

28/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33

 

 

3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -FW Simon o be done now 28-01-2016 11-46 

28/01/2016

/ Page Numbers: 5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33

--

5,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 28/01/2016 11:46:17 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Attachments: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

489414.pdf Document 1.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 28 January 2016 11:02

To: 'Josephine Ward'; 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

Can you please give me an update you said on Thursday last week that you would reply to the below emails on the Friday last week and I have not heard from you still.

I sent you the information you asked for in the text on 22/01/2016 by email

Then some other information by email on the 24/01/2016 which linked Scotland Yard again.

We need to know if you have emailed Supt Adrian Coombs to get the statement he said he was willing to do back in Sep2015, this is a very important statement as it will show all the information about Essex we don't know how long he will take to reply and time is running out. I would like to see the email that is written before it is sent so I can see if there is anything that has been missed out, as there was a lot he done and said to me when he called me and spoke to me.

Also have you put in the request for the missing CAD's, and all the CADs for all the events that went on at Crown Road, I have had an updated email from Enfield Council as I emailed them. Or will this be done when we are served their updated file on the 02/02/2016

Attached is 2 emails updated from Enfield Council

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]-11-01-2016 = this is the reply to asking about the April 2014 event at Crown Road.

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]-11-01-2016-01 = this is my reply to his email with more dates that has never been said, which Enfield Council has not replied to.

I have also attached a letter due to a FOI I put in to a next council = die to the FOI they sent me information and a letter = 489414 = due to the FOI I put in they sent me = Document 1 = which is copies of 2 Noise Abatement Notice that were served by their council to 2 buildings. so, you can see how much power a Noise Abatement Notice has.

Why did Enfield Council never serve a Noise Abatement Notice on Crown Road it would have allowed them to take sound systems so would have stopped events going on? Crown Road events were going on for months and Enfield Council and the police did nothing allowed then to go on, which was causing a huge problem to people that lived nearby. Yet as soon as the police see Simon at progress way, they get Enfield council out to try and serve paperwork. Why did the council only try to serve this on Simon when there were loads of people at the gate of Progress Way and Simon was outside? The paperwork could have been served on any person inside of Progress Way, yet no paperwork was served, and Enfield Council just left.

Why also if Enfield Council went out on the 08th June 2014 to serve paper work at Progress Way did they not do the same to Crown Road at the same time they had police backup and an event had been running the 6th 7th 08th June at Crown road the same as progress way.

And what will be the outcome due to Val Tanner saying she could not give you the information you asked for via email. what is going to be the plain of action on how we are going to deal with this and the public order unit at Scotland Yard as they have a lot of information on events even over the last months so how was they not involved in these events like Steven Elsmore is trying to say in his last statement.

If you could give me an update with anything else that needs to be done and a full update as to how we are going to deal with everything I would be grateful.

I know that we are meant to be served the file by the 02/02/2016 by them could you please let me know as soon as it comes to the office so I can pick it up will need 2 copies one for me and one for Simon. So, we can see what has been changed and updated, as we will need to work fast as any other information, we want to put in will need to be done fast.

I also need a copy of Simon folder so he can see it as he has never seen it and he really need to go over its ASAP.

Simon File was never completed and he was never given a file for trial what if the file we made up before Christmas does not match the one the court and the police had for trial and they have more things in there's that we don't have in the file that been made up.

Also have you sorted a barrister out for the appeal I know before Christmas you said you did not have one yet and needed to find one to do the appeal, the barrister will need time to go over all this data to see if there is things we have missed and they need to know the case before the appeal, Andy Locke will have information in his files that would really help and he did agree to do the appeal hearing and he knows the case already.

6,

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 19 January 2016 20:08

To: 'Josephine Ward'; 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

Please could you reply to the below emails, this is making things harder for me with you not replying to my emails.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 19 January 2016 13:39

To: 'Josephine Ward'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Dear Josey

I have not had a reply to the below emails and was wondering what was going on could you please give me an update.

Also Simon wanted to get the file that has been made up so he can see what has been done as he could not look at the last set that was sent to the court and police as there was no time in which to let him see.

Could you also please explain if you have submitted the request for the information that we need. And also wrote the email to Supt Adrian Coombs yet to get the witness statement, as that will be needed.

Simon wants to know what is going on and also the dates.

Could you please reply to my emails so I can give him an update please.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 15 January 2016 16:34

To: 'Josephine Ward'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

can you please give me an update.

Have you put into the police for the missing CADs and everything else that needs to be asked for from the public order unit.

Have you sent the email to Supt Adrian Coombs to get him to do the statement yet I spoke to him in Sep 2015 and I have been asking since then for an email to be sent to him as he said he was willing to do a statement and got all his notes out to do one.

I have got the tickets from Dwayne and the hall details they were not put in the file due to me not getting them till after Christmas, as he had a problem with my email.

Can you give me the date that the cps has to reply to us and send us any other information.

And can I have the date Simon trial is due to happen, and if there anything else we need to do please.

Regards

|Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 13 January 2016 13:18

To: 'Josephine Ward'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

7,

Hi Josey

Can you please reply to what needs to be done and if you sent the email to Supt Adrian Coombs to get his statement which he said he was willing to do.

And can you reply to the below emails.

Also, can I have all the dates that things need to be done by.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 09 January 2016 14:51

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

I am sorry that I keep emailing you, but I am trying to deal with things and Simon keeps asking for updates to this appeal.

Just before Christmas you said Simon trial date was meant to be set for the 6th Feb but I just checked and that is a Saturday so that cannot be the date, Ben wants to take time of work, could you please send me the full dates for everything so I know the dates as to when things have to be done for this case I have asked before for this information as when we were at court many dates were said and I did not take them all in.

Also can you tell me if you have written to Supt Adrian Coombs yet as Simon is asking everyday what is going on with the case and what has been done and what has not been done, and how we are dealing with this case and all the information that is needed, and the below emails.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 07 January 2016 12:45

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

Can you give me an update on the below email and what needs to be done please.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 05 January 2016 17:59

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell What needs to be done now.

Hi Josey

I hope you had a nice Christmas and New Year; I just wanted to know when you were back off holiday.

I was wondering if you had written yet to get the statement from Supt Adrian Coombs.

And was wondering if also you when you would be writing and asking for all the discloser.

We have just over 4 weeks left to get all the information. I know you had the reply from Val tanner and said you were going to deal with this.

Would it also please be possible for you to write down everything that has been done and send it to Simon Email so he can get an update as to what is going on with the case?

It is really hard for me dealing with this case like this as I am not the one that this case is about. I am trying to give Simon updates as to things that have and have not been done, but with you only wanting to deal with me until just before the appeal it is hard as I know

Simon wants to know things and have things done. And he got a lot of input about things, that he wants to include.

Like you were asking the order of how things should be done.

8,

Simon spoke to me the other day and told me, and I hope I have got this right what he said.

The environmental protection act 1990section 80 abatement notice should be put in place by the council. I have a copy of one from a FOI I put in I will attach it here for you to see there is 2 in one file that they sent me.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/79

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/80

Above is some links that deals with this.

The abatement notice then gives them the right to take the sound systems, and then after this the section 63 can be put in place, I think but Simon understands all of this.

I not sure if I got all this correct, but Simon understands it all, Simon has never been given any paperwork from the council or the police, so no abatement notice or a section 63.

Even when they took his sound system on the 20/06/2014 Simon has never had any paperwork.

Also, no abatement notice was put in place for Crown Road by the council I have this in an email, and they were having a great deal of problems as you know with Crown Road.

Crown road was going on for months which we can prove, it was going on, on the 6th, 07th and 08th, and had been going on for weeks before this at Crown Road, yet the police get the council out on the 08th to serve an abatement notice for Progress Way but did not do this for Crown Road?

The council knows that they can put an abatement notice in place at any time, and the reason they gave me in an email for no doing so is a joke tbh.

Can you give me an update on what has to be done now please?

Regards

Lorraine

9,

Rachael Beck

By Email: rachaelbeck100@gmail.com

31st July 2015

ISLINGTON

Environment & Regeneration Municipal Offices 222 Upper Street London N1 1XR

T 020 752723216

F 020 75272732

E dawn-forte-khan@ islington.gov.uk

W www.islinaton.gov.uk

Dear Rachael Beck,

Subject: Freedom of Information Request 489414

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on the 3rd July 2015.

The information needed is regarding Disused or abandoned buildings or any industrial estates buildings or office buildings or open air land, or where occupiers/squatters were in building that could have resulted in problems with Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties, for the dates of all of 2013 all of 2014,2015 to date.

Question 1: The Dates and times and addresses to any Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties.

Question 2: Where the Noise and Nuisance Team had such information that there was Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties was in progress or believed to be in progress, within and around the Islington council area and wards boundaries that the Islington council is part off.

Question 3: If any paperwork was served to any person/persons/occupiers/squatters, on any dates when the Noise and Nuisance Team was in attendance to any Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties, and copies of such paperwork.

Response 3: This information is contained in document 1.

Question 4: All the calls that were made on any dates to the Noise and Nuisance Team to make them aware that an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties was taking place or could be taking place. This would include all calls that were made before any Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties took place. This would also include any calls the police made to the Noise and Nuisance Team to make them aware that an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties was going to take place.

Question 5: Any noise abatement orders that was put in place on any addresses where an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties was taking place or could take place. This would include any noise abatement orders that were put in place before an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves, or Illegal Parties took place. This would include dates and times the noise abatement, orders were served on an address and to whom and to forward copies of any such noise abatement orders within this request.

Response 5: This information is contained in document 1.

10,

Question 6: Person's names who attended any addresses and times and dates from the Noise and Nuisance Team and any police officer names or IDs that attended with the Noise and Nuisance Team to any Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties. If the names cannot be given for the Noise and Nuisance Team offices that please just state how many Noise and Nuisance Team officers were in attendance.

Response 6: Please note that in responding to your request we have applied s. 40 (2)- exemption where the information contains personal data; we have redacted the information provided as it relates to third parties. This information is contained in document land the attached spread sheet.

Question 7: Any information if the police contacted the Noise and Nuisance Team about any information that an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties was going to take place or could take place in the area or wards boundaries that the council is part off.

Question 8: Any information if the Noise and Nuisance Team contacted the police about any information they were aware of that an Illegal raves, Illegal Squat Parties, Illegal Squat Raves or Illegal Parties was going to take place or could take place in the area or wards boundaries that the council is part off.

Responses 1,2, 4,7 & 8: This information is contained on the attached spread sheet.

If you are not satisfied with the way in which your request has been handled or the outcome, you may request an internal review within two calendar months of the date of this response by contacting: Information Complaints, Digital Services, Room G17, Town Hall, Upper Street, London N1 2UD.

Email: infocomplaints@islinaton.aov.uk

mailto: infocomplaints@islinaton.aov.uk

Further information is also available from the Information Commissioner's Office, at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.

Telephone: 01625 545 700.

Web: www.ico.orq.uk

http://www.ico.orq.uk/

Khan Environment & Regeneration Islington Council

11.

12,

13,

14,

Blank Page!

15,

16,

17,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

From: Ned Johnson

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Andy Hiaham

Robert Oles

Theresa Dodd

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Date: 11 January 2016 12:17:36

Attachments: image006.png

image007.png

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Ms. Cordell,

Thank you for your email; I have rechecked our database and indeed, I did make a mistake and missed one complaint which was received by our Residential Noise Team on 20/04/14, it was the only complaint received by the Council prior to the ones listed in the FOI response sent to you. The officer who received the complaint tried to contact the customer who made it on several occasions but was unable to do so and as such we were unable to verify the complaint. The next complaint received was then on 18/05/14 as stated in my original response.

We did not receive any further complaints after June 2014 in regard to the Man Building and therefore as far as we were aware the matter had been resolved.

A Noise Abatement Notice was not served on the squatters as we would not have been able to verify any names given, if indeed they would have given a name and it would have been unenforceable as it is extremely unlikely that we would have been able to take anybody to court who was squatting. The line taken was to pursue the owners of the building who then needed to evict the squatters and secure the premises, which they did; serving a Noise Abatement Notice would have had no effect on the owners as they were already taking the necessary steps to stop the problem.

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Pollution Control & Planning Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 05 January 2016 16:59

18,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

To: Ned Johnson

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear Ned Johnson

I am writing this email due to a FOI request I put in some time ago.

It has come to my attention that some of the information you have given me in incorrect and was wondering if you could comment on this.

In my FOI request you said that Crown Road information started on the 18/5/2014, but I have found newspaper information that this started much earlier than this.

I have a newspaper that is dated the 25/04/2014 which was printed after a 15-hour rave took place there on the 19/04/2014, which is much earlier than the 18/05/2014 as the date you gave me that this started.

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/11172103.Residents fume over 15 hour rave /

And one that was in printed on 9 September 2014 a paper saying The MAN building, in Crown Road, on the junction with Southbury Road, Enfield, has also been used for illegal raves and parties in the last few months which these words would say the events was going on much later than June 2014 that you have given in the FOI request.

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/11459487.Listed building wrecked by graffiti/

I still also cannot understand why an abatement notice order was not put in place due to the number of events that took place there. I do understand on the days of the events it could be classed as unsafe due to the amount of people, but this site was being squatted and there would have been far less people there during the weeks when these events were not going on. And cannot understand why an abatement notice order was not put in place during the time when these events were not going on.

On the 6th 07th and 08th June 2014 the council were aware an event was ongoing at Crown Road.

On the 6th 07th and 08th June 2014 the council were aware an event was ongoing at Progress way.

On the 08th June the council attended with police to Progress Way to serve paperwork this was not served to any persons within the site of Progress Way.

But if you were with police, which your team was why was paperwork not tried to be served at Crown Road site also as your team was aware off an event also going on there.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ned Johnson

mailto: Ned.Johnson@enfield.gov.uk 

Sent: 09 March 2015 12:21

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Esg Complaints

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

19,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Ms. Cordell,

In terms of the number of events there was one further rave that took place on 25th March 2013 at Progress Way, other than this occurrence I have provided you with the dates and locations of all the illegal raves/parties that are recorded on our database as well as all other

data we hold that you requested. The rave on March 25th, 2013 was attended by the Out of Hours Noise Team, assistance was requested from the police, but they were unable to help on that occasion.

The events at Crown Road were over a period of several weeks not months, during which time we were in regular contact with the new site owners who worked to get the site secured and the power turned off. The Out of Hours Noise Team undertook observations of the noise during

the event on May 31st/June 1st but did not visit the party as the team decided that it was unsafe to do so due to the nature and location of the event and provided information to the daytime officer who ensured the owners undertook the necessary works.

The complaints received on Sunday June 8th were all received after the council's Out of Hours Service had finished at 03:00 and therefore no response was possible.

The Out of Hours Team respond to all complaints received but will only visit a premises where it is safe for them to do so and in the case of illegal raves/parties quite often there are officer safety issues which prevent visits at night time during the event, unless police support can be gained. Following illegal raves/parties we do make every effort to get a building secured as soon as possible to prevent the same thing happening again.

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Health Safety & Pollution Control, Planning & Licensing Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@hlueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 March 2015 15:22

To: Ned Johnson

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

20,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

Dear Ned Johnson

Thank you for the reply to the freedom of information act I put in.

I do however believe there is a lot of data that has been left out, so maybe I need to clarify the data that is being requested.

·         To information is regarding Disused or abandoned buildings or any industrial estates buildings or open-air land. For the dates all of 2013 to date.

·         This would include all data if there were occupiers/squatters in said building/parties/raves. This would include the dates these buildings/Disused or abandoned buildings/ or any industrial estates was first known to the Environment & Street Scene Department.

·         All information would cover all wards boundaries for Enfield Council.

Information is also needed for some areas within the Enfield Council borough.

The information would cover if police were in attendance, if calls were made to the Environment & Street Scene Department by police, and any police officer information that the Environment & Street Scene Department holds about any police officer.

This information would also include any calls that were made from the Environment & Street Scene Department to police in relation to any Disused or abandoned buildings or any industrial estates buildings or open air land that the Environment & Street Scene Department felt could have a problem with.

There is also an issue with the information in your email

· 18/5/14: 3 calls after event

· 19/5/14: 6 calls after event

· 21/5/14: 1 call after event

· But have not given the date of the event itself, are the below layout ones was when events have taken place as it just has calls at the end of the dates could you please clarify

· 31/5/14: 2 calls

· 1/6/14: 6 calls

Also in your email it seems that there was more of a problem with crown road over some months but from how I am reading your email it seems no one ever attended from the Environment & Street Scene Department on any of the dates in your list can this also be clarified in more detail.

I know you have until the 10/03/2015 to supply the information I have asked for. But I do feel your email was very incomplete, I do hope that I have not got to wait 20 more days now as I need all the data by 10/03/2015 and I did ask for all information and I feel that has not been given.

Could you get back to me via email as to the time it will take to get all the information I have asked for within my request?

Regards

Lorraine

From: Ned Johnson

mailto: Ned.Johnson@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 05 March 2015 16:39

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

21,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

Cc: Esg Complaints

Subject: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Miss Cordell,

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your email received on February 10th, 2015 where you requested information regarding illegal raves/parties. In response to your questions:

All dates and times and addresses to any illegal rave/parties where the Noise and Nuisance Team attended:

· 8/6/14, no time recorded, Progress Way, Enfield.

Any paperwork was served to any person/persons and if need known. copies of any paperwork served:

No paperwork served.

All the calls that were made on any dates to the Noise and Nuisance Team to make them aware that an illegal rave/parties were taking place

Progress Way:

· 13/6/14: 1 call 12/6/14: 2 calls after event 9/6/14: 2 calls after event 8/6/14: 6 calls 7/6/14: 8 calls

Leeside Road:

· 15/7/13: 1 call after event

· 46 Crown Road:

· 18/5/14: 3 calls after event

· 19/5/14: 6 calls after event

· 21/5/14: 1 call after event

· 31/5/14: 2 calls

· 1/6/14: 6 calls

· 2/6/14: 4 calls after event

· 4/6/14: 1 call after event

· 6/6/14: 1 call

· 8/6/14: 3 calls

· 9/6/14: 1 call after event

· 13/6/14: 2 calls

--

22,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

Any noise abatement orders that was put on any addresses where an illegal rave/parties was taking place. This would include any noise abatement that were put in place before an illegal rave/parties took place. This would include dates and times the noise abatement, orders were served on an address and to whom and to forward copies of any such noise abatement orders within this request:

No noise abatement notices served.

Personal names who attended the address and times and dates of any person attending from the Noise and Nuisance Team and any police officer names or IDs that attended with the Noise and Nuisance Team:

Progress way: 2 Enforcement Officers attended form the Out of Hours Noise Team, 8/6/14, no times noted.

Any reports made up for any of the addresses in full for the dates listed above for any illegal rave/parties.

No reports made.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to:

Theresa Dodd

Correspondence & Complaints Manager

Environment & Street Scene Department

PO Box 52

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield EN1 3XE

020 8379 3540

Email - theresa.dodd@enfield.gov.uk

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Pollution

Pollution Control, Planning & Licensing Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation

23,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016.pdf

Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

24,

ENFIELD

Connected Create an account today for quick and easy access to council services.

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

25,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell

To: Ned Johnson"

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Date:   11 January 2016   15:25:00

Dear Ned Johnson,

Thank you for the reply email and the update.

I have other information due to investigations I have done and due to speaking to people within the area. That it was not just the one date in April 2014 there were events at Crown Road.

The dates I have been given that events took place at Crown Road are:

12th / 13th April 2014

19th / 20th April 2014 (confirmed)

26th / 27th April 2014

03rd / 04th May 2014

17th / 18th May 2014 (confirmed)

31st / 01st May and June 2014 (confirmed)

06th 07th 08th June 2014 (confirmed)

13th / 14th June 2014 (confirmed)

Some of these dates have already been given that events took place within the FOI I requested.

Also you say you did not serve a Noise Abatement Notice on the squatters / occupiers, as it would have had no benefit to do so as you would not have been able to take anyone to court, and I do understand that the council was working with the owners of the building to deal with this problem.

But I am sure if you had served a Noise Abatement Notice to the squatters / occupiers / Building, it would have covered not just to take someone to court. It would have covered the council to have seized sound equipment and due to this stopped the events far sooner with a Noise Abatement Notice in place on the building then not having served one at all.

I believe that is the reason a Noise Abatement Notice can be served on occupiers / Buildings under Environmental Protection Act 1990 section 80

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ned Johnson [mailto: Ned.Johnson@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 11 January 2016 12:17

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Andy Higham; Robert Oles; Theresa Dodd

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Ms. Cordell,

Thank you for your email; I have rechecked our database and indeed, I did make a mistake and missed one complaint which was received by our Residential Noise Team on 20/04/14, it was the only complaint received by the Council prior to the ones listed in the FOI response sent to

26,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

you. The officer who received the complaint tried to contact the customer who made it on several occasions but was unable to do so and as such we were unable to verify the complaint. The next complaint received was then on 18/05/14 as stated in my original response.

We did not receive any further complaints after June 2014 in regard to the Man Building and therefore as far as we were aware the matter had been resolved.

A Noise Abatement Notice was not served on the squatters as we would not have been able to verify any names given, if indeed they would have given a name and it would have been unenforceable as it is extremely unlikely that we would have been able to take anybody to court who was squatting. The line taken was to pursue the owners of the building who then needed to evict the squatters and secure the premises, which they did; serving a Noise Abatement Notice would have had no effect on the owners as they were already taking the necessary steps to stop the problem.

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Pollution Control & Planning Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 05 January 2016 16:59

To: Ned Johnson

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear Ned Johnson

I am writing this email due to a FOI request I put in some time ago.

It has come to my attention that some of the information you have given me in incorrect and was wondering if you could comment on this.

In my FOI request you said that Crown Road information started on the 18/5/2014, but I have found newspaper information that this started much earlier than this.

I have a newspaper that is dated the 25/04/2014 which was printed after a 15-hour rave took place there on the 19/04/2014, which is much earlier than the 18/05/2014 as the date you gave me that this started.

27,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/11172103.Residents_fume_over_15 hour rave /

And one that was in printed on 9 September 2014 a paper saying The MAN building, in Crown Road, on the junction with Southbury Road, Enfield, has also been used for illegal raves and parties in the last few months which these words would say the events was going on much later than June 2014 that you have given in the FOI request.

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/11459487.Listed building wrecked by graffiti/

I still also cannot understand why an abatement notice order was not put in place due to the number of events that took place there. I do understand on the days of the events it could be classed as unsafe due to the amount of people, but this site was being squatted and there would have been far less people there during the weeks when these events were not going on. And cannot understand why an abatement notice order was not put in place during the time when these events were not going on.

On the 6th 07th and 08th June 2014 the council were aware an event was ongoing at Crown Road.

On the 6th 07th and 08th June 2014 the council were aware an event was ongoing at Progress way.

On the 08th June the council attended with police to Progress Way to serve paperwork this was not served to any persons within the site of Progress Way.

But if you were with police, which your team was why was paperwork not tried to be served at Crown Road site also as your team was aware off an event also going on there.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ned Johnson [mailto: Ned.Johnson@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 09 March 2015 12:21

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Esg Complaints

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Ms. Cordell,

In terms of the number of events there was one further rave that took place on 25th March 2013 at Progress Way, other than this occurrence I have provided you with the dates and locations of all the illegal raves/parties that are recorded on our database as well as all other

data we hold that you requested. The rave on March 25th, 2013 was attended by the Out of Hours Noise Team, assistance was requested from the police, but they were unable to help on that occasion.

The events at Crown Road were over a period of several weeks not months, during which time we were in regular contact with the new site owners who worked to get the site secured and the power turned off. The Out of Hours Noise Team undertook observations of the noise during

28,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

the event on May 31st/June 1st but did not visit the party as the team decided that it was unsafe to do so due to the nature and location of the event and provided information to the daytime officer who ensured the owners undertook the necessary works.

The complaints received on Sunday June 8th were all received after the council's Out of Hours Service had finished at 03:00 and therefore no response was possible.

The Out of Hours Team respond to all complaints received but will only visit a premises where it is safe for them to do so and in the case of illegal raves/parties quite often there are officer safety issues which prevent visits at night time during the event, unless police support can be gained. Following illegal raves/parties we do make every effort to get a building secured as soon as possible to prevent the same thing happening again.

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Health Safety & Pollution Control, Planning & Licensing Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@hlueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 March 2015 15:22

To: Ned Johnson

Subject: RE: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear Ned Johnson

Thank you for the reply to the freedom of information act I put in.

I do however believe there is a lot of data that has been left out, so maybe I need to clarify the data that is being requested.

To information is regarding Disused or abandoned buildings or any industrial estates buildings or open-air land. For the dates all of 2013 to date.

This would include all data if there were occupiers/squatters in said building/parties/raves. This would include the dates these buildings/Disused or abandoned buildings/ or any industrial estates was first known to the Environment & Street Scene Department.

All information would cover all wards boundaries for Enfield Council.

29,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

Information is also needed for some areas within the Enfield Council borough.

The information would cover if police were in attendance, if calls were made to the Environment & Street Scene Department by police, and any police officer information that the Environment & Street Scene Department holds about any police officer.

This information would also include any calls that were made from the Environment & Street Scene Department to police in relation to any Disused or abandoned buildings or any industrial estates buildings or open air land that the Environment & Street Scene Department felt could have a problem with.

There is also an issue with the information in your email

· 18/5/14: 3 calls after event

· 19/5/14: 6 calls after event

· 21/5/14: 1 call after event

· But have not given the date of the event itself, are the below layout ones was when events have taken place as it just has calls at the end of the dates could you please clarify

· 31/5/14: 2 calls

· 1/6/14: 6 calls

Also in your email it seems that there was more of a problem with crown road over some months but from how I am reading your email it seems no one ever attended from the Environment & Street Scene Department on any of the dates in your list can this also be clarified in more detail.

I know you have until the 10/03/2015 to supply the information I have asked for. But I do feel your email was very incomplete, I do hope that I have not got to wait 20 more days now as I need all the data by 10/03/2015 and I did ask for all information and I feel that has not been given.

Could you get back to me via email as to the time it will take to get all the information I have asked for within my request?

Regards

Lorraine

From: Ned Johnson

mailto: Ned.Johnson@enfield.Gov.uk

Sent: 05 March 2015 16:39

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Esg Complaints

Subject: RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Miss Cordell,

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your email received on February 10th, 2015 where you requested information regarding illegal raves/parties. In response to your questions:

All dates and times and addresses to any illegal rave/parties where the Noise and Nuisance

30,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

Team attended:

8/6/14, no time recorded, Progress Way, Enfield.

Any paperwork was served to any person/persons and if need known. copies of any paperwork served:

No paperwork served.

All the calls that were made on any dates to the Noise and Nuisance Team to make them aware that an illegal rave/parties were taking place

Progress Way:

13/6/14: 1 call 12/6/14: 2 calls after event 9/6/14: 2 calls after event 8/6/14: 6 calls 7/6/14: 8 calls

Leeside Road:

15/7/13: 1 call after event

46 Crown Road:

18/5/14: 3 calls after event

19/5/14: 6 calls after event

21/5/14: 1 call after event

31/5/14: 2 calls

1/6/14: 6 calls

2/6/14: 4 calls after event

4/6/14: 1 call after event

6/6/14: 1 call

8/6/14: 3 calls

9/6/14: 1 call after event

13/6/14: 2 calls

Any noise abatement orders that was put on any addresses where an illegal rave/parties was taking place. This would include any noise abatement that were put in place before an illegal rave/parties took place. This would include dates and times the noise abatement, orders were served on an address and to whom and to forward copies of any such noise abatement orders within this request:

No noise abatement notices served.

Personal names who attended the address and times and dates of any person attending from the Noise and Nuisance Team and any police officer names or IDs that attended with the Noise and Nuisance Team:

Progress way: 2 Enforcement Officers attended form the Out of Hours Noise Team, 8/6/14, no

31,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

times noted.

Any reports made up for any of the addresses in full for the dates listed above for any illegal rave/parties.

No reports made.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to:

Theresa Dodd

Correspondence & Complaints Manager

Environment & Street Scene Department

PO Box 52

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield EN1 3XE

020 8379 3540

Email - theresa.dodd@enfield.gov.uk

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Ned Johnson

Principal Officer Pollution

Pollution Control, Planning & Licensing Enforcement Planning, Highways & Transportation Regeneration & Environment Department Enfield Council

www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

32,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

Be part of

Make one change

move more &at well think less stop smoking

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

ENFIELD

Connected

Create an account today for quick and easy access to council services.

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy,

33,

RE FOI 11845 [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] -11-01-2016-01.pdf

distribute or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 2

Too Smooth -1-2237 01-02-2017 04-16 

01/02/2016   20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 34

 

4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 2

Too Smooth -1-2237 01-02-2017 04-16 

01/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 34

--

34

From: Rewired

re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 03:48:22 PM

To: Josephine Ward

josie@michaelcarroUandco.com

Subject: Re: Appellant response to respondent's

updated I made a typo error at the bottom of the first copy I sent.

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not think that I can stand a fair trial with the time stamps being the way that they are under article 6 of my human rights and I have drafted a letter in regards to this which I would like to go over with yourself. I have made a bundle of all the relevant documentation oi think is relevant towards my case but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 15:41, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not. I have made a bundle of but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 14:29, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -FW Simon argument Papers 04-02-2016 21-08

04/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 35,36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51,52,53,54

55,56,57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69,70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82,83,84

85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176,177,178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195

 

5.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -FW Simon argument Papers 04-02-2016 21-08

04/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 35,36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51,52,53,54

55,56,57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69,70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82,83,84

85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176,177,178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195

--

35,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 04/02/2016 09:08:23 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument Papers

Attachments: Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument.pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (2).pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

here just got from Josey well Patrick

From: Patrick Mc Elligott

mailto: patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com

Sent: 04 February 2016 17:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com; clarence@michaelcarrollandco.com

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument Papers

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find the papers attached. Could you please provide us with your son's email address as well too.

Regards.

36,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 820

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))                                                    

Lord Hope of Craighead

This view as to the meaning of the phrase “criminal charge” is                           

reinforced by the third criterion, which is the nature and degree of severity of the penalty. The formulation of this criterion in the early case of Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) r EHRR 647, 678-679, para 82 is instructive:

 

“['Supervision by the court] would generally prove to be illusory if it did not also take into consideration the degree of severity of the penalty that the person concerned risks incurring. In a society subscribing to the B rule of law, there belong to the ‘criminal’ sphere deprivations of liberty liable to be imposed as a punishment, except those which by their nature, duration or manner of execution cannot be appreciably detrimental. The seriousness of what is at stake, the traditions of the contracting states and the importance attached by the Convention to respect for the physical liberty of the person all require that this should be so.”

 

The underlying idea is that proceedings do not lie within the criminal sphere for the purposes of article 6 unless they are capable of resulting in the imposition of a penalty by way of punishment. In B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340, 353, para 28 Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ said that he was aware of no case in which the European Court has held a proceeding to be criminal even though an adverse outcome for the defendant cannot result in any penalty. I agree. Although there are other aspects of the procedure which suggest that in proceedings for the imposition of an anti-social behaviour order the person Is not “charged with a criminal offence”, the critical question as 1 see it is whether the making of such an order amounts to the imposition of a penalty. But it is first necessary to consider whether either of the first two criteria are satisfied.

 

The first criterion: classification in domestic law

A finding that the proceedings were classified as criminal in domestic law is likely to be conclusive. But a finding that they are civil is of relative weight and serves only as a starting point: Benham v United Kingdom 22 EHRR 293, 323, para 56. In Lauko v Slovakia (1998) 33 EHRR 994, 1010-1011, para 57 the court observed that the criteria are alternative and ^ not cumulative: see also Garyfallou AEBE v Greece (1997) EHRR 344. As it was put in Ozturk v Germany 6 EHRR 409, 424, para 54, one criterion cannot be applied so as to divest an offence of a criminal character if that has been established under another criterion. But it was recognised in Lauko v Slovakia, at p ion, para 57, that a cumulative approach may be adopted if the separate analysis of each of them does not lead to a clear conclusion as to the existence of a “criminal charge”. For the reasons already given, I consider that the position under domestic law is that the proceedings are classified as civil proceedings and not criminal. In their helpful written submissions which were developed before us in oral argument Liberty, to whom leave was given to intervene in these appeals, have contended that the essential question is how domestic law classifies the conduct which is at issue, not the proceedings themselves, d hey submit that the conduct which requires to be demonstrated falls within the scope of the criminal law, and that for this reason the proceedings should be treated as criminal proceedings in domestic law for the purposes of the Convention. They point out that the definition of “anti-social behaviour” in section 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 is modelled on

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

37,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 821

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))

Lord Hope of Craighead

A “harassment” in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, which is a criminal offence under section z of that Act, and that such conduct may also be treated as criminal under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and a variety of other statutory provisions dealing with offences such as assault, theft and burglary. They also invoke section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 in support of the proposition that an application made under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 3 998 should be construed in domestic law as 6 criminal proceedings in the absence of an express provision in the legislation to the contrary.

· 1 would reject these arguments. The question is whether, as it was put in Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) 1 EHRR 647, 678, para 81, the provision defining the offence belongs to criminal law, disciplinary law or both concurrently. It cannot be answered without examining the nature and purpose of the proceedings in which the conduct is alleged. The analogies to which Liberty refer are all examples of situations in which the conduct described is defined in the statute for the purpose of enabling a charge to be brought with a view to the imposition of a penalty. In Engel v The Netherlands (No 1), at p 677, para 79 the court described the aim of repressing the applicants’ conduct through penalties as an objective which was analogous to the “general goal of the criminal law”. I hat is not the 0 purpose for which proceedings for the imposition of an anti-social behaviour order are brought. Their purpose is to protect the public from further anti­social acts by the defendant. As for the argument regarding section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998, it is, as Liberty themselves recognise, circular. According to the jurisprudence of the Strasbourg Court, the first criterion is how the proceedings are classified according to the legal system of the Ł respondent state: Engel v The Netherlands (No 1), at p 678, para 8z. Section z of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides that a court or tribunal determining a question which has arisen in connection with a Convention right must take the Strasbourg jurisprudence into account. Strasbourg jurisprudence tells us that the question of classification is a matter for our own domestic system. Under our system, for the reasons already given, the proceedings arc civil proceedings and not criminal.

The second criterion: the nature of the offence

· This question looks to the nature of the offence charged. But there is a preliminary question that has to be examined. Do proceedings for the imposition of an anti-social behaviour order involve the bringing of a charge at all? For the reasons already given, 1 think that the answer to this question in domestic law is clear. They do not involve the bringing of a charge because the purpose of the procedure is to impose a prohibition, not a penalty. But the domestic answer to this question does not resolve the issue, because for tire purposes of the Convention it is necessary to look at the substance of what is involved and not the form. Moreover, the question cannot be answered according to what Parliament is thought to have intended. In this context it is the effect of what Parliament has done that has H to be examined. The court looks behind the appearances and investigates the realities of the procedure: Deweer v Belgium (1980) z EHRR. 439, 438, para 44.

· The grounds for making the application involve making an allegation against the defendant that he has acted in a manner which may

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

38,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 822

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL)

Lord Hope of Craighead

we’ll have involved criminal conduct. A formal accusation is made, and the court to which it is made has to reach a decision as to whether or not the allegation has been made out. The situation can be distinguished from that where a sex offender order is sought under section 2 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as it is a precondition for the making of the application that the defendant is already a sex offender as defined in section 3(1) of the Act. It can also be distinguished from that where a confiscation order is sought under the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986, as it is a precondition for the making of an application for such an order that the person against whom the order is sought has been convicted of a drug trafficking offence as defined in the Act. A previous conviction for the acts which are said to have amounted to anti-social behaviour is not required for the purposes of section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. For the defendants it was contended that these features of the proceedings showed that they were  directed at the world at large, rather than a pre-defined or limited class of persons, and that offences which were of this character were apt to be regarded as involving a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6.

· I do not think that the fact that no previous criminal conviction is required before an application for an and-social behaviour order can be made under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act .1998 has the significance which the defendants seek to attach to it. A distinction is drawn in the jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court between charges which are addressed to a pre-defined or limited class of persons, such as those who are serving in the armed forces or are serving sentences of imprisonment as in Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) 1 EHRR 647 and McEeeley v United Kingdom (1980) 3 EHRR 161 or those who take part in proceedings before

a court as in Ravnsborg v Sweden 18 EHRR 38, on the one hand and charges which are directed to the world at large on the other, as in Ben denoun u France (1994) 18 EHRR 54 which was concerned with a provision in the tax code applicable to all citizens. The distinction which is drawn here is between proceedings which are disciplinary in character and those which are criminal. Where a limited group of persons possessing a special status is involved the conclusion is more readily drawn that the proceedings are ^ disciplinary. But that is not a distinction which falls to be drawn in this case.

The question is whether the person against whom an anti-behaviour order is being sought is “charged” with an offence at all. There are several indications that this is not so.

· The conduct which requires to be demonstrated is not necessarily conduct which would be capable of being treated as criminal. It has to be shown that the defendant has acted in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress. But in order to prove that an offence under section 1of the Public Order Act 1986 was committed by him it would be necessary to go further and prove that he intended to cause these consequences. In order to prove that an offence was committed under section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 it would be necessary

to prove that he was engaged in a course of conduct which in fact amounted to harassment and that he knew or ought to have known that his conduct amounted to harassment.

· Furthermore, the decision whether or not to make the order does not depend solely on proof of the defendant’s conduct. The application may only be made if it appears to the local council or the chief constable that an

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

39,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:  823      

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (E))

Lord Hope of Craighead

An order is necessary to protect persons in the area, and consultation between them is required before the application is made. Thus, the proceedings are identified from the outset as preventive in character rather than punitive or disciplinary. This is a strong indication that they are not proceedings for the determination of a criminal charge against the defendant. In Lattko v Slovakia 33 EHRR 9514, ion, para 58 the court said that the fine imposed in that case was intended as a punishment to deter re-offending and that it had 6 “a punitive character, which is the customary distinguishing feature of criminal penalties”. In Guzzardi v Italy (3980) 3 EHRR 333, 369-37°, para o the court said that proceedings under which the applicant, as a suspected Mafioso, had been placed under special supervision with an obligation of compulsory residence within a restricted area did not involve the determination of a criminal charge against him within the meaning of C article. see also Raimondo v Italy 18 EHRR 137. In M v Italy (199r) 70 DR 59, the commission held that article 6(2) did not apply to confiscation of property belonging to a person suspected of being a member of a mafia- type organisation. In neither of these cases was the imposition of the order regarded as being punitive. In Gough v Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2002] QB 459 the Divisional Court held that the imposition of a banning order under the Football (Spectators) Act 1989 as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000, which was designed to combat what Laws I.J described as “the shame and menace of football hooliganism”, was not in conflict with article 6. This decision has been affirmed by the Court of Appeal [2002] QB 1 2t 3.

 

· In contrast to those decisions, which support the proposition that a distinction is drawn between proceedings for the imposition of preventive measures and those for the imposition of a penalty or punishment, there is Steel v United Kingdom 28 FJIRR 603, In that case the court held that article 6(3) applied to proceedings in which the applicants, who had been arrested and charged with breach of the peace, were brought before a magistrate and bound over to keep the peace. As in the case of applications for an anti-social behaviour order, the procedure is initiated under section 51 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 by a complaint, and a bind over order ^ does not constitute a criminal conviction. It was contended foi the defendants that that decision is directly in point in this case and indistinguishable, and that contention was strongly supported by Liberty.

 

· But I would hold that it is distinguishable, for the reasons which were given by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR. in the Court of Appeal in the McCann case [2001] rWLRro84, 1100H—1 to b. As he pointed out, in contrast to proceedings for breach of the peace, there is no power of arrest for the purpose of proceedings under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The fact that a warrant may be issued for the defendant’s arrest if he fails to attend the hearing or an adjourned hearing does not show that they are criminal proceedings. Rather it shows that he has failed to respond to a summons by the court. In itself this is far from conclusive, as there are numerous offences in English law which are non-arrestable. But it has to be ^ taken together with the other factors. Proof of anti-social behaviour is not the only criterion for the making of the order, nor is proof that the defendant is likely to cause further anti-social acts in the future. 'the orders must be shown to be necessary for the purpose of protecting people against further such behaviour by him. This is not a distinction of form rather than

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

40,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 824

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))

Lord Hope of Craighead

substance at all. The last criterion is of fundamental importance to the A decision as to the prohibitions that are required. And in contrast to proceedings for breach of the peace, which can lead to the immediate imposition of a sentence of imprisonment under section 11.5(3) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 for up to six months if the defendant fails to comply with the order because he does not agree to enter into a recognisance to keep the peace or to be of good behaviour, proceedings under section 1 of g the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 cannot in themselves result in the immediate imposition of a penalty.

The third criterion: is an antisocial behaviour order a penalty

· This question looks to the nature of the penalty. But here again there is a preliminary question that has to be examined. Is an anti-social behaviour order a penalty at all? The essential characteristics of an anti­social behaviour order are that the defendant is prohibited from doing something. The purpose of the prohibition is to protect people in the area to which the order relates. Section 1(6) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides that the prohibitions that may be imposed are those necessary for the purposes of protecting persons from further anti-social conduct that is, from conduct which will cause, or is likely to cause, them harassment, alarm D or distress. It is true that no limits are set as to the prohibitions that may he imposed, so long as they are found to be necessary. The defendants say that prohibitions which banish the defendant from an area of the city where he lives, or which expose him to harsher penalties than he would normally face if he commits an offence, have all the characteristics of a penalty for the anti­social acts which he is found to have committed.

· An anti-social behaviour order may well restrict the freedom of the defendant to do what he wants and to go where he pleases. But these restrictions are imposed for preventive reasons, not as punishment. 1 he tests that has to be applied under section 1(6) is confined to what is necessary foi the purpose of protecting persons from further anti-social acts by the defendant. The court is not being required, nor indeed is it permitted, to consider what an appropriate sanction would be for his past conduct.  Moreover, while the court may restrict the defendant’s liberty where this is shown to be necessary to protect persons in the area from further anti-social acts by him, it may not deprive him of it nor may it impose a fine on him.

Conclusion on classification

· For these reasons I do not think that any of the criteria for a finding c that proceedings under section r of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 have the character of criminal proceedings for the purposes of article 6 are satisfied. The consequence of so holding is of fundamental importance to the future of this legislation. Cases such as Unterpertinger v Austria (1986) 13 FURR .175, Kostovski v The Netherlands (1989) 1.1 F.HRR 434 and Saidi v France (1993) 17 EHRR 2.51 illustrate the reluctance of the Staatsburg court to accept that the use of hearsay evidence is compatible with a defendant’s right under article 6(3)(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him. But I would hold that article 6(3) does not apply to these proceedings and that the rules of evidence that are to be applied are the civil evidence rules. This means that hearsay evidence under the Civil

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

41,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 825

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hope of Craighead

A Evidence Act 1995, the use of which will be necessary in many cases if the magistrates are to be properly informed about the scale and nature of the anti-social behaviour and the prohibitions that are needed for the protection of the public, is admissible.

Are the proceedings civil proceedings?

Counsel for the respondents and the Secretary of State were agreed that, if your Lordships were to hold that the specific guarantees in article 6(2.) and article 6(3) did not apply to these proceedings, they were nevertheless subject to the provisions of article 6(1). The question of classification is critical in this case, so it is important that the basis for these concessions should be clearly understood. They could only be accepted as well-founded if it was clear that the proceedings involved the determination of the defendant’s civil rights and obligations.

· At first sight an order which prohibits a person from behaving in an anti-social manner has nothing to do with his civil rights and obligations. He has no right in domestic private law to use or engage in abusive, insulting, offensive, threatening language or behaviour or to threaten or engage in violence or damage against any person or property, which are among the acts which the defendants have been prohibited from doing in the McCann case. But, as Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said in In re S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan) [2002] AC 291, 32,0, para 71., by virtue of the Human Rights Act 1998 the right to respect for private and family life which is guaranteed by article 8 of the Convention is now part of a person’s civil rights in domestic law for the purposes of article 6(1}. In my opinion the same can be said of the rights to freedom of expression and of assembly and association which are guaranteed by articles 10 and 1 r.

· Section 1(6) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 sets no limits to the prohibitions that may be imposed, except that they must be necessary for the protection of people in the local government area against further anti-social acts by the defendant. Among the range of orders that might reasonably be thought to be necessary are orders which may interfere with the defendant’s private life, his freedom to express himself either by words or conduct and his freedom to associate with other people. Although the jurisprudence of the Strasbourg court appears to me as yet to be unclear on this point, 1 would hold that the fact that prohibitions made under section I(d) of that Act may have this effect is sufficient to attract the right to a fair trial which is guaranteed by article 6(1). This means that the court must act with scrupulous fairness at all stages in the proceedings. When it is making its assessment of the facts and circumstances that have been put before it in evidence and of the prohibitions, if any, that are to be imposed, it must ensure that the defendant does not suffer any injustice.

Standard of proof

· As Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR observed in the Court of Appeal in the McCann case [2001I t WLR 1.084, riot, para 65, anti-social behaviour orders have serious consequences. It was with this point in mind that', at p 1101, para 67, he commended the course which, the Recorder of Manchester followed in the Crown Court when he said that, without- intending to lay down any form of precedent, the court had decided to apply

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

42,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:826

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hope of Craighead

the standard of being satisfied so that they were sure that the statutory conditions were fulfilled before they would consider the making of an order in the case of each defendant. I too would endorse this approach, for the following reasons.

· Mr Crow for the Secretary of State said that his preferred position was that the standard to be applied in these proceedings should be the civil standard. His submission, as it was put in his written case, was that g although the civil standard was a single, inflexible test, the inherent probability or improbability of an event was a matter to be taken into account when the evidence was being assessed. He maintained that this view was consistent with the position for which lie contended, that these were civil proceedings which should be decided according to the civil evidence rules. But it is not an invariable rule that the lower standard of proof must be applied in civil proceedings. I think that there are good reasons, in the interests of fairness, for applying the higher standard when allegations are made of criminal or quasi-criminal conduct which, if proved, would have serious consequences for the person against whom they are made.

· This, as I have already mentioned, was the view which the Court of Session took in Constanda v M 1997 SC 217 when it decided that proof to the criminal standard was required of allegations that a child had engaged in p criminal conduct although the ground of referral to a children’s hearing was not that he had committed an offence hut that he was exposed to moral danger. There is now a substantial body of opinion that, if the case for an order such as a banning order or a sex offender order is to be made out, account should be taken of the seriousness of the matters to be proved and the implications of proving them. It has also been recognised that if this is done the civil standard of proof will for all practical purposes be E indistinguishable from the criminal standard: see B u Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340, 354, para 31, per Lord Bingham of Cornlii.il CJ; Gough v Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2002] QB 1213, 1242-1243, para 90, per Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR. As Mr Crow pointed out, the condition in section I( 1 )(b) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 that a prohibition order is necessary to protect persons in the local government area from further anti-social acts raises a question which is a matter for evaluation and assessment. But the condition in section I(I)(a) that the defendant has acted in an anti-social manner raises serious questions of fact, and the implications for him of proving that he has acted in this way are also serious. I would hold that the standard of proof that ought to be applied in these cases to allegations about the defendant’s conduct is the criminal standard.

Conclusion

· In the Clingham case I would make the same order as that proposed by Lord Steyn. In the McCann case I would dismiss the appeals.

Lord Hutton

My Lords, section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was enacted to remedy a grave social problem. In some parts of England, particularly in urban areas, there are vulnerable people who live in constant fear and distress as a result of the anti-social behaviour of others.

The anti-social behaviour can take different forms and may consist of

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

43,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 827

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL)

Lord Hutton

Insults and abuse and threats or assaults or damage to houses by stone throwing or the painting of graffiti. Those who are victims of such behaviour are often too frightened to be willing to go into the witness box in criminal proceedings to give evidence against those who make their lives a misery, because they fear that they will be harassed or intimidated for so doing.

· The remedy provided by section I of the 1998 Act is to give power to a magistrates’ court to make an order which imposes on the defendant the prohibitions which are necessary for the purpose of protecting persons in the local area from further anti-social, acts by him. Such an order will frequently prohibit the defendant from entering a defined area where he has been particularly troublesome and from using or engaging in any abusive, insulting, offensive, threatening or intimidating language or behaviour or from threatening or engaging in violence or damage against any person or property within a somewhat wider area.

· Section 1 (to) provides that if a person does anything which he is prohibited from doing by an anti-social behaviour order he shall be liable oil summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding a specified amount, or to both, or on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.

· The remedy given by section 1 has operated effectively because the courts have held that proceedings under section 1 are civil proceedings and not criminal proceedings. Therefore, it has not been necessary for those who allege that they have suffered as a result of anti-social behaviour on the part of the defendant to go into the witness box to give evidence against him, because hearsay evidence can be given of their complaints and allegations pursuant to section 1 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 which provides that in civil proceedings evidence shall not be excluded on the ground that it is hearsay.

· It is rulings that applications for anti-social behaviour orders are civil proceedings which are challenged by the defendants in these appeals. They submit that both under domestic law and under the jurisprudence of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) the proceedings against them under section 1 of the 1998 Act are criminal proceedings and constitute criminal charges against them so that hearsay evidence is not admissible. They contend in their submissions in reliance on the Convention that the use of hearsay evidence against them violates their human rights.

The facts of the present cases and the proceedings before the magistrates and on appeal have been fully set out in the speeches of my noble and learned friends Lord Steyn and Lord Hope of Craighead. I gratefully adopt their accounts and I therefore turn to consider the submissions advanced on behalf of the defendants.

Domestic law

Counsel for the defendants submitted that an application for an anti­social behaviour order is a criminal proceeding because the complaint against the defendant alleges anti-social behaviour which, in effect, is an allegation of the commission of criminal offences. 1 bus the complaint against the defendant Clingham alleged:

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

44,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 828

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)) Lord Hutton

It appears to the local authority, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to you, namely—(a) chat you have acted between 9 December 1999 and 15 April 2.000 on or in the vicinity of the Wornington Green Estate, London W10 in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as yourself, namely by: assaulting residents, threatening to assault children of residents, verbally abusing residents and police officers, threatening and intimidating shopkeepers, engaging in car related crime, throwing objects at persons and property and entering property as a trespasser; and (b) that an anti-social behaviour order is necessary to protect persons in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea in which the harassment, alarm or distress was caused, or was likely to be caused from further anti-social acts by you .

· Counsel submitted that the great majority of this conduct constituted the commission of separate criminal offences. They also relied on the dose similarity between the wording of section I(I)(a) of the 1998 Act and the wording of sections 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. Section 4A, as inserted by section 154 of the Criminal justice and Public- Order Act 1994, provides:

“(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he—(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.”

Section 5 provides:

“(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be p caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.”

Section 1. (1) of the 1998 Act provides:

“An application for an order under this section may be made by a relevant authority if it appears to the authority that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to any person aged ten or over, namely—(a) that the person has acted, since the commencement date, in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself. .

· In reliance on authorities, the majority of which were considering the meaning of the term “criminal cause or matter”, counsel further submitted that an application under section r of the 1998 Act. is a criminal proceeding because it can result under section 1(10) in the imposition of a term of imprisonment. Counsel cited Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney General for Canada [1-931] AC 310, 324 where Lord Atkin stated:

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

45,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 829

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

“It appears to their Lordships to be of little value to seek to confine

crimes to a category of acts which by their very nature belong to the domain of ‘criminal jurisprudence1; for the domain of criminal jurisprudence can only be ascertained by examining what acts at any particular period are declared by the state to be crimes, and the only common nature they will be found to possess is that they are prohibited by the state and that those who commit them are punished.”

In Exp Alice Woodbail (1888) io QBD 832, 837-838, Lindley LJ stated:

“Can we say that the application in the present case is not an application in a criminal cause or matter? I think that in substance it certainly is. Its whole object is to enable the person in custody to escape being sent for trial in America upon a charge of forgery.”

In Amand v Home Secretary [1943] AC 147,156 Viscount Simon LC stated:

“If the matter is one the direct outcome of which may be trial of the applicant and his possible punishment for an alleged offence by a court claiming jurisdiction to do so, the matter is criminal.”

Lord "Wright stated, at p 162:

“if the cause or matter is one which, if carried to its conclusion, might

result in the conviction of the person charged and in a sentence of some punishment, such as imprisonment or fine, it is a ‘criminal cause or matter’.” I am unable to accept these submissions. The application for an anti-social behaviour order does not charge the defendant with having committed a crime. The purpose of the application is to obtain an order prohibiting the defendant from doing anti-social acts in the future and its object is not the obtaining of a conviction against him resulting in the imposition of a punishment. I am in respectful agreement with the statement of Lord Bingham of Cornhili CJ in Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates' Court [2000] 1 WLR 2020, 2025 that:

“criminal proceedings involve a formal accusation made on behalf of the state or by a private prosecutor that a defendant has committed a breach of the criminal law, and the state or the private prosecutor has instituted proceedings which may culminate in the conviction and condemnation of the defendant.” The passages in the judgments relied on by the defendants do not, in my opinion, assist them because they emphasise that the imposition of a conviction may be a consequence of the proceedings in which the application is brought. Thus in the Proprietary Articles Trade Association case j t 9 31 ] AC 310, 324 Lord Atkin stated that “those who commit them are punished”; in Ex p Alice Woodball 20 QBD 832, 838 Lindley LJ stated: “[the] whole object [of the application] is to enable the person in custody to escape being sent for trial in America upon a charge of forgery”; in Amand s case 11:9431 AC 147 Viscount Simon LC stated, at p t 56, that the matter is criminal if it is one “the direct outcome of which may be trial of the applicant and his possible punishment”; and Lord Wright stated, at p 162, that a matter is a criminal one which, “if carried to its conclusion, might result in

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

46,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 830

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)      

Lord Hutton

conviction and punishment. But an application for an anti-social behaviour order, if carried to its conclusion, will not result in conviction and punishment, it will result in the making of an order which cannot be regarded as a punishment. A conviction and punishment will only be imposed if the defendant, by his own choice, subsequently breaches the order and separate and distinct proceedings are brought against him.

· I further consider that a complaint brought against a defendant under section 1(3} of the 1998 Act does not constitute an allegation of a crime. The fact that the background to the complaint will very often be the alleged commission of a number of criminal offences does not mean that the complaint constitutes a charge of a criminal offence: see S v Miller 2001 SC 977, 989-990, para 23 cited subsequently in paragraph 1.02 of this opinion.

· There are two further considerations which support the conclusion C that an application for an anti-social behaviour order is a civil proceeding and not a criminal proceeding. First, section 1 is contained in Part I of the Act under the heading “Prevention of crime and disorder” whereas Part II under the heading “Criminal law” creates a number of offences and provides for their punishment. Secondly, section 1(3) provides that an application for an anti-social behaviour order shall be made by complaint to a magistrates’ court, and a complaint is the appropriate procedure for commencing civil proceedings in a magistrates’ court: see section 51 of the Magistrates ‘Courts Act 1980.

· Accordingly, I conclude that under domestic law an application for an anti-social behaviour order is not a criminal proceeding but is a civil proceeding.

The European Convention on Human Rights

· Article 6(1) provides: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing. Article 6(3) provides: “Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights . . . (d) to examine . . . witnesses against him . . .” The defendants submitted that under the jurisprudence of the Convention an application for an anti-social behaviour order is a criminal charge, and accordingly the defendants will not have a fair hearing under article 6 if the evidence against them of anti-social behaviour is hearsay evidence and they do not have the opportunity to cross-examine in court the persons who have made allegations of such behaviour against them. In these submissions the defendants were supported by the submissions advanced by counsel on behalf of Liberty which was given leave to intervene in these appeals.

room in deciding whether there is a criminal charge for the purposes of article 6 the European Court of Human Rights stated in Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) r EHRR 647, 678, para 82. that it has regard to three criteria, which are the classification of the proceedings in domestic law, the nature of the offence, and the severity of the penalty which may be imposed. Whilst I am satisfied that the application for an anti-social behaviour order is a civil proceeding in domestic law the European Court has stated that the classification of the proceedings in domestic law is of limited value and that the other two criteria are considerations of greater weight: see Oztiirk v Germany 6 EHRR 409, 422, para 52.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

47,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 831

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

rot in relation to the second and third criteria the European Court stated in Qztiirk, at pp 423-414, para 53:

“according to the ordinary meaning of the terms, there generally come within the ambit of the criminal law offences that make their perpetrator liable to penalties intended, inter alia, to be deterrent and usually consisting of fines and of measures depriving the person of his liberty . . . the general character of the rule [of law infringed by the applicant] and the purpose of the penalty, being both deterrent and punitive, suffice to show that the offence in question was, in terms of article 6 of the Convention, criminal in nature.”

· The complaints against the defendants under section 1 of the 1998 Act do not allege the commission of criminal offences for which punishment is sought. The fact that the backgrounds to the complaints were the alleged commission of a number of criminal offences does not mean that the complaints constituted charges of criminal offences. In LS’ v Miller 2001 SC 977, the Inner House was considering section 52.(a.)(I) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 which provides that a child may be in need of compulsory measures of supervision where he “has committed an offence”, and Lord President Rodger stated, at pp 989-990, para 23:

“In my view, once the procurator fiscal has decided not to proceed with the charge against a child and so there is no longer any possibility of proceedings resulting in a penalty, any subsequent proceedings under the 1995 Act are not criminal for the purposes of article 6. Although the reporter does indeed intend to show that the child concerned committed an offence, this is not for the purpose of punishing him but in order to establish a basis for taking appropriate measures for his welfare. That being so, the child who is notified of grounds for referral setting out the offence in question is not thereby ‘charged with a criminal offence’ in terms of article 6.

· In relation to the third criterion, I consider that the making of an anti-social behaviour order does not constitute a punishment or penalty imposed on the defendant. In my opinion the magistrate who heard the complaint against the defendant Clingham was correct when in the case stated for the opinion of the High Court he stated:

“These were civil proceedings of an injunctive nature imposing no penalty on the appellant but providing such measure of restraint as the court may find necessary to protect members of the public from his misbehaviour.”

· The defendants relied on the decision of the European Commission of Human Rights (“the commission”) and of the European Court in Steel v United Kingdom 28 EHRR 603. In that case some of the applicants who had been charged with a breach of the peace were committed to prison for refusing to agree to be bound over to keep the peace. The applicants complained (inter alia) that their rights under article 5 and article 6(3)(a) had been violated. In considering the claims of the applicants both the commission and the European Court expressed the opinion that, notwithstanding that breach of the peace is not classified as a criminal offence under English law, breach of the peace must be regarded as an

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

48,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 832

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

“offence” within the meaning of article y (I)(c). The commission stated in its A opinion, at pp 61 5-616:

The commission notes that under the domestic legal system, breach of the peace is not a criminal offence and binding over is a civil procedure. However, as the European Court of Human Rights has held [Ozturk v Germany (1984) 6 EHRR 409, 4x3-424, para 53]: ‘[There generally come within the ambit of the criminal law offences that make their perpetrator liable to penalties intended, inter alia, to be deterrent and usually consisting of fines and of measures depriving the person of his liberty. The rule at issue prescribes conduct of a certain kind and makes the resultant requirement subject to a sanction that is punitive . . . the general character of the rule and the purpose of the penalty, being both deterrent and punitive, suffice to show that the offence was, in terms of article 6 of the Convention, criminal in nature.’

“67. The proceedings brought against the first applicant for breaching the peace also display these characteristics: their deterrent nature is apparent from the way in which a person can be arrested for breach of the peace and subsequently bound over ‘to keep the peace or be of good behaviour’, in which case no penalty will be enforced, and the punitive element derives from the fact that if a person does not agree to be bound over, he will be imprisoned for a period of up to six months.

“68. In these circumstances, the commission considers the charge of breach of the peace to be a criminal offence and binding over proceedings to be ‘criminal’ in nature, for the purposes of article 6 of the Convention.”

The court stated, at pp 63 5-636:

“48. Breach of the peace is not classed as a criminal offence under ^ English law. However, the court observes that the duty to keep the peace is in the nature of a public duty; the police have powers to arrest any person who has breached the peace or whom they reasonably fear will breach the peace; and the magistrates may commit to prison any person who refuses to be bound over not to breach the peace where there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that his or her conduct caused or was likely to cause a breach of the peace and that he or she would otherwise cause a breach of the peace in the future.

“49. Bearing in mind the nature of the proceedings in question and the penalty at stake, the court considers that breach of the peace must be regarded as an ‘offence’ within the meaning of article 5(r)(c).”

· The defendants’ principal submission in reliance on Steel was that both in proceedings for a breach of the peace and in proceedings for an anti­social behaviour order there was a two-stage process. First, there was a finding of a breach of the peace or a finding of anti-social behaviour and, secondly, there was imprisonment if the defendant refused to be bound over

or if the defendant chose to disobey the anti-social behaviour order. Accordingly, if binding over proceedings are criminal proceedings for the purposes of article 6 it follows that an application for an anti-social behaviour order is also a criminal proceeding within the meaning of article 6.

· I am unable to accept the defendants’ submissions for the reasons given by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR in his judgment in McCann

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

49,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 833

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

[zoo1] I WLR 1084, 1100-1101, para 62, with which I am in respectful agreement. In particular I consider that the view expressed by the European Commission and the court is primarily based on the consideration that in the proceedings for breach of the peace before the magistrates’ court the court has power in those proceedings themselves to commit the defendant to prison if he or she refuses to be bound over. Thus the commission stated, at 28 EHRR 603, 616, para 67: “the punitive clement derives from the fact that if a person does not agree to be bound over, he will be imprisoned for a period of up to six months” and the court stated, at p 636, para 45:

“Bearing in mind the nature of the proceedings in question and the penalty at stake, the court considers that breach of the peace must be regarded as an ‘offence’ within the meaning of article 5 (1) (c) The importance of the distinction between the power to commit to prison immediately on refusal to be bound over and the need for a subsequent prosecution to impose a punishment for breach of an anti-social behaviour order or a sex offender order under section 2 of the 1998 Act is referred to by Lord Bingham of Cornhill C] in B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340, 353, para 27:

“In Percy v Director of Public Prosecutions I1995I 1 WLR 1382 the defendant had a choice between agreeing to be bound over and going to prison. Her refusal to agree to be bound over had an immediate and obvious penal consequence without any intervening stage. The threat of imprisonment was no doubt intended to be coercive, but it was also punitive, in my judgment that is a crucial distinction between Percy’s case and any injunctive procedure such as in play here.”

· The fact that the defendant would be liable to imprisonment under section 1(10) of the 1:998 Act if he chooses within the period specified in the order without reasonable excuse to do anything which he is prohibited from doing by the order, does not mean that the order itself constitutes a punishment or penalty. In my opinion, the reasoning of Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ in B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary  [Loot] IWLR 340, 3 52, para 25 in respect of a sex offender order made under section 2 of the 1998 Act applies with equal force to section 1: “The rationale of section 2 was, by means of an injunctive order, to seek to avoid the contingency of any further suffering by any further victim. It would also of course be to the advantage of a defendant if he were to be saved from further offending. As in the case of a civil injunction, a breach of the court’s order may attract a sanction. But, also as in the case of a civil injunction, the order, although restraining the defendant from doing that which is prohibited, imposes no penalty or disability upon him.”

· The jurisprudence of the European Court recognises that proceedings taken to obtain an order designed to prevent future harmful conduct, but not to impose a penalty for past offences, does not constitute the bringing of a criminal charge. In Guzzardi v Italy 3 EHRR 333 the complainant, a suspected Mafioso, by an order of the Milan Regional Court was placed under special supervision for three years with an obligation to reside within an area of 2.5 square kilometres on an island. He brought

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

50,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 834

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

proceedings challenging the order and the proceedings terminated in the Court of Cassation which dismissed Guzzardi’s appeal. The European Court held that article 6 was not engaged and stated, at pp 369-370, para 108:

“In the court’s opinion, those proceedings did not involve the ‘determination ... of a criminal charge’, even when these words are construed within the meaning of the Convention. Whether the right to liberty, which was at stake (see paragraph 62 above), is to be qualified as a ‘civil right’ is a matter of controversy; in any event, the evidence does not reveal any infringement of paragraph 1 of article 6.”

no In Raimondo v Italy 18 F.HRR 237 the applicant who was suspected of association with a Mafia-type organisation, was made subject to preventive measures which included being placed under special police supervision. He complained (inter alia) that the proceedings relating to his appeal against the special supervision had taken an unreasonable time in violation of article 6(1) of the Convention. The European Court rejected his complaint and held, referring to Guzzardi, at p 264, para 43 of its judgment:

“The court shares the view taken by the Government and the commission that special supervision is not comparable to a criminal sanction because it is designed to prevent the commission of offences. It follows that proceedings concerning it did not involve ‘the determination, of a criminal charge’.”

in in the present cases the determination of the applications did not involve “the determination, of a criminal charge” and the orders were designed to prevent the commission of anti-social behaviour in the future.

A fair bearing in the determination of civil rights

1.12 A further question arises whether the admission of hearsay evidence against the defendants constitutes a violation of their rights under article 6 to have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights.

A person against whom an anti-social behaviour order is made can have no valid claim that those parts of the order which prohibit him from using or engaging in any abusive, insulting, offensive, threatening or intimidating language or behaviour or from threatening or engaging in violence or damage against any person or property relate to his civil rights. A person has no civil right under domestic law to engage in such behaviour. To the extent that the order prohibits a defendant from entering a particular area or engaging in some activity which is prima facie lawful it can be argued that part of the order affects his civil rights so that article 6(1) is engaged. Articles 8(2) and 11(2} of the Convention permit such restrictions on the rights specified in them as are necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, and Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead has discussed the relationship between civil rights under domestic law {to which article 6(1) relates) and the rights guaranteed by the Convention in paragraphs 65 to 72 of his judgment in In re S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Rian) [ 2002] 2 AC 291, 319-3 20. I wish to reserve my opinion on the question whether article 6(r) is engaged, but if there is a valid argument that the hearing of an application for an anti-social

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

51,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 835

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

behaviour order against a defendant involves a determination of his civil rights and engages article 6(I), I am of the opinion that there is no unfairness in the admission of hearsay evidence against him, because the provisions of section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 lay down considerations which ensure that hearsay evidence is fairly weighed and assessed, section 4 providing:

“(1) In estimating the weight (if any) to be given to hearsay evidence in civil proceedings the court shall have regard to any circumstances from which any inference can reasonably be drawn as to the reliability or otherwise of the evidence.

“(z) Regard may be had, in particular, to the following—(a) whether it would have been reasonable and practicable for the party by whom the evidence was adduced to have produced the maker of the original statement as a witness; (b) whether the original statement was made contemporaneously with the occurrence or existence of the matters stated; (c) whether the evidence involves multiple hearsay; (d) whether any person involved had any motive to conceal or misrepresent matters; (e) whether the original statement was an edited account, or was made in collaboration with another or for a particular purpose; (f) whether the circumstances in which the evidence is adduced as hearsay are such as to suggest an attempt to prevent proper evaluation of its weight.”

· The submissions of counsel on behalf of the defendants and on behalf of Liberty have laid stress on the human rights of the defendants. However the European Court has frequently affirmed the principle stated in Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden 5 F.HRR 35, 52, para 69, that the search for the striking of a fair balance “between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights” is inherent in the whole of the Convention. In these cases which your Lordships have held are not criminal cases under the Convention and therefore do not attract the specific protection given by article 6(3)(d) (though even in criminal cases the European Court has recognised that “principles of fair trial also require that in appropriate cases the interests of the defence are balanced against those of witnesses or victims called upon to testify”: see Doorson v The Netherlands (1996) F.HRR 330, 358, para 70), and having regard to the safeguards contained in section 4 of the 1995 Act, I consider that the striking of a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community (the community in this case being represented by weak and vulnerable people who claim that they are the victims of anti-social behaviour which violates their rights) and the requirements of the protection of the defendants’ rights requires the scales to come down in favour of the protection of the community and of permitting the use of hearsay evidence in applications for anti-social behaviour orders.

The standard of proof

· I am in agreement with the opinions of my noble and learned friends Lord Steyn and Lord Hope of Craighead on this point and for the reasons which they give I would hold that in proceedings under section 1 of the 1998 Act the standard of proof that ought to be applied to allegations about the defendants’ past behaviour is the criminal standard.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

52,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 836

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hutton

· For the reasons which I have given I would dismiss the appeals of A the McCann defendants and would declare that the House had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal of the defendant Clingham.

LORD HOBHOUSE OF WOODBOROUGH

· My Lords, for the reasons given by my noble and learned friends Lord Steyn and Lord Hope of Craighead and in agreement with the opinion

of my noble and learned friend Lord Hutton, in particular what he has said e in paragraph 113 of his opinion, I too would make the orders proposed.

LORD SCOTT OF FOSCOTE

· My Lords, I agree that for the reasons given in the opinions of my noble and learned friends, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hutton, the appeal in the McCann case should be dismissed and in the Clingham case the House should make the order proposed by Lord Steyn.

I, like my noble and learned friend Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, am in full agreement with what Lord Hutton has said in paragraph 1.13 of his opinion.

Appeals in McCann case dismissed. Declaration that no jurisdiction to hear appeal in Clingham case.

Solicitors: Peter Kandler & Co; Burton Copeland, Manchester; James Welch; Director of Legal Services, Kensington, and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council; Winckworth Sherwood; Treasury Solicitor.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

53,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 690

R. v DEAN BONESS AND OTHERS

Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Roderick Evans, and Mr Justice Pitchers): October 14, 2005

[2005] EWCA Crim 2395; [2006] I Cr. App. R. (S.) 120

Anti-social behaviour orders; Sentencing guidelines

Crime and Disorder Act 1998, S. 1 C—antisocial behaviour order on convic­tion—general considerations

H2 Observations on the considerations which are relevant to the making of orders under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s. 1C.

H3       Bones: the appellant pleaded guilty to one count of burglary of a dwelling and

one of handling stolen goods. The appellant and another person entered an unoc­cupied house and stole items to the value of Ł4,800. Following another burglary, the next day, a search of the appellant’s home resulted in the discovery of property stolen in that burglary. The appellant had six previous appearances for offences involving vehicle crime, attempted burglary, violence, handling stolen goods and using threatening behaviour. He was subject to two community orders at the time of the offences. Sentenced to three years’ detention in a young offender insti­tution, and subjected to an order under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, S.1  for a period of five years’ prohibiting him from entering any public car park within a specified area except in the course of lawful employment, entering any land or building on land which formed part of educational premises except as an enrolled pupil, wearing or having with him in any public place anything which covered or could be used to cover the face or part the face, having with him in a public place any item which could be used in the commission of a bur­glary or theft from vehicles except one door or bicycle lock key, having possession of any article or carried in public any vehicle that could be used as a weapon, remaining on any shop, commercial or hospital premises if asked to leave by staff or entering any premises from which he was barred, entering any private land adjoining any dwelling premises or commercial premises out­side the opening hours of those premises without express permission, touching or entering any unattended vehicle without the express permission of the owner, acting or inciting others to act in an anti-social manner, congregating in

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

54,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 691

R. v Dean Bones and Others

groups in a manner causing or likely to cause any person to fear for their safety or congregating in groups of more than six persons in an outdoor public place, doing anything which might cause damage, not being anywhere but his home address or at an alternative address agreed in advance between the hours of 23.30 and 07.00, being carried on any vehicle other than a vehicle in lawful use, and being in company with 12 named individuals. The order was to run for five years from the appellant’s release from custody.

H4 Bebbington and others: nine appellants pleaded guilty and one was convicted of affray or, in the case of Bebbington, threatening behaviour. The appellants with others were supporters of Chester City EC. They were drinking in a public house in Chester when a group of supporters of Wrexham EC. arrived at Chester station on their way home from a match. The appellants were warned by police not to leave the public house. The appellants did leave the public house and a confron­tation occurred between them and the Wrexham supporters. The confrontation involved the singing of loud and abusive songs and threats of violence. Sentenced (except in the case of the appellant Bebbington) to custodial sentences of between four months and two years’ imprisonment, with an order under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 S.1C prohibiting the defendant from entering any premises for the purpose of attending any football matches in England and Wales which were regulated for the purposes of the Football Spectators Act 1989, entering a specified area on any day on which Chester City were playing at home, during a period beginning three hours before kick-off and ending six hours after kick­ off, attending within a 10-mile radius of any premises outside Chester at which Chester City were playing on the day of any away match, and on any day on which England or Wales played a regulated football match in England or Wales, going within a three-mile radius of the stadium where the match was being played during the period commencing three hours before kick-off and end­ing six hours after kick off. The orders were to last between four years and eight years in the different cases.

Held: the power to make an anti-social behaviour order was introduced by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which came into force on April 1, 1999. There were various procedures which could lead to the making of an order, in particular one which involved an application by a relevant authority to a magistrates’ court. The Court was concerned with the power to make an order following a conviction for a relevant offence. The power was granted by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s. 1C, as inserted by the Police Reform Act 2002, and subsequently amended by the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, s.86. The section provided that if the court considered that the offender had acted, at any time since April 1, 1999, in an anti-social manner, and that an order under the section was necessary to pro­tect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him, the court might make an order prohibiting the offender from doing anything described in the order. It had been held in McCann v Manchester Crown Court [2003] 1 Cr. App. R. 27 that proceedings on complaint under s. 1 of the Act were civil in nature, that hearsay evidence was admissible, and that the magis­trates’ court had to be satisfied to the criminal standard that the defendant had acted in an anti-social manner. The test for whether the order was necessary

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

55,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 692

R. v Dean Bones and Others

required an exercise of judgement or evaluation. That did not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In A v Acton Youth Court (unreported, April 26, 2005) it had been said that the actual and potential consequences of an order made it particularly important that procedural fairness should be scrupulously observed. In (Shane Tony) [2004] 2 Cr. App. R.(S.) 63 (p.343) the Court had stated that the terms of the order must be precise and capable of being understood by the offender, the findings of fact giving rise to the making of the order must be recorded, the order must be explained to the offender, the exact terms of the order must be pronounced in open court and a written order must accurately reflect the order as pronounced. Because an order must be precise and capable of being understood, a court should ask itself before making an order “are the terms of this order clear so that the offender will know precisely what it is that he is pro­hibited from doing?” The Home Office had published guidance on the use of anti-social behaviour orders.

H6 An order under s. 1C took effect on the day on which it was made, but a court might provide that requirements be suspended until the offender was released from custody. The Court had observed that where custodial sentences in excess of a few months were passed and offenders were liable to be released on licence, the circumstances in which there would be a demonstrable necessity to make a suspended anti-social behaviour order to take effect on release would be limited, although there would be cases in which geographical restraints could properly supplement licence conditions. In Vittles [2005] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 8 (p.3!) a sus­pended order had been upheld.

An order had effect for the period specified, not less than two years, or until further order. In lonergan v Lewes Crown Court [2005] EWHC 457 (Admin), it was said that just because an order must run for a minimum of two years, it did not follow that each prohibition must endure for the life of the order.

H8 The essential requirement of the section was that an order could be made only if it was necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by the offender. The lest for making an order prohibiting the offender from doing something was necessity. Each separate order prohibit­ing a person from doing a specified thing must be necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him. Any order should be tailor-made for the indi­vidual offender, not designed on a word processor for use in every case. The court must ask itself when considering any specific order prohibiting the offender from doing something, “is this order necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him?” The purpose of an order was not to punish an offender. This followed from the requirement that the order must be necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him. The Court had been told that the imposition of an order was sometimes sought by the defendant’s advocate at the sentencing stage, in the hope that the court might make an order as an alternative to a custodial sentence. A court must not allow itself to be diverted in this way—it might be better to decide the appropriate sentence and then move on to consider whether an order should be made or not after the sentence had been passed, albeit at the same hearing.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

56,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 693

R. v Dean Bones and Others

H9 It followed from the requirement that the order must be necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by the offender, that the court should not impose an order which prohibited an offender from committing a specified crimi­nal offence if the sentence which could be passed following a conviction for the offence should be a sufficient deterrent. If following a conviction for the offence, the offender would be liable to imprisonment, then the order would add nothing other than to increase the sentence, if the sentence for the offence was less than five years’ imprisonment. If the offender was not deterred from compelling the offence by a sentence of imprisonment for the offence, the order was not likely further to deter and therefore was not necessary. It had been said in that the Court was not persuaded that the inclusion of matters among the prohibitions which were criminal offences was to be actively discouraged. The Court in that case took the view that there was no harm in reminding offenders that certain matters did constitute criminal conduct. The Court would only comment that the test for making an order was not whether the offender needed reminding that cer­tain matters did constitute criminal conduct, but whether the order was necessary.

H10 It had been held, rightly in the Court’s view, that an order should not be used merely to increase the sentence of imprisonment which an offender was liable to receive. In Kirby [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. f S.) 26 (p. 151) an order had been made pro­hibiting the offender from driving, attempting to drive or allowing himself to be carried in any motor vehicle which been taken without the consent of the owner, and driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle until the expiration of the appellant’s period of disqualification. The judge’s purpose in making the order was to secure the result that if the appellant committed such offence again the court would not be limited to the maximum penalty for the offences themselves but would be able to impose up to five years’ imprisonment for breaches of the anti-social behaviour order. The Court in Kirby considered that this was not a way in which the power should normally be exercised. This decision was in con­flict with Hall |2005] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 118 (p.671), but in Williams [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. f S.) 56 (p.305) the Court preferred Kirby to Hall. The Court in the pre­sent case also agreed with Kirby. Different considerations might apply were the maximum sentence was only a fine, but the court must still go through all the steps to make sure that an order was necessary.

HI I The aim of an order was to prevent anti-social behaviour. What the police or other authorities needed was to be able to lake action before the anti-social behav­iour look place. If for example a court was faced by an offender who caused criminal damage by spraying graffiti, then the order should be aimed at facilitat­ing action to be taken to prevent graffiti being sprayed by him or others. An order in clear and simple terms preventing the offender from being in possession of a can of spray paint in a public place gave the police or others responsible for pro­tecting property an opportunity to take action in advance of the actual spraying and made it clear lo the offender that he had lost the right to carry such a can for the duration of the order.

H12 In addition to the court considering that the order prohibiting the offender from doing something was necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by the offender, the terms of the order must be proportionate in the sense that they

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

57,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 694

R. v Dean Bones and Others

must be commensurate with the risk to be guarded against. This was particularly important where the order might interfere with Convention rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998. In considering the order made against the appellant Bones, the Court accepted that the appellant had consistently engaged in anti­social behaviour over a period of approximately three years. He was a persistent prolific offender. His anti-social behaviour included threatening behaviour, vehicle crime and offences of dishonesty including burglary. He was sentenced to a custodial sentence of three years’ detention and was thus subject to a period on licence subject to recall or return to custody. It was far from clear that it was necessary to make an order in respect of the appellant. Considering the detailed terms of the order, some of the terms were unnecessary or unclear. The order would be quashed. In the case of Bebbington and others it was not necessary to make an order in respect of all but two of the appellants in view of their ante­cedent history. So far as the other two appellants were concerned, all the prohibitions would be quashed except the prohibitions relating to attending foot­ball matches played at the home ground of Chester City, and orders would be added in both cases restricting the appellants concerned from entering a specified area in the vicinity of Chester railway station on any day on which Wrexham were playing a regulated football match away from their home stadium, during a period commencing three hours before the beginning of that match and ending six hours after the beginning of that match.

Cases cited:

· McCann v Manchester Crown Court [2002] UKHL 39; [2003] 1 A.C. 787; [2003] 1Cr.App. R. 27 (p.419),

· Lonergan v Lewes Crown Court [2005] EWHC 457.1 W.L.R. 2570; [2005] A.C.D. 84,

· Kirby [2005] EWC1A Crim 1228.I Cr. App. R. (S.) 26 (p. 151),

· Hall [2004] EWCA Crim 2671; [2005]! Cr. App. R. (S.) 118 (p.671),

· Williams [2006] EWCA Crim 1796; [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 56 (p.305)

References: orders under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Current Sen­tencing Practice

Commentary: [2006] Crim. L.R 160

J.G.J. Sharp for the appellant Bones.

CLP. Hennell for the appellants in Bebbington and others.

M. Sullivan and./. Rees for the Crown in the appeal of Bones.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

58,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 695

JUDGMENT

Hooper L.J.: On April 7, 2005 we reduced the sentence of imprisonment passed on the appellant Dean Bones and adjourned the appeal against the mak­ing of an anti-social behaviour order (“ASBO”) to enable the CPS to instruct counsel who would be able to give us both general assistance about ASBOs and specific assistance about the ASBO in this case. We resumed the hearing on July 5, 2005 and announced, at the conclusion, that the ASBO was quashed for reasons which we would give later. Mr Rees had prepared a comprehensive skeleton argument and we are particularly grateful to him for his help and to those in the Home Office who have assisted him. We have incorporated much of what he wrote into the judgment.

· On July 5, we also heard the appeals of Shaun Anthony Bebbington and others.

We granted leave to appeal and any necessary extensions of time. At the con­clusion of the hearing we announced our decision to reduce the sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment passed on Lee William Schofield and substitute for it a sen­tence of 18 months’ imprisonment. We look the view that a sentence of that length was sufficient. That was the only sentence of imprisonment which we were asked to consider (the other appellants had served their sentences). We quashed all the ASBOs other than those in respect of Schofield and Ian Jeremy Stuart Bruce. In these two cases we announced that we would alter the terms of the orders substan­tially but, given that we needed further material, we said that the precise detail of the amended orders would be announced with our reserved judgment. We have now received that detail.

Bones

· On April 7, Pilchers J. gave the following reasons for reducing the sentence of imprisonment passed on Bones:

a.      This 18-year-old appellant pleaded guilty to one count of dwelling house burglary and one of the handing stolen goods in the Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence. On 17th December 2004 at the Crown Court at Winchester he was sentenced to a total of three years’ custody and made subject to an Anti-Social Behav­iour Order for a period of five years to run from the date of his release.

b.      The events of burglary were committed during the morning of 23rd October 2004 at an unoccupied house in Basingstoke. The appellant and another entered through a kitchen window and carried out an untidy search, stealing items to the value of Ł4,800, some of which were of great sentiment value to the owner. When the appellant was arrested a watch, which had been taken during the burglary was recovered from him.

c.       There was another burglary the next day from a house in Basingstoke. When the appellant was arrested, his home was searched and property from that burglary was recovered. He admitted buying these items knowing they were stolen.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

59,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 696

R. v Dean Bones and Others

· The appellant has a number of previous convictions. He was before the courts on six occasions during 2002, 2003 and 2004 for offences involving vehicle crime, attempted burglary, an offence of violence, handling stolen goods and using threatening behaviour. He received a series of community orders and in respect of two of them he was in breach by reason of these offences.

· The judge heard evidence in addition to that which he found sufficient to make the ASBO as we have indicated. That, as we have also indicated, will be considered in detail and in principle on a later occasion.

· For the purposes of today’s hearing we deal simply with the custodial sentence. It is argued by counsel that the sentence of three years was loo long following a very early plea of guilty. Applying the principles contained in the well-known case of Mainerney we are satisfied that this sentence for offences in respect of which early pleas had been entered is too long. Bear­ing in mind the clear refusal of the appellant to comply with community orders, a sentence of custody was inevitable.

· However, the dwelling house burglary, although of quite high value and causing considerable distress, fell into the category of an offence committed by a first-time burglar, albeit with those two aggravating features. There was also the receiving of stolen goods which the appellant must have known had come from a dwelling house burglary. The total sentence appropriate for that offending, in our judgment, would be one of 18 months.

· We therefore allow the appeal to the extent of reducing the sentences to 18 months and six months concurrently. To that extent, as we say, the appeal in relation to the custodial term is allowed.”

The ASBO was in the following form:

“The court found that

(i) The defendant had acted in an anti-social manner which caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself as shown by:

a.      The present conviction.

b.      His previous convictions; and

c.       The summary of anti-social behaviour acts set out in the request form attached

And that

(ii) an order was necessary to protect persons in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him.

It is ordered that the defendant, Dean Bones is prohibited from:

In England and Wales:

Entering any public car park within the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council area, except in the course of lawful employment.

Entering any land or building on the land which forms a part of educational premises except as an enrolled pupil with the agreement of the head of the establishment or in the course of lawful employment.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

60,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 697

R, v Dean Bones and Others

In any public place, wearing, or having with you anything which covers, or could be used to cover, the face or part of the face. This will include hooded clothing, balaclavas, masks, or anything else which could be used to hide identity, except that a motorcycle helmet may be worn only when lawfully riding a motorcycle.

Having any item with you in public which could be used in the commission of a burglary, or theft of or from vehicles except that you may carry one door key for your house and one motor vehicle or bicycle lock key. A motor vehicle key can only be carried if you are able to inform a checking officer of the registration number of the vehicle and that it can be ascertained that the vehicle is insured for you to drive it.

Having possession of any article in public or carried in any vehicle, that could be used as a weapon. This will include glass bottles, drinking glasses and tools.

Remaining on any shop, commercial or hospital premises if asked to leave by staff. Entering any premises from which barred.

Entering upon any private land adjoining any dwelling premises or commer­cial premises outside of opening hours of that premises without the express permission of a person in charge of that premises. This includes front gar­dens, driveways and paths. Except in the course of lawful employment. Touching or entering any unattended vehicle without the express permission of the owner.

Acting or inciting others to act in an anti-social manner, that is to say, a man­ner that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household.

Congregating in groups of people in a manner causing or likely to cause any person to fear for their safety or congregating in groups of more than SIX persons in an outdoor public place.

Doing anything which may cause damage.

Not being anywhere but your home address as listed on this order between 2330 hours and 0700 hours or at an alternative address as agreed in advance with the prolific and priority offender officer or anti-social behaviour co­ordinator at Basingstoke Police Station.

Being carried on any vehicle other than a vehicle in lawful use.

Being in the company of Jason Arnold, Richard Ashman, Corrine Barlow, Mark Bicknell, Joseph (Joe) Burford, Sean Condon, Alan Dawkins, Simon Lee, Daniel (Danny) Malcolm, Michael March, or Nathan Threshie. This order to run for 5 years after release from custody.”

Bebbington and others

· The appellants are: Regina v Shaun Anthony Bebington (21), Mark Graham Bateman (19); Lee William Schofield (37); Ian Jeremy Stuart Bruce (now 36); Dale Anthony Cooper (19); Howard John Stocking (19); Thomas Philip Sheridan (17); Russell Keeley (now 20); Thomas Turner (now 18) and John O’ Hanlon (17)

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

61,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 698

R, v Dean Bones and Others

· On September 13, 2004 at the Crown Court at Chester Bateman, Bruce, Cooper, Stocking, Sheridan, Keeley, Turner and O’Hanlon pleaded guilty. On November 17, 2004 Bebbington pleaded guilty on re-arraignment. On January 5, 2005 Schofield was convicted. On January 7, 2005 (H.H. Judge Woodward) they were sentenced as follows:

Bebbington

Threatening behaviour—Community Punishment Order for 160 hours; anti-social behaviour order for four years.

Bateman

Affray—five months’ detention in a young offender institution; anti-social behaviour order for eight years

Schofield

Affray—two years’ imprisonment; anti-social behaviour order for 10 years

Bruce

Affray—eight months' imprisonment (E.D.R. 7/5/2005); anti-social behav­iour order for 10 years

Cooper

Threatening behaviour—Community Punishment Order for 160 hours; anti-social behaviour order for four years.

Stocking

Affray—five months’ detention in a young offender institution; anti-social behaviour order for eight years

Sheridan

Affray—four months’ detention and training order; anti-social behaviour order for six years

Keeley

Affray—five months’ detention in a young offender institution; anti-social behaviour order for eight years

Turner

Affray—four months’ detention and training order; anti-social behaviour order for six years

O’Hanlon

Affray—four months’ detention and training order; six-year anti-social behaviour order.

· There were three convicted co-defendants:

Carl Graham Wood (d.o.b. 9/10/70) pleaded guilty to affray and was sen­tenced to 16 months’ imprisonment and a 10-year anti-social behaviour order.

Graham Jones (d.o.b. 7/12/71) pleaded guilty to affray and was sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment and a 10-year anti-social behaviour order. Adam Paul Fulcher (d.o.b. n/k) pleaded guilty to affray and was sentenced to a four-month detention and training order and a six-year anti-social behav­iour order.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

62,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 699

R, v Dean Bones and Others

The ASBOs were in the terms of a football banning order, the court having no jurisdiction to pass an actual football banning order.

“The defendant must not for the duration of the order,

· Enter any premises for the purpose of attending any football matches in England and Wales that are regulated for the purposes of the Foot­ball Spectators Act 1989.

· On any day that Chester City AFC play at a regulated football match at the Deva Stadium during the period commencing three hours prior to kick off and ending six hours after kick-off, enter any area inside the shaded boundary as defined in the two attached maps.

· Attend within a 10-mile radius of any premises outside Chester at which football matches are played by Chester AFC on the day of any away match.

· On any day that England or Wales play a regulated football match in England or Wales, during the period commencing three hours prior to kick-off and ending six hours after lick-off, go within a 3-mile radius of the relevant stadium where the match is being played.

We take the facts from the CACD summary:

“At about 7pm on 10 January 2004, there was a confrontation between sup­porters of Wrexham football club and Chester City football club in the centre of Chester. The applicants were all supporters of Chester City and some members of the two rival groups associated themselves with the hard core of the hooligan element attached to both football clubs. The two rival gangs came together through a mutual interest in football and they had stayed together because of a mutual interest in hooliganism and there had been a long-standing and deep antipathy between the two groups. The supporters of Wrexham had travelled back from a game at Chesterfield and had alighted at the station in Chester. The applicants were drinking in a public house and had been warned by the police not to leave the public house when the police became aware that the Wrexham group were at the station. However, the group did leave the public house and went across the road to the station with the intention of fighting with the group from Wrexham. There was an element of pre-meditation about the incident because the group left the public house as the group of Wrexham supporters arrived at the station and attempted to leave the station. The group from Chester did not enter the station because the groups were kept apart by police officers. The actions of the Chester group were caught on CCTV, they were heard responding to the taunts of the Wrexham group and began singing loud and abusive songs. Members of the public, employees at the station and the police officers felt threatened by their actions.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

63,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:700

R. v Dean Bones and Others

The applicants all played different roles in the incident, some having sub­stantially more involvement than others and, on the prosecution’s case, some of the defendants, particularly Wood and Schofield, were the ringlea­ders and orchestrated the threats of violence. The CCTV evidence was the basis of the prosecution case against the applicants.”

· We have watched the CCTV evidence.

· All of the appellants were of good character other than Schofield and Bruce. Schofield had a previous conviction for affray as well as other offences. Bruce had one relevant previous conviction in 2004 for being drunk and disorderly. The authors of the various pre-sentence reports recommended non-custodial sen­tences given the low risk of reoffending. As the judge said in passing sentence all of the defendants other than Schofield had expressed remorse. Some of the appel­lants had good character references, including Bruce.

· In passing sentence, the judge said that the defendants had deliberately left the public house with the intention of fighting the group from Wrexham. There could be no other sensible explanation as to what happened that day and it was clearly shown on the video. He said that the people of Chester and visitors to the city had to know that the courts would take a firm stand against this type of criminal behaviour. In addition, the evidence at Schofield’s trial indicated that the num­bers of the younger element in the football hooligans in Chester had grown significantly over the last two years and that was an issue that could not be ignored. The courts would not tolerate such behaviour and a message had to be sent out to people like them that such behaviour would not be tolerated. All bar Schofield had pleaded guilty and they would receive credit for those pleas. Wood was the most prominent of the protagonists. He threw a bottle at the police and he had a bad record for offences of violence, including one for an offence very similar to this. Schofield was not only the oldest of the defendants, but he also directed others. He was not shown outwardly playing an active role, but by his mere presence he made sure that others were there. He was seen shouting and on a number of occasions had clearly instructed others to do things and they had followed his lead and instructions. He was the controlling mind behind what was going on. He also had a previous conviction for a very similar offence. The others had all expressed their remorse and had acted out of character.

· ASBOs

· The power to make an ASBO was introduced by s. 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA 1998) which came into force on April 1, 1999. In McCann v Manchester Crown Court [2002} UKHL 39; [2003] 1 A.C. 787; [2003] 1 Cr. App. R. 27 (p.419) Lord Sleyn described the social problem that S.1 of the 1998 Act was designed to address. He referred to the fear, misery and distress that might be caused by outrageous anti-social behaviour, usually in urban areas, often by young persons and groups of young persons. He said:

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

64,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:701

“In recent years this phenomenon became a serious problem. There appeared to be a gap in the law. The criminal law offered insufficient pro­tection to communities. Public confidence in the rule of law was undermined by a not unreasonable view in some communities that the law failed them.”

· There are various procedures which can lead to the making of an ASBO, in par­ticular, that which involves an application by a relevant authority (e.g. a local authority) to a magistrates’ court. We are concerned with the power to make an ASBO following conviction for a relevant offence, a power granted to avoid the need to invoke the procedure in the magistrates’ court and thus a further hearing. The power was granted by s. 1C of the Crime and Disorder Act 1988 (“CDA 1998)”, as inserted by s.64 of the Police Reform Act 2002 and amended by s.86 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. However, the principles are the same irrespective of the procedural route.

· Section 1 C (2) of CDA 1998 provides:

“If the court considers—

3. that the offender has acted, at any time since the commencement date [1st April 1999] in an anti-social manner, that is to say in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself; and

4. that an order under this section is necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him,

it may make an order which prohibits the offender from doing anything described in the order.” (Underlining added)

· An ASBO is an order prohibiting a person from doing the “thing” described in the order.

· We deal first with some procedural points. In McCann the House of Lords held that the proceedings on complaint by a relevant authority under s. 1 of CDA 1998 were civil in nature, that hearsay evidence was admissible, that the magistrates’ court had to be satisfied to the criminal standard that the defendant had acted in an anti-social manner, The test for whether the order was necessary required an exer­cise of judgment or evaluation and did not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In W. v Acton Youth Court [2005] EWHC 954 (Sedley L.J. and Pitchers J.) confirmed that proceedings under s. 1C are civil proceedings.

· In that case Pitchers J. said that:

“The actual and potential consequences for the subject of an ASBO make it particularly important that procedural fairness is scrupulously observed.”

· (Shane Tony) [2004] EWCA Grim 287; [20041 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 63 (p.343) Henriques J. giving the judgment of the Court (presided over by Lord Woolf C.J.) said (para.[34]):

“In our judgment the following principles clearly emerge:

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

65,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:702

R. v Dean Bones and Others

· The terms of the order must be precise and capable of being under­stood by offender.

· The findings of fact giving rise to the making of the order must be recorded.

· The order must be explained to the offender.

· The exact terms of the order must be pronounced in open court and the written order must accurately reflect the order as pronounced."

Because an ASBO must obviously be precise and capable of being understood by the offender, a court should ask itself before making an order: “Are the terms of this order clear so that the offender will know precisely what it is that he is pro­hibited from doing?"

The Home Office in a 2002 publication entitled “A Guide to Anti-Social Behaviour Orders and Acceptable Behaviour Contracts” gave examples of the types of anti-social behaviour which the Home Office considered could be tackled by ASBOs. The list (which does not purport to be exhaustive) comprises: harassment of residents or passers-by, verbal abuse, criminal damage, vandalism, noise nuisance, writing graffiti, engaging in threatening behaviour in large groups, racial abuse, smoking or drinking alcohol while under age, substance misuse, joyriding, begging, prostitution, kerb-crawling, throwing missiles, assault and vehicle crime.

Home Office guidance suggests that prohibitions, should amongst other things:

be reasonable and proportionate; be realistic and practical.

be in terms which make it easy to determine and prosecute a breach.

In the report of the working group set up under Thomas L.J. there is a section which identifies elements of best practice adopted within the courts when dealing with the terms of an ASBO. Included amongst these elements are:

the prohibition should be capable of being easily understood by the defend­ant.

the condition should be enforceable in the sense that it should allow a breach

to be readily identified and capable of being proved.

exclusion zones should be clearly delineated with the use of clearly marked

maps.

individuals whom the defendant is prohibited from contacting or associating with should be clearly identified.

in the case of a foreign national, consideration should be given to the need for the order to be translated.

The report of the working group also provides examples of general prohibi­tions imposed by the courts which in their view were specific and enforceable and could be incorporated in ASBOs in order to protect persons from a wide range of anti-social behaviour. These include conditions prohibiting the offender from.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

66,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 703

R. v Dean Bones and Others

living anywhere other than a specified address without the permission of a nominated person.

entering an area edged in red on the attached map including both footways of any road which forms the boundary area.

visiting a named individual unless accompanied by a parent or legal guard­ian.

associating with a named individual in a public place.

leaving his home between certain hours except in the case of emergency etc.

An order made under s. 1C lakes effect on the day on which it was made, but the court may provide in any such order that such requirements of the order as it may specify shall, during any period when the offender is detained in legal custody, be suspended until his release from that custody (S.1C(5)). In the Court observed that where custodial sentences in excess of a few months were passed and offenders were liable to be released on licence (and therefore subject to recall) the circumstances in which there would be a demonstrable necessity to make a suspended anti-social behaviour order, to take effect on release, would be limited, although there would be cases in which geographical restraints could properly supplement licence conditions.

Anthony Malcolm Vittles ]2004] EWCA Crim 1089 [20051 1 Cr. App. R.(S.) 8 is an example of a case in which the Court of Appeal decided that there was a demonstrable necessity to make a “suspended” ASBO, despite the fact that the appellant was sentenced to a total of three years and 10 months' imprison­ment, The appellant, who was a heavy drug user, admitted breaking into between 10 and 30 vehicles belonging to American servicemen who lived off air­bases used by American forces. The offences involved theft of items from the motor cars to a value of Ł3,500. In upholding the making of the order, although reducing the term, the Court of Appeal referred to and said that they took the view that the transient, vulnerable, nature of the American population, specifi­cally targeted by the appellant, made it appropriate that, exceptionally, an anti­social behaviour order should be made, notwithstanding the imposition of a sub­stantial prison sentence.

An order shall have effect for a period (not less than two years) specified in the order or until further order (S, l C (9) and 1C (7)). In Lonergan v Lewes Crown Court |20()5] EWHC 457; [2005] 1 W.L.R. 2570; [2005] A.C.D. 84 (Admin) Maurice Kay L.J. said in the course of delivering the judgment that just because an ASBO must run for a minimum of two years, it does not follow that each and every prohibition within a particular order must endure for the life of the order. Although doubt was expressed about this in the report of the working group set up by Thomas L.J., in our view Maurice Kay L.J. is right. It may be necessary to include a prohibition which would need to be amended or removed after a period of Lime for example when the offender starts work (provided that at least one prohibition is ordered to have effect for at least two years). Maurice Kay L.J. also said (para. [7)] that the statute requires the order to be “substantially and not just formally prohibitory.”

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

.67,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 704

R. v Dean Bones and Others

· There are provisions for applications to vary or discharge an order (see s. 1 C (6) and s. 140 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 which inserts s. 1CA of the CD A 1998).

· We turn to the requirement that an order can only be made if it is necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by the offender. Following a finding that the offender has acted in an anti-social manner (whether or not the act constitutes a criminal offence), the lest for making an order prohibiting the offender from doing something is one of necessity. Each separate order prohibiting a person from doing a specified thing must be necess­ary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him. Any order should therefore be tailor-made for the individual offender, not designed on a word pro­cessor for use in every case. The court must ask itself when considering any specific order prohibiting the offender from doing something, “Is this order necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him?”

· The purpose of an ASBO is not to punish an offender (see Lonergan, para.[10]}. This principle follows from the requirement that the order must be necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him. The use of an ASBO to punish an offender is thus unlawful. We were told during the course of argument that the imposition of an ASBO is sometimes sought by the defend­ant’s advocate at the sentencing stage, hoping that the court might make an ASBO order as an alternative to prison or other sanction. A court must not allow itself to be diverted in this way—indeed it may be better to decide the appropriate sen­tence and then move on to consider whether an ASBO should be made or not after sentence has been passed, albeit at the same hearing.

· It follows from the requirement that the order must be necessary to protect per­sons from further anti-social acts by him, that the court should not impose an order which prohibits an offender from committing a specified criminal offence if the sentence which could be passed following conviction for the offence should be a sufficient deterrent. If following conviction for the offence the offender would be liable to imprisonment, then an ASBO would add nothing other than to increase the sentence if the sentence for the offence is less than five years’ imprisonment. But if the offender is not going to be deterred from committing the offence by a sentence of imprisonment for that offence, the ASBO is not likely (it may be thought) further to deter and is therefore not necessary. In, Henriques J. said (para. [3()]):

“Next, it is submitted that (two of] the prohibitions are redundant as they prohibit conduct which is already subject to a general prohibition by the Public Order Act 1986 and the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 respect­ively. In that regard we are by no means persuaded that the inclusion of such matters is to be actively discouraged. So far as more minor offences are concerned, we Lake the view that there is no harm in reminding offenders that certain matters do constitute criminal conduct, although we would only encourage the inclusion of comparatively minor criminal offences in the terms of such orders.”

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

68,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 705

R. v Dean Bones and Others

We would only make one comment on this passage. The test for making an order is not whether the offender needs reminding that certain matters do consti­tute criminal conduct, but whether it is necessary.

It has been held, rightly in our view, that an ASBO should not be used merely to increase the sentence of imprisonment which an offender is liable to receive. In Kirby [2005] EWCA Crim 1228; [2006] I Cr. App. R.(S.) 26 (p.S51) an ASBO had been made prohibiting the offender from driving, attempting to drive or allowing himself to be carried in any motor vehicle which had been taken without the consent of the owner or other lawful authority, and driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle until after the expiration of his period of disqualification. As the Court (presided over by Maurice Kay LJ) found, the judge’s purpose in making this order was to secure the result that if the appellant committed such offences again the court would not be limited to the maximum penalty for the offences themselves but would be able to impose up to five years’ imprisonment for breach of the anti-social behaviour order. David Clarke J giving the judgment of the Court said:

“In our judgment this decision of the court [in R. r P] and the earlier case of [C v Sunderland Youth Court [2003] EWHC 2385; [2004] 1 Cr. App. R.(S.) 76 (p.443) ] serve to demonstrate that to make an anti-social behaviour order in a case such as the present case, where the underlying objective was to give the court higher sentencing powers in the event of future similar offending, is not a use of the power which should normally be exercised.”

· That decision was in conflict with an earlier decision Hall [2004] EWCA Crim 2671; [2005] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 118 (p.671) (Hunt and Tugenhat J. J.), the correct­ness of which was doubled by Dr Thomas ([2005] Crim. L.R. 152). In Williams [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 56 (p.305), the Court (Mance L.J., Elias J. and Sir Charles Mantell) preferred Kirby to Hall. We also agree with the decision in Kirby.

· Different considerations may apply if the maximum sentence is only a fine, but the court must still go through all the steps to make sure that an ASBO is necess­ary.

· There is another reason why a court should be reluctant to impose an order which prohibits an offender from, or merely from, committing a specified crimi­nal offence. The aim of an ASBO is to prevent anti-social behaviour. To prevent it the police or other authorities need to be able to take action before the anti-social behaviour it is designed to prevent takes place, if, for example, a court is faced by an offender who causes criminal damage by spraying graffiti then the order should be aimed at facilitating action to be taken to prevent graffiti spraying by him and/or his associates before it takes place. An order in clear and simple terms preventing the offender from being in possession of a can of spray paint in a public place gives the police or others responsible for protecting the property an opportunity to lake action in advance of the actual spraying and makes it clear to the offender that he has lost the right to carry such a can for the duration of the order.

· If a court wishes to make an order prohibiting a group of youngsters from racing cars or motor bikes on an estate or driving at excessive speed (anti-social

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

69,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 706

R. v Dean Bones and Others

behaviour for those living on the estate), then the order should not (normally) pro­hibit driving whilst disqualified. It should prohibit, for example, the offender whilst on the estate from taking part in, or encouraging, racing, or driving at excessive speed. It might also prevent the group from congregating with named others in a particular area of the estate. Such an order gives those respon­sible for enforcing order on the estate the opportunity to take action to prevent the anti-social conduct, it is to be hoped, before its takes place. Neighbours can alert the police who will not have to wait for the commission of a particular criminal offence. The ASBO will be breached not just by the offender driving but by his giving encouragement by being a passenger or a spectator. It matters not for the purposes of enforcing the ASBO whether he has or has not a driving licence enti­tling him to drive.

· Not only must the court before imposing an order prohibiting the offender from doing something consider that such an order is necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him; the terms of the order must be proportionate in the sense that they must be commensurate with the risk to be guarded against. This is particularly important where an order may interfere with an ECHR right protec­ted by the Human Rights Act 1998, e.g. Arts 8, 10 and 11.

· We think that bail conditions provide a useful analogy. A defendant may be prohibited from contacting directly or indirectly a prosecution witness or enter­ing a particular area near the alleged victim’s home. The aim is to prevent the defendant trying to tamper with witnesses or committing a further offence. But the police do not have to wait until he has tampered or committed a further offence and thus committed a very serious offence. If he breaks the conditions even without intending to tamper, he is in breach of his bail conditions and liable to be remanded in custody. The victim has the comfort of knowing that if the defendant enters the prescribed area, the police can be called Lo Lake action. The victim does not have to wait for the offence to happen again.

· We look at some examples of how the Divisional Court and this Court have approached ASBOs.

· In McGrath [2005] EWCA Crim 353; [2005] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 85 (p.529) con­sidered the terms of an ASBO made under s. 1C in respect of an appellant, aged 25, with an appalling record who pleaded guilty to a count of theft which involved breaking into a car in a station car park and stealing various compact discs. The ASBO contained (amongst others) the following prohibitions:

Entering any other car park whether on payment or otherwise within the counties of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, or Buckinghamshire.

Trespassing on any land belonging to any person whether legal or natural within those counties.

Having in his possession in any public place any window hammer, screwdriver, torch or any tool or implement which could be used for the pur­pose of breaking into motor vehicles.”

· In respect of term 2, the Court of Appeal held that it was unjustifiably draco­nian and loo wide; it would, for example, prevent the appellant from entering, even as a passenger, any car park in a supermarket. Similar considerations

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

70,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:707

R. v Dean Bones and Others

applied lo term 3.11"the appellant look a wrong turn on a walk and entered some­one’s property, he would be at risk of a five-year prison sentence. The Court of Appeal look the view that term 4 was unacceptably wide. The meaning of the words “too! or implement” was impossible to ascertain. Insofar as the wording of term 4 was sufficiently qualified by the final wording “which could be used for the purpose of breaking into motor vehicles”, the Court of Appeal observed that, effectively, the term overlaps with the offence of going equipped.

· In IV v DPP [2005] EWHC 1333 held that a clause in an ASBO made in respect of a young offender which prohibited him from committing any criminal offence was plainly loo wide and unenforceable. There was a danger that W would not know what a criminal offence was and what was not. It was well established that an order had to be clear and in terms that would enable an individual to know what he could and could not do. A general restriction was not necessary where specific behaviour restrictions were in place. Brooke L.J. said (para.[8]) that, given the offender’s previous convictions for theft, a prohibition against committing theft “might not have been inappropriate”. We have already expressed our reservations about such a prohibition.

· In the Court expressed doubt about whether an ASBO is appropriate if the anti-social conduct is itself a serious offence, such as robbery. The Court reviewed the propriety of making an anti-social behaviour in respect of an appel­lant, aged 15 at the Lime of the offences, who pleaded guilty to assault with intent to rob, robbery, theft, false imprisonment, and attempted robbery. He was involved in a number of incidents in which he approached younger boys, threa­tened them and in one case struck a boy with a stick and stole their mobile phones. The appellant was made the subject of an order under S.1C of CDA 1998. The effect of the order was Lo prevent the appellant from acting in various ways, principally excluding him from two parks and an airport. In the course of the judgment, Henriques J. giving the judgment observed:

“It will be readily observed from a consideration of the Home Office ‘Guide Lo anti-social behaviour orders’ that the conduct primarily envisaged as trig­gering these orders was for a less grave offence than street robbery, namely graffiti, abusive and intimidating language, excessive noise, fouling the street with litter, drunken behaviour and drug dealing. Doubtless in drafting that report the Home Office had in mind that courts have considerable powers to restrain robbers. We do not go so far as to suggest that anti-social behaviour orders are necessarily inappropriate in cases with characteristics such as the present.”

· We see no reason why, in appropriate circumstances, an order should not be made of the kind in excluding an offender from two parks and an airport if that is where he is committing robberies (or committing other anti-social behav­iour). Such an order enables those responsible for the safety of the prescribed areas an opportunity to act before a robbery is committed by the offender.

· In Werner [2004] EWCA Grim 2931 the female appellant had committed a number of offences over a relatively short period of time which involved stealing credit cards, a cheque book, and other items from hotel rooms while the occupants

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

71,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:708

R. V Dean Bones and Other’s

were out and using the cards to obtain services and goods. In addition to passing a sentence of imprisonment, the judge made the appellant the subject of an ASBO under s. 1C of CDA 1998, prohibiting her from entering any hotel, guesthouse, or similar premises anywhere within the Greater London Area, It was submitted on the appellant’s behalf that this was an inappropriate and improper use of the power because the behaviour it sought to protect the public from was only anti-social in the sense that all criminal offences were anti-social and it was not the sort of behaviour that ASBOs were meant to target. The Court of Appeal declined to express a definitive view on this issue and quashed the order on a dif­ferent ground, but they did make the following observations. The forms of conduct listed on p.8 of the 2002 Home Office guide have a direct or indirect impact on the quality of life of people living in the community. They are different in character from offences of dishonesty committed in private against individual victims, distressing though such offences are to the victims. The Court said that it would not like Lo be taken to say that in no case could offences of this sort attract such an order.

· It seems to us that there is another problem with the kind of order in Werner. In the absence of a system to warn all hotels, guesthouses, or similar premises any­where within the Greater London Area, there is no practical way of policing the order. The breach of the ASBO will occur at the same time as the commission of any further offence in a hotel, guesthouse, or similar premises. The ASBO achieves nothing— if she is not to be deterred by the prospect of imprisonment for committing the offence, she is unlikely to be deterred by the prospect of being sentenced for breach of the ASBO. By committing the substantive offence, she will have committed the further offence of being in breach of her ASBO, but to what avail? The criminal statistics will show two offences rather than one. If on the other hand she “worked” a limited number of establishments, it would be practical to supervise compliance with the order. The establishments could be pull on notice about her and should she enter the premises the police could be called, whether her no Live in entering the premises was honest or not.

· In Rush 12005] EWCA Grim 1316; [2006] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 35 (p.200) the appellant appealed against a sentence of 30 months’ imprisonment and an ASBO of 10 years’ duration following a plea to burglary. The burglary involved pushing into his parents’ house (where he no longer lived) and stealing cigarettes from a cupboard. The appellant had a history of previous offending that was almost entirely targeted at his parents. The Court of Appeal reduced the sentence for the burglary to 12 months’ imprisonment and the duration of the ASBO to five years. In so doing, they said that the making of an ASBO should not be a normal part of the sentencing process especially if the case did not involve harassment or intimidation. Imposing an ASBO was a course to be taken in particular circum­stances.

· In McGrath the Court observed that ASBOs should be treated with a proper degree of caution and circumspection. They were not cure-alls and were not lightly to be imposed (para.fi 2]),

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

72,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:709

R. V Dean Bones and Other’s

In Lonergan the Divisional Court held that it was lawful for a prohibition in the nature of a curfew to be included in an ASBO made under s. 1 CDA 1998 if its imposition was necessary to provide protection for others.

With these general observations in mind, we turn to the appeals against the ASBOs.

The Dean Bones ASBO

· In favour of making an ASBO was the fact that the appellant had consistently engaged in anti-social behaviour over a period of approximately three years. He was a persistent prolific offender and had admitted to drug misuse in the com­munity. There were three main aspects to his anti-social behaviour: threatening behaviour (two incidents), vehicle crime (three incidents) and other offences of dishonesty such as burglary and theft (three incidents and other incidents of handling stolen goods). On the other hand, he was being sentenced to a custodial sentence of three years’ detention in a young offender institution and was thus subject to a period on licence and subject to recall or return to custody.

· The respondent accepts, on the authorities and in particular having regard to (para.[25] above) that it is far from clear that it was necessary to make an ASBO in respect of the appellant. We agree.

· We turn to the various orders. The first order prohibited the appellant from:

Entering any public car park within the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council area, except in the course of lawful employment.

· The respondent submits:

“The antecedent information does not state whether any of the vehicle crimes committed by the appellant took place in a public car park. However, it is submitted that it could sensibly be argued that a person intent on com­mitting vehicle crime is likely to be attracted to car parks. The prohibition as drafted does not appear to allow the offender to park his own vehicle in a public car park or, for example, to be a passenger in a vehicle driven into a public car park in the course of a shopping trip. Thus, in the absence of evi­dence showing that the appellant committed vehicle crime in car parks, there would appear to be a question mark over whether the prohibition is proportional, particularly as prohibition (3) seems to be drafted with a view to allowing the appellant to ride a motorcycle. If the court contem­plated the lawful use of a motorbike as an activity which the appellant could pursue, then this prohibition would significantly limit the places he might be able to park it. It is of note that in McGrath the Court of Appeal held a similar prohibition to be too wide, although it covered a much larger geographical area.”

· We agree. Even if the order was necessary to prevent anti-social behaviour by the appellant, it was not proportionate.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

73,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page 710

R. v Dean Bones and Others

· The second order prohibited the appellant from:

Entering any land or building on the land which forms a part of educational premises except as an enrolled pupil with the agreement of the head of the establishment or in the course of lawful employment.

· As to this the respondent submits:

“It is not clear what information provided the basis for making this prohib­ition. There is nothing in the appellant’s previous offending history which suggests that he engages in anti-social behaviour in educational premises. It is submitted that the term ‘educational premises’ arguably lacks clarity; for example, does it include teaching hospitals or premises where night clas­ses are held? There also appears to be a danger that the appellant might unwittingly breach the terms of the order were he, for example, to play sport on playing fields associated with educational premises.”

· We agree with this analysis.

The order was not necessary and is, in any event, unclear.

· The third order prohibited the appellant from:

In any public place, wearing, or having with you anything which covers, or could be used to cover, the face or part of the face. This will include hooded clothing, balaclavas, masks, or anything else which could be used to hide identity, except that a motorcycle helmet may be worn only when lawfully riding a motorcycle.

· The respondent submits:

“It is presumed that this prohibition was based upon the assertion that the appellant is forensically aware and will use items to attempt to prevent detection. It is submitted that the terms of the prohibition are too wide, resulting in a lack of clarity and consequences which are not commensurate with the risk which the prohibition seeks to address. The phrase “having with you anything which could be used to cover the face or part of the face” covers a huge number of items. For example, it is not unknown for those seeking to conceal their identity to pull up a jumper to conceal part of the face, but surely the prohibition cannot have been intended to limit so radically the choice of clothing that the appellant can wear? It seems that the appellant would potentially be in breach of the order were he to wear a scarf or carry a newspaper in public.”

· We agree.

· The fourth order prohibited the appellant from:

Having any item with you in public which could be used in the commission of a burglary, or theft of or from vehicles except that you may carry one door key for your house and one motor vehicle or bicycle lock key. A motor

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

74,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 710

R. v Dean Bones and Others

vehicle key can only be carried if you are able to inform a checking officer of the registration number of the vehicle and that it can be ascertained that the vehicle is insured for you to drive it. We agree with the respondent’s submission that: the first part of this prohibition has been drafted too widely and lacks clarity.”

The respondent points out that there are many items that might be used in the commission of a burglary, such as a credit card, a mobile phone, or a pair of gloves. Was the appellant being prohibited from carrying such items? If so, the order is neither clear nor proportionate,

The fifth order prohibited the appellant from:

Having possession of any article in public or carried in any vehicle, that could be used as a weapon. This will include glass bottles, drinking glasses and tools.

· The respondent submits and we agree:

“that the necessity for such a prohibition is not supported by the material pull forward in support of the application. There is very Little in the appellant’s antecedent history which indicates a disposition to use a weapon. Further­more, it is submitted that the wording of the prohibition is obviously too wide, resulting in lack of clarity and consequences which are not commen­surate with the risk. Many otherwise innocent items have the capacity to be used as weapons, including anything hard or with an edge or point. This pro­hibition has draconian consequences. The appellant would be prohibited from doing a huge range of things including having a drink in a public bar.”

· We have already noted judicial criticism of the use of the word “tool” (see para.[42] above).

· The sixth order prohibited the appellant from:

Remaining on any shop, commercial or hospital premises if asked to leave by staff. Entering any premises from which barred.

· The respondent submits:

“The appellant has convictions for offences of dishonesty, including an attempted burglary of shop premises and he has been reprimanded for sho­plifting. Thus, there appears to be a foundation for such a prohibition. It is submitted that this term is capable of being understood by the appellant and is proportionate given that it hinges upon being refused permission to enter/ remain on particular premises by those who have control of them.”

· We agree, although we wonder whether the appellant would understand the staccato sentence: “Entering any premises from which barred.”

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

.75,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 712

R. v Dean Bones and Others

· The seventh order prohibited the appellant from:

Entering upon any private land adjoining any dwelling premises or commer­cial premises outside of opening hours of that premises without the express permission of a person in charge of that premises. This includes front gar­dens, driveways and paths. Except in the course of lawful employment.

· The respondent points out that in McGrath the Court of Appeal held that a term which prohibited the appellant from “trespassing on any land belonging to any person whether legal or natural within those counties” was too wide and harsh. If the appellant looks a wrong turn on a walk and entered someone’s prop­erty, he would be at risk of a five-year prison sentence. In our view this prohibition, albeit less open to criticism than the one in McGrath is also loo wide and harsh. Although certain pieces of land might easily be identified as being caught by the prohibition (such as a front garden, driveway, or path) it might be harder to recognise, say, in more rural areas. The absence of any geo­graphical restriction reinforces our view. Furthermore, there is no practical way that compliance with the order could be enforced, at least outside the appel­lant’s immediate home area (see para.[47] above).

· The eighth order prohibited the appellant, from:

Touching or entering any unattended vehicle without the express permission of the owner.

· The respondent submits:

“The appellant has previous convictions for aggravated vehicle taking and interfering with a motor vehicle and has been reprimanded for theft of a motorcycle. It is submitted that the prohibition is sufficiently clear and pre­cise and is commensurate with the risk it seeks to meet.”

· We agree generally but we would have preferred a geographical limit so as to make it feasible to enforce the order. Local officers, aware of the prohibition, would then have a useful weapon to prevent the appellant committing vehicle crime. They would not have to wait until he had committed a particular crime relating to vehicles,

· The ninth order prohibited the appellant from:

Acting or inciting others to act in an anti-social manner, that is to say, a man­ner that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household.

· The respondent submits that this was a proper order to make and is in accord­ance with the Home Office guidance. We would prefer some geographical limit, in the absence of good reasons for having no such limit.

· The tenth order prohibited the appellant from:

Congregating in groups of people in a manner causing or likely to cause any person to fear for their safely or congregating in groups of more than six per- sons in an outdoor public place.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

76,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 713

R. v Dean Bones and Others

Given the appellant’s previous history the first part of the prohibition can be justified as necessary. As the respondent points out, the final clause would appear to prohibit the appellant from attending sporting or other outdoor events. Such a prohibition is, in our view, disproportionate. Although, as the respondent points out, the appellant would be able to argue that he had a reasonable excuse for attending the event, this is, in our view, an insufficient safeguard.

The eleventh order prohibited the appellant from:

Doing anything which may cause damage.

The respondent submits that this prohibition, even if justified (which is far from clear), is far too wide. In the words of the respondent: “Is the appellant pro­hibited from scuffing his shoes?” We agree.

The twelfth order prohibited the appellant from:

Not being anywhere but your home address as listed on this order between 2330 hours and 0700 hours or at an alternative address as agreed in advance with the prolific and priority offender officer or anti-social behaviour co­ordinator at Basingstoke Police Station.

Although curfews can properly be included in an ASBO, we doubt, as does the respondent, that such an order was necessary in this case. Although the offences of interfering with a motor vehicle and attempted burglary (for which the appel­lant was sentenced on 16/5/02) were both committed between 10pm and midnight on the same evening, there is no suggestion that other offences have been committed at night. Moreover, the author of the pre-sentence report states that the appellant’s offending behaviour did not fit a pattern which could be con­trolled by the use of a curfew order.

We would go further than the respondent. Even if an ASBO was justified a 5-year curfew to follow release is not, in our view, proportionate.

The thirteenth order prohibited the appellant from:

Being carried on any vehicle other than a vehicle in lawful use.

The respondent submits this prohibition is sufficiently clear and proportionate. We are not convinced. We do not find the expression “lawful use” to be free from difficulty. If “the carrying” is likely to constitute a specific criminal offence (e.g. one of the family of taking without consent offences), what does this order add? We would also have preferred some geographical limit.

The final order prohibited the appellant from:

Being in the company of Jason Arnold, Richard Ashman, Corrine Barlow, Mark Bicknell, Joseph (Joe) Burford, Sean Condon, Alan Dawkins, Simon Lee, Daniel (Danny) Malcolm, Michael March, or Nathan Threshie.

The respondent submits:

“This prohibition seems to be based on the assertion in PC Woods’ docu­ment that the appellant is associating with other criminals who were also nominated as persistent prolific offenders. The appellant admitted that the

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

77,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page:714

R. v Dean Bones and Others

offending spree which recently brought him before the court was the result of being contacted by an old friend. It is submitted that care has been taken to identify the individuals with whom the appellant is not to associate.”

· The respondent, however, has doubts whether a prohibition that prevents the appellant from associating with any of the named individuals for five years after his release, even in a private residence where one or more resides, is dispro­portionate to the risk of anti-social behaviour it is designed to prevent. We share those doubts.

Bebbington and others— the ASBOs

· We have no doubt that in respect of all the appellants, other than Schofield and Bruce, it was not “necessary” to make any ASBO, given their antecedent history, reports, and references.

· Counsel on behalf of Schofield attacked the judge's findings of fact. The judge conducted the trial and was in the best position to decide upon Schofield’s role.

· For Scofield and Bruce, given their history and the judge’s findings, an order could properly have been made to prevent a repetition of the disgraceful conduct of that night. The judge was entitled, absent any special circumstances, to make only one of the orders, namely:

On any day that Chester City AFC play at a regulated football match at the Deva Stadium during the period commencing three hours prior to kick off and ending six hours after kick-off, enter any area inside the shaded bound­ary as defined in the attached map.

· We amend the ASBO made in respect of Bruce by quashing the other orders and confirming this part only of the original order. In so far as Schofield is con­cerned, he will be living and working within the exclusion zone, so the order made is inappropriate. In his case the order will read:

On any day that Chester City AFC play at a regulated football match at the Deva Stadium during the period commencing three hours prior to kick off and ending six hours after kick-off, enter any area which is within 100 yards of the main entrance to Chester Station except for the purposes of his work with the Royal Mail.

· As the trouble that arose in this case did so on a day when Wrexham AFC was playing away and the club’s supporters were returning home via Chester railway station there will be in the case of both Bruce and Schofield an additional term in the ASBO as follows.

· In the case of Bruce:

On any day that Wrexham Town AFC play a regulated football match away from their home stadium during the period commencing three hours prior to kick off and ending six hours after kicking off, enter any area inside the shaded boundary as defined in the attached map.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

78,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page: 7 85

In the cases of Schofield:

On any day that Wrexham Town AFC play a regulated football match away from their home stadium during the period commencing three hours prior to kick off and ending six hours after kick-off, enter any area which is within 100 yards of the main entrance to Chester railway station except for the pur­poses of his work with the Royal Mail,

The period of 10 years for which the judge ordered the ASBOs to run is mani­festly excessive. In the case of each appellant the order will last for four years from January 7, 2005, the date when they were sentenced.

PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL

79,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page 1

Status: S Law in Force © Amendment(s) Pending

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 c. 33 Part V PUBLIC ORDER: COLLECTIVE TRESPASS OR NUISANCE ON LAND

Powers in relation to raves

This version in force from: January 1, 2006 to present (version 4 of 5)

The text of this provision varies depending on jurisdiction or other application, see parallel texts relating to:

England and Wales | Scotland

England and Wales

63.— Powers to remove persons attending or preparing for a rave.

1.      This section applies to a gathering on land in the open air of 20 or more persons (whether or not trespassers) at which amplified music is played during the night (with or without intermissions) and is such as, by reason of its loudness and duration and the time at which it is played, is likely to cause serious distress to the inhabitants of the locality; and for this purpose—

A. such a gathering continues during intermissions in the music and, where the gathering extends over several days, throughout the period during which amplified music is played at night (with or without intermissions); and

B. "music includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats.

(1 A) This section also applies to a gathering if-

a.      it is a gathering on land of 20 or more persons who are trespassing on the land; and

b.      it would be a gathering of a kind mentioned in subsection (1} above if it took place on land in the open air.

2.      If, as respects any land, a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent reasonably believes that—

(a)   two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to

www.WestLaw.uk

80,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page2

which this section applies,

(b)  ten or more persons are waiting for such a gathering to begin there, or

(c)   ten or more persons are attending such a gathering which is in progress,

he may give a direction that those persons and any other persons who come to prepare or wait for or to attend the gathering are to leave the land and remove any vehicles or other property which they have with them on the land.

3.      A direction under subsection (2) above, if not communicated to the persons referred to in subsection (2) by the police officer giving the direction, may be communicated to them by any constable at the scene.

4.      Persons shall be treated as having had a direction under subsection (2) above communicated to them if reasonable steps have been taken to bring it to their attention.

5.      A direction under subsection (2) above does not apply to an exempt person.

6.      If a person knowing that a direction has been given which applies to him—

a.      fails to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable, or

b.      having left again enters the land within the period of 7 days beginning with the day on which the direction was given, he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

7.      In proceedings for an offence under subsection (6) above it is a defence for the accused to show that he had a reasonable excuse for failing to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable or, as the case may be, for again entering the land.

(7      A) A person commits an offence if-

a.      he knows that a direction under subsection (2) above has been given which applies to him, and

b.      he prepares for or attends a gathering to which this section applies within the period of 24 hours starting when the direction was given.

(7B) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (7A) above is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

(8) ...l

www.WestLaw.uk

81,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page3

(9) This section does not apply—

(a) in England and Wales, to a gathering in relation to a licensable activity within section 1(1 Vet of the Licensing Act 2003 (provision of certain forms of entertainment) carried on under and in accordance with an authorisation within the meaning of section 136 of that Act.

2

(b) in Scotland, to a gathering in premises which, by virtue of section 41 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, are licensed to be used as a place of public entertainment.

(10) In this section—

“exempt person", in relation to land (or any gathering on land), means the occupier, any member of his family and any employee or agent of his and any person whose home is situated on the land.

"land in the open air” includes a place partly open to the air.

2

"occupier”

"trespasser”

and “vehicle ‘have the same meaning as in section 61.

Back to Top

Scotland

63.— Powers to remove persons attending or preparing for a rave.

· This section applies to a gathering on land in the open air of 100 or more persons (whether or not trespassers) at which amplified music is played during the night (with or without intermissions) and is such as, by reason of its loudness and duration and the time at

www.WestLaw.uk

82,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Page4

which it is played, is likely to cause serious distress to the inhabitants of the locality, and for this purpose—

(a) such a gathering continues during intermissions in the music and, where the gathering extends over several days, throughout the period during which amplified music is played at night (with or without intermissions); and

(b) “music" includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats.

· If, as respects any land

I

a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent reasonably believes that—

(a)   two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to which this section applies,

(b)  ten or more persons are waiting for such a gathering to begin there, or

(c)   ten or more persons are attending such a gathering which is in progress,

he may give a direction that those persons and any other persons who come to prepare or wait for or to attend the gathering are to leave the land and remove any vehicles or other property which they have with them on the land.

(3) A direction under subsection (2) above, if not communicated to the persons referred to in subsection (2) by the police officer giving the direction, may be communicated to them by any constable at the scene.

(4) Persons shall be treated as having had a direction under subsection (2) above communicated to them if reasonable steps have been taken to bring it to their attention,

(5) A direction under subsection (2) above does not apply to an exempt person.

(6) if a person knowing that a direction has been given which applies to him—

(a)   fails to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable, or

(b)  having left again enters the land within the period of 7 days beginning with the day on which the direction was given,

he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

(7) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused to show that he had a reasonable excuse for failing to leave the land as soon as reasonably practicable or, as the case may be, for again entering the land.

www.WestLaw.uk

83,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (2).pdf

Pages

(8) A constable in uniform who reasonably suspects that a person is committing an offence under this section may arrest him without a warrant.

(9) This section does not apply—

(a) in England and Wales, to a gathering in relation to a licensable activity within section 1(1fc) of the Licensing Act 2003 (provision of certain forms of entertainment) carried on under and in accordance with an authorisation within the meaning of section 136 of that Act.

(b) in Scotland, to a gathering in premises which, by virtue of section 41 of the Civic Government (Scotland^ Act 1982. are licensed to be used as a place of public entertainment.

(10) In this section—

2

"exempt person", in relation to land (or any gathering on land), means the occupier, any member of his family and any employee or agent of his and any person whose home is situated on the land.

“land in the open air includes a place partly open to the air.

3

"occupier"

"trespasser"

and “vehicle' have the same meaning as in section 61.

4

[Back to Top]

Notes

Words repealed by Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 c. 38 Sc.h.3 oara.1 (January 20, 2004 as Si 2003/3300)

www.WestLaw.uk

84,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Paged

Substituted by Licensing Act 2003 c. 17 Sch.6 oara.111 (November 24. 2005)

(a)   Definition repealed by Licensing Act 2003 c. 1. Sch.7 oara.1 (November 24, 2005 as SI 2005/3056)

(4) Repealed by Licensing Act 2003 c, 17 Sch.7 para.1 (November 24, 2005 as SI 2005/3056)

(5) Amended by Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 c. 38 PI 7 s.58 (January 20, 2004)

(6) Repealed subject to transitory provisions specified in SI 2005/3495 art.2(2) by Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 c. 15 Sch.17f2t para.1 (January 1,2006: repeal has effect subject to transitory provisions specified in SI 2005/3495 art.2(2))

(7) Note not available

Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland

Subject: Criminal law Other related subjects: Penology and criminology

www.WestLaw.uk

85,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

86,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (2).pdf

Contents

Ministerial foreword   4

Introduction    6

(11) Anti-social behaviour orders: the basics 8

What are anti-social behaviour orders?          8

What sort of behaviour can be tackled by ASROs?   8

Legal definition of anti-social behaviour for the purpose of obtaining an order       9

Standard of proof        9

Against whom can an order be made?            10

Who can apply for an order?  10

Which courts can make ASBOs?       11

Length of orders         11

Anti-social behaviour response courts            11

Orders made in county court proceedings (section IB of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998)           13

(12) Taking a strategic approach        14

Orders made on conviction in criminal proceedings  14

Where is an ASBO valid?      14

Can interim orders be made?  15

Interim orders made in the county courts       16

Orders against children and young people     16

Breach of an order      16

Expert prosecutors      16

Standard ASBO form 17

Disposals         17

(13) Managing the application process           19

Partnership working    19

Taking ownership       20

Other considerations   21

Collection of evidence            22

Together campaign fact sheet 23

(14) Time limits          24

Magistrates’ courts (acting in their civil capacity)     24

(15) Use of hearsay and professional witness evidence         25

Hearsay evidence        25

Professional witnesses            25

Vulnerable and intimidated witnesses            25

Witness development and support      26

Improving protection of witnesses in court    27

(16) Information sharing         28

Information sharing and registered social landlords  28

Information sharing protocols            28

87,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Contents

(17) The terms of the order (the prohibitions)            29

The role of the agencies          29

The courts       29

Effective prohibitions 30

Length of prohibitions            31

Targeting specific behaviour  31

Duration of an order   32

(18) Applying to the courts    33

Summons procedure   33

Disclosure       33

Court procedures         33

Orders made on conviction in criminal proceedings  33

Interim orders on conviction   36

Step-by-step guide      37

Public funding for defendants 37

(19) Children and young people         38

Who can apply for an order?  38

Individual support orders        41

(20) Immediate post-order procedure (adults and young people)      44

Good practice - managing procedures and timescales            44

Enforcing the order     45

One-year review of juveniles’ ASBOs           45

Police National Computer (PNC)       45

(21) Appeals   46

Magistrates’ court (acting in its civil capacity) and orders on conviction in criminal proceedings 46

County court   46

Appeals to the High Court by case stated      46

Appeals before the Crown Court        47

Rectification of mistakes        47

Application for judicial review           47

(22) Breaches  48

Breaches by adults      48

Breaches by children and young people         48

(23) Variation and discharge of an order       50

(24) Monitoring and recording           51

(25) Promoting awareness of orders   52

Suggested aims of the strategy           52

Publicity          52

Principles         52

Benefits of publicity   53

The decision to publish           53

The decision-making process 53

What publicity should look like: are the contents proportionate?      54

Type of information to include in publicity    54

Age consideration       54

Photographs    55

Distribution of publicity         55

Consideration of human rights           56

Consideration of data protection        56

Type of publicity         56

Working with the media         56

2

88,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

 

IN THE WOOD GREEN CROWN COURT

Case No A2Q150064

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ORDER

BETWEEN:

SIMON CORDELL -and-

Appellant

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

Respondent

SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

References to page numbers are in [square brackets], [AX] being the Appellant’s bundle and [RX] being

the Respondent’s bundle

1

Listing; For appeal hearing, 22-24.02,16 for 3 days

Issues: (I) whether the Appellant has acted in an anti-social manner

(ii) whether an ASBO necessary Recommended

pre-reading: For an Application for the ASBO [Rl-3]

The ASBO made on 04.08.15 [R13]

The statements of DC Elsmore, the OIC [R14-35]

Statements of R’s witnesses [R36-66]

A’s statements [A1-X5]

Statements of A’s witnesses [A16-30, A258-272]

Introduction

(1) The Appellant is appealing against a decision made by the district judge at Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court on 4 August 2015 pursuant to S.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (“the 1998 Act”) to make him subject to an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) to last for 5 years.

(2) The facts relied upon by the Respondent are set out in the bundle of evidence placed before the court and, in particular, the witness statements of the Respondent’s officers [R.14-35]. The Appellant has also provided a bundle for this appeal hearing [A],

89,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument.pdf

(3) The Respondent’s case is that the Appellant has been integrally involved in the organisation of raves in London, particularly Enfield, and/or the supply of sound equipment to those raves. The Respondent relies on each incident set out in the application notice to support his case [Rl-3]. 'The Respondent submits that it is necessary for an ASBO to be in place to protect the public from further anti-social acts, specifically the organisation of raves, done by the Appellant.

(4) A chronology of events is appended to this Skeleton Argument.

(5) Legal framework

(6) Whilst the relevant provisions of the 1998 Act were repealed by the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, s.21 of that Act provides that these proceedings are unaffected except that, on 23 March 2020, the Appellant’s ASBO will automatically become an Injunction under as if made under S.1 of that Act.

(7) Section 4 of the 1998 Act provides that an appeal against the making of an ASBO lies to the Crown Court.

(8) Section 79(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 provides that an appeal to the Crown Court is by way of a re-hearing. The relevant test, therefore, is that set out in S.1 of the Act.

(1)      Pursuant to S.1 (4) of the 1998 Act, the court may exercise it discretion and make an ASBO if the two-part test set: out in S.1(l) is satisfied. Section 1(1) states:

a.      An application for an order under this section may be made by a relevant: authority if it: appears to the authority that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to any person aged ID or over, namely—that the person has acted, since the commencement date, in an and-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment:, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself; and

b.      that such an order is necessary to protect relevant persons from further anti­social acts by him.

2

90,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

(9) It is for the Respondent to satisfy the court to the criminal standard that the Appellant has acted in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself. However, the second limb of the test “does not involve a standard of proof: it is an exercise of judgment or evaluation” (R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Court [2003] l A.C. 787 at

[371).

(10) In R v Dean lioness [2006] 1 Cr. App. II. (S.) 120, the Court of Appeal provided general guidance as to the creation of prohibitions forming an ASBO. the court held that:

5. prohibitions should be individually tailored to the individual and that each individual prohibition must be necessary [28].

(ti) an ASBO can include prohibitions not to undertake minor criminal activity that may be covered under separate legislation [30-1]. However, an ASBO should seek to prevent a person from being able to commit that offence, rather than further penalise him when he does commit it [35]; and

(iii) the terms of the ASBO must be proportionate so as to be commensurate with the risk identified [37],

Submissions

The first limb of the test under S. 1 (l)(a) of the 1998 Act

(11) The organisation of large-scale raves, whether or not they fall within the parameters of s.63 of the Criminal justice and Public Order Act 1994 and whether on private property or common land, fall within the definition of anti-social behaviour. 1 he Home Office Guidance: ‘A Guide to antisocial beamer orders’ specifies noise nuisance, particularly when late at night, as an example of anti-social behaviour.

5. It is submitted that, a person who helps organise or supplies equipment for a rave, where there is loud music late at night (except where there is a licence to do so and/or the music is played on licensed premises), has prana jade done an act in contravention of S.1(l)(a) of the 1998 Act.

3

91,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument.pdf

(12) The Respondent relies on the evidence provided in die witness statements provided by various officers as well as supporting intelligence reports, the page references for this evidence are set out in the appended chronology. The court is invited to take particular note of the evidence supporting the conclusion that the Appellant was integrally involved in the organization of raves and/or the supply of equipment:

6. The Appellant was identified by gate security as the organizer of a rave of about 300 people on 7/8 June 2014 (see evidence of Insp. Hamill JR38] and supporting evidence of PS Miles [R36]).

7. The Appellant admitted to Insp. Skinner that he was the organiser of the rave on 7/8 June 2014 [R41].

8. The Appellant admitted to Insp. Skinner that he was the organiser of the rave organised and prevented on 19 July 2014 [R39, R41].

9. The Appellant admitted to PC Edgoose that he lent his sound equipment for use at raves and that he could get a significant number of people to turn out for a rave [R48, R88]; and

10. The Appellant was the organiser of the rave on 9 August 2014 and provided the sound equipment as well as laughing gas [R42, R44-5, R47]. When a crowd turned up and tried to force entry, the Appellant encouraged them to break the police line [R43, R45-6].

(13) The Respondent further relies on the information set out in the intelligence reports and the documents provided to the court in the Respondent’s bundle. The evidences show the Appellant has witnessed by many different police officers supplying equipment for or helping to organise a rave.

(14) The court will be invited to reject the Appellant’s account as t:o his activities on the relevant, days as not credible.

The second limb of the test under section 1 of the Act

(15) It is first submitted that an ASBO is, in general terms, necessary.

4

92,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument.pdf

(16) There is a significant body of evidence showing the impact of raves on people who live near where they occur [R51-66, R155-298]. The level of distress that these individuals suffered as a result of the raves organised by the Appellant was high. 'There is a need to prevent these events occurring in the future.

(17) The ASBO (and interim ASBO beforehand) have been effective. The only time where the. Appellant’s behaviour has improved is when these proceedings were commenced, and it was made clear to the Appellant that his actions could not be tolerated.

(18) "The Appellant has denied the acts alleged by the Respondent. He has shown no acknowledgment or desire to change his ways that might make an ASBO unnecessary.

(19) As to the particular prohibitions on the ASBO, significant effort was made by the Respondent and by the court to ensure that any legitimate business activities that the Appellant wished to undertake would in no way be inhibited by this order. Tor the Appellant to provide recorded music to a gathering of people he would either need to have a licence for that event or to provide the music on a licensed premises for fewer than 500 people with, a general licence to play recorded music (see s. 1 and Sch.l of the Licensing Act 2003). This order specifically does not preclude him from providing regulated entertainment under the auspices of a valid licence.

(20) The only amendment that the Respondent would seek is that the words “or s.63(l. A)” be added after the words “s.63(l)” in prohibitions a, b, and c of the ASBO.

(21) It is submitted that the terms of the ASBO as drafted are necessary and proportionate in that they should have minimal impact on the Appellant’s life and legitimate business activities.

Robert Talalay

Chambers of 1 'torus Barton OC 5 Essex Court "I’rnrpk

January 2016

5

93,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

6

Case No A20150064

IN THE WOOD GREEN CROWN COURT

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ORDER

BETWEEN:

SIMON CORDELL

Appellant

-and-

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

Respondent

SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE RESPONDENT

1C Essex Court

Hugh Giles (Director)

Metropolitan Police Service

Directorate of Legal Services

New Scotland Yard

Broadway

London

SW1H OBG

94,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

IN THE WOOD GREEN CROWN COURT        Case No A2Q15P064

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ANTI-SOCIAL

BEHAVIOUR ORDER

BETWEEN:

SIMON CORDELL

Appellant

-and-

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

Respondent

CHRONOLOGY

12/01/13

Information pertaining to this date entered by PC Purcell that a vehicle

belonging to the Appellant (Ford hocus Silver MA57LDY) was supplying equipment for a rave in Canary Wharf [R152-4]. Appellant accepts attendance but. denies any organisational/supply role for a rave [A3]

24/05/13

Information pertaining to this date entered by PC- Jackson that the

Appellant was seen with another individual who told PC- Jackson that they were looking for a place to set. up a rave over the ban holiday [R118- 120]. Appellant’s account at [A4]

25/05/14

Information pertaining to this date entered by PC Hoodless concerning a

report that there were trespassers on private premises. The Appellant was spoken to and had a set of large speakers in his van (White Ford I transit CX52JPZ) [R112-4]. Appellant accepts attendance but denies any organisational/supply role for a rave [A4]

6-8/06/14

Police attended and broke up a rave at Progress Way, Enfield. Evidence of the Appellant’s alleged organisational involvement [R36-41, 110]; impact statements [R51-66]; CAD reports [R155-298]. Appellant denies attendance on 6 or 8 June 2014 and admits attendance on 7 June 2014 but denies any organisational/supply role for a rave [A5]

95,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

20/06/14

Rave in Neasden closed down. White Fold Transit CX52JRZ removed from the site [R102]. Appellant’s account is that he provided sound equipment for a gentleman’s birthday party and was informed the following day that his equipment had been seized [A5, A253-6]

19/07/14

Police attended and closed down a putative rave on Great Cambridge

Road, Enfield. Evidence of the Appellant’s alleged organisational involvement [R39-41, R91]. Appellant’s account is that stopped his car to help a homeless person from being arrested when he was arrested for a breach of the peace; he denies any organisational/supply role for a rave

[A6]

24/07/14

Conversation reported by PC Edgoose in which the Appellant is alleged

to have bragged about organising raves [R48, R88]. I he Appellants account is at [A6-7]

27/07/14

Information pertaining to this date entered by PC Chandler that the Appellant driving a White herd transit CX52JRZ was present at powering speakers at a rave on Millmarsh Lane, Enfield [R83-6J. Appellant, accepts attendance at a birthday party but denies any organisational/supply role for a rave [A7]

09-10/08/14

Police attended and broke up a rave on Millmarsh Lane, Pm field.

Evidence of the Appellant’s alleged organisational involvement [R42-7, R80-1]. Appellant accepts attendance at a birthday dinner but denies any organisational/supply role for a rave

96,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

787

[R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))

House of Lords

Regina (McCann and others) v Crown Court at Manchester

and another

Clingham v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough fi Council

[2002.] UKHL 39

2002 May 27,28; Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton,

Oct 17 Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough and

Lord Scott of Foscote

Crime — Crime and disorder — Antisocial behaviour order — Applications for anti­social behaviour orders relying on hearsay evidence — Whether proceedings civil or criminal — Whether hearsay evidence admissible — Whether criminal standard of proof to be satisfied — Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (c 37J, s r — Human Rights Act 1998 (042), Sch 1, Ft 1, act

In the first case the Chief Constable applied to the magistrates’ court for anti- social behaviour orders to be made against each of the defendants, three brothers aged 16, 15 and 13, pursuant to section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998'. The stipendiary magistrate made the orders, which, inter alia, prohibited the defendants from entering a particular area of the city in which they lived. On the defendants’ appeal to the Crown Court, the judge held chat the proceedings for the making of an order were civil rather than criminal and that, therefore, they were not subject to the rules of evidence which applied in criminal prosecutions or to the protection of article 6(2) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1.998c However, the court applied the standard of proof of being “satisfied so that it was sure” that the orders should be made and, having done so, dismissed the appeals.

The defendants brought judicial review proceedings seeking an order of certiorari to quash the judge’s decision.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application and the Court of Appeal upheld that decision. The defendants appealed.

In the second case the local authority applied to the magistrates’ court for an anti­social behaviour order to be made against the defendant. The application was based primarily on hearsay evidence including evidence from anonymous complainants and evidence from complainants whose identities were not disclosed. A hearsay notice under the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999 was served on the defendant, who challenged its validity. Following a pre-trial review, the district judge stated a case for the Divisional Court raising questions about the admissibility of hearsay evidence in the proceedings. The Divisional Court, in reliance on the decision of the Divisional Court in the first case, ruled that the proceedings were civil and that the hearsay evidence could be admitted. The defendant appealed pursuant to a certificate granted under section 1 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960.

On the appeals—

Held, dismissing the appeal in the first case and declaring that the house had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal in the second case, that since applications for anti­social behaviour orders under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1 998 were initiated by the civil process of complaint and did not charge the defendant with any

· Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s r: see post, para 6.

· Human Rights Act 1998, Sell 1, Pt., art 6: see post, para 7.

97,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

788

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

(2003] 1 AC

crime or involve the Crown Prosecution Service, and since the making of such an order, the purpose of which was preventive not punitive, was not a conviction, did not appear on the defendant’s criminal record and resulted in no penalty, the proceedings were civil under domestic law; that, since the proceedings did not involve the determination of a criminal charge and could not result in the imposition of an immediate penalty on the defendant, they therefore could not be classified as criminal for the purposes of article 6 of the Convention; that, in so far as the proceedings involved a determination of the defendants’ civil rights and thereby engaged the right to a fair trial under article 6(r),

the use of hearsay evidence admissible under the Civil Evidence Act 1995 in such proceedings was not unfair and involved no violation of that right; that hearsay evidence under the 1995 Act and the 1999 Rules was therefore admissible on an application for an anti-social behaviour order under section 1 of the 1998 Act; but that, given the seriousness of the matter involved, the court should be satisfied to the criminal standard of proof that a defendant had acted in an anti-social manner before making such an order; and that, accordingly, in rile first case the appropriate standard of proof had been applied, and since the second case was not a “criminal cause or matter” the House had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal under section 1 of the 1960 Act (post, paras 22, 26­27, 30, 33-35, 36, 37, 39-40, 5H 55-5h, 64, 67, 68, 74, 76-77, 81-84, 94-98, 102­103, 105-106, 108, 111, 112, 11 3-117).

(22) Dicta of Lord Atkin in Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney General for Canada [1.931] AC 310, 324,

(23) PC, of Lord Bingham of Cornhili CJ in Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates' Court [2000] 1 WLR 2020, 2025,

(24) DC, B 1 > Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340, DC, S v Miller 2001 SC 977 and

(25) Gough v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary [2002] QB 1213, CA applied.

Decision of the Court of Appeal [2001] EWCA Civ 281; [2001] 1. WLR 1084; [2001] 4 All ER 264 affirmed.

The following cases are referred to in the opinions of their Lordships.

Adolf v Austria (1982) 4 EHRR 313

Albert and Le Compte v Belgium (1983)5 EHRR 533          ^

Amand v Home Secretary 1943 | AC 147; [1942] 2 All ER 381, HL(E)

B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [200 t] I WLR 340; [2001] 1 All ER 562, DC

B endenoun v France (19 9 4) 18 EHRR 5 4

Bcnham v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 293

Brown v Stott (2003] t AC 68 r; [1001] 2 WLR 817; [2001] 2 All ER 97,

PC Cons tanda v M 19 9 7 S C 217

Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates’ Court [2000] 1 WLR Z020; 120001 4 All ER 763,

DC Deweer u Belgium (1980) 2 EHRR 439

Dumbo Beheer BV v The Netherlands (1993) 18 EHRR 213

Doorson v The Netherlands (1996)22 EHRR 3 30 Engel t/

The Netherlands (No 1) (1976) > EHRR 647

Garyfallou AEBE v Greece (1997) 28 EHRR 344

Gough v Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2001 j EWITC Admin 554; [2002] QB 459; [2001] 3 WLR T392; [2001] 4 All ER 289, DC; [2002] EWCA Civ 351; 12002] QB tzr 3; (2002] 3 WLR 289; [2002] 2 All ER 985,

CA Guzzardi v Italy (1980) 3 EHRR 3 3 3

H (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof), hi re [ 1996] AC 563; (1996] 2 WLR 8; [ 1996] 1 All ER 1, HI. (E)

Han v Customs and Excise Comrs {200:] EWCA Civ 1040; [2001] 1 WLR 2253; [2001] 4 All ER 687, CA

Kostovskt v The Netherlands (5989) 12 EHRR 434

Lauko v Slovakia (1998) 33 EHRR 994

98,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] I AC

789

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lutz v Germany (1987) Ro EHRR 181

M v Italy (1991) 70 DR 59

McFeeley v United Kingdom (1980) 3 EHRR 161

M'Gregor v D 1977 SC 3 30

Official Receiver v Stern \2.000] 1 WLR 22.30; [2001] 1 All ER633, CA Qztiirk v Germany (1984) 6 EHRR 409    ^

Percy v Director of Public Prosecutions [r995l 1 WLR 1381; l.t.995] 3 All ER 124, DC

Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney General for Canada [1931] AC 310, PC

R v Kansa! (No z) [2001] UKHL 62; [2002] 2 AC 69; [2001] 3 WLR 1.562; [2002]

· All ER 257, HL{E)

R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex p McCormick [1998] BCC 379 Raimondo v Italy (1994) 18 EJHRR 137 Ravnsborg v Sweden (1994) r 8 EHRR 3 8

S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan), In re [2001] UKHL 10.

12002] 2 AC 291; [2002] zWLR 720; [2002] 2 All ER 5:92, HL(E)

S v Miller 200 s SC 977

Saidi v France {1993} 17 EHRR 251

Sporrong and Ldnnrotb v Sweden (1981) j EHRR 35

Steel v United Kingdom (1998) 28 EHRR 603

Unterpertinger v Austria (1986) 13 EHRR 175

Woodball (Alice), Ex p (1888) 20 QBD 83 2, CA

The following additional cases were cited in argument:

Bonalmm v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1985] QB 675; [1985]

· WLR 712; 11.985] 1. AUER797, CA   ^

Botross v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council (1994} 93 LGR 268,

DC     ,         .

Carr v Atkins [1987] QB 963; [1987] 3 WLR 529; [1987] 3 All LR 684, CA Ihhotson v United Kingdom (1998) 27 EHRR CD 332

Krone-Verilog GmbH v Austria (Application No 28977/95) (unreported) 21 May 1997, E Com HR

Nottingham City Council v Zain (A Manor) I2001j EWCA Civ 1248; [2002] 1 WLR 607, CA

Pelle v France (1986) 50 DR 263

R v Board of Visitors of Hull Prison, Ex p St Germain [1.979] QB 42S; 119791 1 WLR 42; [1979] 1 AUER 701, CA

R (McCann) v Crown Court at Manchester APPEAL from the Court of Appeal

This was an appeal, with leave of the House (Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn and Lord Rodger of Earls ferry) granted on 25 April 2002, by the defendants, Sean McCann, Michael McCann and Joseph McCann, against a decision of the Court of Appeal (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Kennedy and Dyson LJj) dated 1 March 2001 dismissing their appeals from a decision of the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench Division (Lord Woolf CJ and Rafferty j) on 22 November 2000 to refuse the defendants’ application, by their mother and litigation friend Margaret McCann, for judicial review by way of an order of certiorari to quash the decision of Judge Rhys Davies QC, the Recorder of Manchester, and justices sitting in the Crown Court at Manchester on 16 May 2000 to uphold a decision of a stipendiary magistrate to make anti-social behaviour orders against the defendants on the application of the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester.

99,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

790

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

[2003] 1 AC

The facts are stated in the opinion of Lord Hope of Craighead.

Clingham v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council

APPEAL from the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench Division

This was an appeal, with leave of the House granted on 23 October 2001, by the defendant, Andrew George Clingham, against a decision of the Divisional Court (Schiemann LJ and Poole J) dated 11 January 2001 dismissing his appeal by way of case stated against a decision on the admissibility of evidence by District Judge David Kennett Brown, sitting as a magistrate at Marylebone Magistrates’ Court on 14 September 2000 at a pre-trial review of an application by Kensington and Chelsea Royal London I3orough Council for an anti-social behaviour order against the defendant.

In refusing leave to appeal the Divisional Court certified, under section 1(2) c of the Administration of justice Act i960, that the following point of law of general public importance was involved in its decision: “Whether hearsay evidence is admissible in proceedings to secure the making of an anti-social behaviour order under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998?”

The facts are stated in the opinion of Lord Steyn.

Stephen Salley QC and Alan Fraser for Clingham. Seen as a whole, the scheme provided for by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 for the making of and enforcement of anti-social behaviour orders is punitive, rather than preventative, and therefore truly criminal. The sanctions for breach of such an order, which include imprisonment for a maximum of five years, are clearly penal in nature. The proper application of the relevant criteria leads to the conclusion that it is properly categorised as criminal even in respect of ^ the initial imposition of the order looked at alone. Consequently, the usual, criminal procedures apply and the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999 (SI 1999/681) do not.

The absence of any real restriction on the possible ambit of anti-social behaviour orders also presents the risk of ad hoc, novel and ill-defined “criminal offences” (founded on the terms of any such order), that is a matter of concern and possible injustice in that it is effectively creating “offences” attracting substantial penalties without the direct involvement of Parliament and in circumstances lacking the sort of certainty that should characterise any prohibition carrying such penal sanctions. The fact that the conduct originally complained of is inevitably reflected in the formulation of the “offence”, it is an integral and inextricable part of a single process with punitive sanction.

Geographical exclusion from a particular area is also properly regarded as punitive. It encroaches on freedom of movement and may in some circumstances amount to an infringement of the right to respect for private and family life (contrary to article 8 of the Convention) and/or freedom of association (contrary to article 11). Although each of these rights is subject to restriction for reasons including the “prevention of crime and disorder” and the “protection of rights of others” that reinforces the argument that such, a sanction is a punitive order.

Even if it is held that the proceedings are properly characterised as “civil”, defendants are entitled to a “fair” hearing in accordance with article 6 (R) “in

100,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

791

[2003] 1 AC   R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

A determination of his civil] rights and obligations”. In determining what is “fair” in this context an almost (or “quasi”) criminal approach should be adopted not only in relation to the standard of proof but in interpretation of wider procedural issues. In the circumstances that would include having particular regard to the minimum requirements that would attach to criminal proceedings under article 6(3), even if those did not directly apply g by virtue of criminal status. In particular this should include the right to examine witnesses pursuant to article <5(3){d).

The application of the criminal standard of proof as being “likely to be appropriate” in the majority of applications for an anti-social behaviour order was accepted by the Court of Appeal in McCann. That is an unsatisfactory approach in relation to the appropriate standard of proof. It would lead to a lack of clarity and certainty, which in turn is likely to cause C injustice, actual or perceived. The proper interpretation is that the appropriate standard of proof to be applied in relation to the making of any anti-social behaviour order is the criminal standard. It is unrealistic to suggest some sort of sliding scale between the criminal and civil standard of proof. Application of the criminal standard of proof would go a long way to achieving a fair trial.

In Clingham the allegations involve serious criminal conduct including burglary, dealing in drugs and assaults. One of the consequences of this is that a person may find himself having to attempt to answer an allegation founded on multiple hearsay to resist an application for an order, only to later have to answer a formal criminal charge founded on the same “facts” which were only proved to the civil standard. Anything said in the course of the first proceedings could be used against hint in respect of the later criminal charge. This also has the potential of effectively depriving the person of his right to silence under article 6(2) in any such subsequent proceedings. If he is to seek to preserve this right by not exposing himself to such risk, by not seeking to challenge the basis on which the anti-social behaviour order is sought, he would be compelled to constrain himself in the initial proceedings such that his general right to a “fair” hearing under article 6(1) in determination of his “civil rights and obligations” regardless of any minimum guaranteed rights afforded in respect of a “criminal charge” under article 6(3}, would be compromised. Anonymity of witnesses probably will not be achievable in these circumstances. The problem of fearful witnesses can be dealt with improving the role of the CPS and police rather than reducing the threshold required for an order to be made.

The jurisdiction to accept Clingham is properly exercised. The definition ^ of “criminal cause or matter in section r(I)(a) of the Administration of Justice Act 1.960, for the purpose of appeal to the higher courts, is wider than the phrase “criminal proceedings”: see Exp Alice Woodhall (1888} 20 QBD 832; Amand v Home Secretary [1943] AC 1:47; Bonalwni v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1985] QB 675; Carr v Atkins f 1 987] r. QB 963; Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates’ Court H [2000] 1 WLR 2020. Applying that approach the making of an anti-social behaviour order would clearly be a criminal cause or matter, as is everything that flows from it.

Adrian Eulford QC and fames Stark for the Mc Cans. Anti-social behaviour orders require proof of conduct that is criminal in nature, closely

101,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

[2003] 1 AC

akin to offences under sections 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and may lead to restrictions on liberty that constitute a punishment. Although the wording of sections 4A and 5 Public of the 1986' Act is not identical to section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act .1998, the conduct involved all falls within section 1. Furthermore, there is no limitation placed on the definition of harassment in section 7(2) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

English law contains a number of strict liability offences. The lack of a requirement of intent cannot render the proceedings civil. Furthermore, men’s rea in both section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and section 2. of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 offences is knowledge based i.e. knew or ought to have known. Most tellingly of all section 1(10) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 itself creates an offence without the requirement of intent- It is subject only to a reasonable excuse defence.

Whether a prohibited act leads to criminal proceedings depends upon the consequences arising from the act not the form of the statute within which it is described or the procedure by which proceedings are commenced. The procedure must be looked at in its totality from the beginning to the end. Although proceedings are started by complaint that is not conclusive. An anti-social behaviour order makes those against whom they are made subject to the risk of criminal sanctions in respect of conduct that would not otherwise be criminal. Conduct which is criminal in character may well take place only at the stage of breach of an order. Prohibitions against committing criminal offences or defined types of anti-social behaviour can be made, breach of which may expose the individual to far more serious penalties than the offence itself. Although it may have been Parliament’s intention to create civil rather than criminal proceedings, one has to look at what has been created not what it was intended to create. The fact that there are different stages to the proceedings does not prevent both stages being criminal causes or matters: see Amand v Home Secretary [r 943] AC 147; R v Board of Visitors of Hull Prison, Ex p St Germain [1979] QB 425- Consequently, applications for anti-social behaviour orders are the initial step in a criminal cause or matter.

The second limb of section 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the requirement of it being “necessary” to make an order is not at odds with the character of the proceedings being criminal Those elements come into play in other criminal proceedings. The first limb constitutes the “offence’ the second limb the need for a “penalty”.

The fact that a penalty, which may have severe consequences, is described as being imposed to protect the public in the future, and not as a punishment for a crime already committed does not prevent the proceedings being criminal proceedings when the correct test is applied: see Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney General for Canada [1.931! AC 310; Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates’ Courts [2000] 1: WLR 2020. The object of a penalty by way of sentence is that it seeks to “protect” as well as to “punish” e.g. removing an offender from society by custody to prevent further offending.         In sentencing protective

considerations, rather than society’s need to punish the individual, often play the major role in deciding what penalty to impose. Thus, to define an anti-social behaviour order as protective does not in any way diminish its punitive effect.

102,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

793

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

The conditions that may be attached to an anti-social behaviour order are unlimited. Curfews and orders banning people from certain areas are now expressly recognised as criminal penalties under sections 37 and 40A of the Powers of the Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000. Restrictions upon liberty have also included a limit upon the number of visitors a person can have to their home or the number of persons with whom they may congregate.

The injunction analogy is a false one. Injunctions seek to prevent the interference by one person with another’s civil rights whether in contract, tort, or equity or to ensure that civil obligations are carried out as in the case of a mandatory injunction. They are not aimed at preserving public order or containing anti-social behaviour. Committal is in consequence of disobedience to the court not as a punishment or penalty for the actual conduct involved. Furthermore, a contempt can be purged but an anti-social behaviour order last for two years.

There are fundamental differences between an anti-social behaviour order and a sex offender order under section 2 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Section 1 requires proof. Section 2 only requires “reasonable cause to believe”. Thus the court does not, under section 2, apply a simple objective test of whether acts took place as in section 1 but has a further subjective element to apply that is not consistent with a criminal offence. Furthermore, the sex offender has already had his fair trial to the criminal standard of proof on the conduct which gave rise to the jurisdiction to make an order. The sex offender order is a mechanism to control the further conduct of those already convicted of criminal offences. The essential prerequisite for the order does not need to be proved in proceedings for making the order. In the context of European jurisprudence a sex offender order is made against a very limited class of persons, those already convicted of sex offences while the anti-social behaviour order is of general application. That is a significant factor: see Benbam v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 293

The relevant criteria for the consideration of whether proceedings are criminal for the purpose of article 6 of the Convention rights are: (a) the domestic classification; (b) The nature of the proceedings; (c) The nature and severity of the punishment: see Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) (1976) I EHRR 647. Those criteria are not cumulative. Any one of the three may render the proceedings as being in respect of criminal charge: see Garyfallou AEBE v Greece (1997) 28 EHRR 344; Lauko v Slovakia (1998) 33 EHRR 994. There does not have to be tile formal constituent elements of an offence as recognised in domestic law: see Deiveer v Belgium (1980) 2 EHRR 439. There is a broad similarity between proceedings for anti-social behaviour orders and breach of the peace. In both cases what is effectively sought is an order prohibiting a certain kind of behaviour. The intention was almost certainly to create a civil procedure, but it did not actually achieve that: see Steel v United Kingdom (1998) 28 EHRR 603. A penalty is still a penalty even when it takes a novel form. See also Han v Customs and Excise Gamuts [ 2001 j 1 WFR 2253 for a review of the European jurisprudence.

The original anti-social behaviour is the most significant element of the criminal conduct leading to a criminal sanction under section 1(10). Thus the crucial conduct of a criminal nature that lies at the heart of the order and to which it is most important for the procedural safeguards of article 6(2) and (3) to be applied occurs at the first stage on the application for an order. It is

103,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

794

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

[2003] AC

thus impossible, when applying the autonomous test from the Convention as A to the genera! nature of the proceedings, to escape the conclusion that they are in respect of a criminal charge. Thus, the orders made in the instant proceedings on the basis that they were civil proceedings not subject to such safeguards should be quashed.

Having a shifting or varying burden of proof may impose on justices an almost impossible task and could lead to the wholly undesirable practice of g justices being asked about the approach they are going to adopt.

A professional judge could mould proceedings to meet the particular dictates of the case more easily: see Official Receiver v Stern I2000] I WLR 2230, 2257-2258. Other issues also arise: the protections under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 would not apply and there could be profound problems regarding the weight to be given to identification evidence.

Brodie Thompson QC for Liberty. There are fundamental implications in the development of criminal law involved in the use of anti-social behaviour orders. It is important that all the full protections of criminal procedure are maintained when people are in effect accused of criminal conduct. Under section I(I){a) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 a person with no previous convictions can be accused of conduct which could equally well have been prosecuted under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. An individual can thus be brought before the court for the first time under section 1 (I)(a). The penalties that can be imposed are in reality much more severe than those under section 5 or under the procedure of binding over the keep the peace, which is a criminal matter under the convention: see Steel v United Kingdom 28 EHRR 603. The protections under criminal law are designed to protect the liberties of persons accused of such conduct. It is Ł important that such protections exist and are changed only by the express will of Parliament. The analogies with sex offenders etc concern people who have already been convicted. It is quite different to impose a similar regime on someone who has no convictions. There is no objection to simple procedures to deal with public order disturbances. There is a long history of such powers see summary in: Percy v Director of Public Prosecutions [ 19 9 5 3 1 WLR 1382. The proper approach to anti-social behaviour is for principled changes in die criminal law to be made by Parliament. The alternative of regarding the matter as civil but reading in criminal protections on an “ad hoc” basis is conceivable hut less desirable in that it left to the Courts to define the protections traditionally provided by the criminal law.

Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 imposes on the courts a broad general duty to construe primary, as well as secondary, legislation to accord c with Convention rights. In that respect the strong interpretive obligation imposed by section 3 necessarily subordinates the narrow intention of Parliament in the adoption of particular measures to its broader intention to avoid any implied inconsistency with protection of the Convention rights, even in primary legislation. Thus, section 3 introduces a degree of circularity into the position under domestic law, requiring the position under the Convention to be considered even in respect of the proper classification of anti-social behaviour orders in. the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 under domestic law principles. Such orders should be construed as criminal if a civil classification would fail to provide all the protections required by the Convention under a criminal classification.

104,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

795

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

John Bowers QC and Richard Banwell for Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council. Anti-social behaviour orders were specifically introduced in section x of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as a novel method for the police and local authorities to deter anti-social behaviour and prevent its escalation, without recourse to criminal sanctions. They are a reaction to a widely perceived social problem of crime and disorder. They were not intended to replace or modify existing criminal offences; rather they are primarily preventative in nature.

A useful contrast may be made between anti-social behaviour orders and:

· curfew orders under sections 12 and 13 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 which are available to the court upon conviction of an offence; and (b) the terms of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 which specifically creates a criminal offence.

An anti-social behaviour order may be properly characterised in effect as, or by analogy, to a quick time injunctive order made in civil proceedings, used to restrain further behaviour which may cause harassment, alarm or distress to the relevant persons in the local government area concerned. Section 1(4) of the 1998 Act thus provides that an order may prohibit the defendant from doing anything described in the order in the future. An order is in terms restricted to the prohibition(s) necessary to protect persons in a defined area from anti-social behaviour (section 1(6)) and is manifestly an order designed to protect in the future, not to punish past misconduct. An analogy to the anti-social behaviour order is the banning order, which may be made by a magistrates’ court under section 14B of the Football Spectators Act 1989. Such an order is civil in nature: see Gough u Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2002] QB 459. A similar comparison can be made with disqualification orders under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 which are also not criminal: see R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex p McCormick [ 1998] BCC 379.

The making of an anti-social behaviour order does not involve a trial and punishment of the individual concerned. Indeed, section I{r){a) of the 1998 Act does not require that a person has caused harassment, alarm, or distress, only that the same may be likely to be caused. The contrast between the provisions of an anti-social behaviour orders and section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 is also instructive. Section 5 expressly provides that a person using threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behaviour within the hearing of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm and distress is guilty of an offence. There is no attribution of an offence to an anti-social behaviour order.

There is no “overall scheme” to section r. to which the application for an anti-social behaviour order can be seen as a “preliminary” (non-criminal proceeding) stage, Instead anti-social behaviour orders, like an injunction may be a possible precursor to separate penal proceedings to enforce them as a distinct second stage, but they do not constitute penal proceedings in themselves. Subsequent enforcement proceedings under the 1998 Act for breach are quite separate from the initial application and order. There is no immediate danger of an individual losing his liberty merely because an order is made.

There are other features of the application for an anti-social behaviour order which tend towards it being a civil procedure: (a) Under Section 1(3) of the 1998 Act proceedings are initiated by complaint, the appropriate

105,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

796

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (Ł)

[2003] 1 AC

procedure for commencing civil proceedings in the magistrates’ court.

· The requirement to consult each other “relevant authority” and adjoining authorities where an order specifies neighbouring areas, demonstrates that it is not contemplated that penal sanctions be imposed.

· Criminal sanctions are found in Part I of the 1998 Act under the heading “Crime and Disorder: general” which covers prohibitions on sex offenders (section z) and “Crime and disorder strategies” (section 5) thus emphasizing the preventative nature of the provisions; (d) Prosecutions are not conducted by the Crown Prosecution Service.

The categorization for what constitutes a criminal offence formulated in Customs and Excise Comrs v City of London Magistrates’ Court. [2000]

1. WLR 2,020 should be adopted. On that basis applications for anti-social behaviour orders involve none of the hallmarks of a criminal matter; there is no formal accusation, made on behalf of the state or by any private prosecutor, that a defendant has committed a breach of the criminal law.

There is no relevant or viable concept of “quasi-criminal” in respect of hearsay evidence, although there may be varying standards of the civil standard of proof. That is a wholly different matter to a “quasi-criminal” approach to matters of admissibility of evidence.

If applications under the 1.998 Act for an anti-social behaviour order are civil in nature, the decision of the High Court in Clingham is final and no right of appeal lies to the House of Lords, as section I(I){a) of the Administration of Justice Act i960 only permits an appeal from a decision of the High Court “in any criminal cause or matter”.

Charles Garside QC and Peter Cadwallader for the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester. Applications for anti-social behaviour orders are civil proceedings. Any proceedings for the breach of an order are criminal proceedings. It was the intention of Parliament that applications for anti­social behaviour orders should be civil proceedings. That result was affected by section 1 of the 1998 Act,

Criminal proceedings are begun by arrest, charge, and production at court or by laying an information followed by summons or warrant. Applications for anti-social behaviour orders are begun by complaint. That is the method for commencing civil proceedings in magistrates’ courts: see Part 2 and sections 51 and 52 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980. Botross v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council (1994) 93 LGR 268 was a case with special facts. It concerned section 82(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The Act and that section had a long legislative history going back to 1.875. ^ ^la<^ been decided in many cases that the nature of such proceedings was criminal, in part, because the sanctions available included a fine. The court concluded that when Parliament enacted the r.990 Act it had made a mistake in legislating for such proceedings to be begun by complaint and had never intended to change the nature of such proceedings.

The procedure for applications for anti-social behaviour orders (section 1(2) of the 1.998 Act) and sex offender orders (section 2(2) of the Act) are identical. Applications for sex offenders’ orders are civil proceedings: see B t/ Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary 1200r j r WLR 340.

106,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[20031 I AC

797

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Applying the three criteria laid down in Engel v The Netherlands (No I) I EHRR 647 to determine whether the proceedings are “criminal” for the purposes of article 6: first, the proceedings for anti-social behaviour orders are classified as civil in domestic law and, second, the defendants are not charged with any offence. As to the third criterion, section 1 of the Act is directed not to the detection, apprehension, trial and punishment of those who have committed crimes, but the restraint of those who have committed anti-social behaviour (which may also amount to a crime) and whose conduct is such that a measure of restraint is necessary to protect members of the public from further anti-social behaviour. The purpose of the proceedings is of importance within the European Jurisprudence: see Raitnondo v Italy (1994) 18 EHRR 2.37', Guzzardi v Italy (1980) 3 EHRR 333. The powers available in those case was at least as restrictive as chose given to the court under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

Jonathan Crow for the Secretary of State for the Horne Department. In determining whether, as a matter of domestic classification, a particular statutory provision forms part of the criminal law, there are two elements: (T) a “prohibited act” and (ii) “penal consequences”: see Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney General for Canada [19313! AC 310, 314. In relation to the first limb, the Act itself does not itself “prohibit” the conduct defined in any anti-social behaviour order. In relation to the second limb, it is important to consider the nature of an anti-social behaviour order independently from the possible consequences of any breach. Given that the only act that can logically be said to have been “prohibited” by section 1 is the act which triggers the making of the order, it is only permissible to consider the immediate consequences of that act—not the possible consequences of some other acts in breach of the anti-social behaviour order, that may or may not occur in the future. When properly analysed Amand v Home Secretary [1943] AC 147 and R v Board of Visitors of Hull Prison, Ex p St Germain [1979] QB 42,5 support that approach. They decide that a cause or matter would be classified as criminal if, carried to its conclusion, it might result in a conviction and sentence. That analysis demonstrates that the criminal sanction for a breach of an anti-social behaviour order cannot affect the proper classification of the proceedings that are brought for the imposition of ail anti-social behaviour order. It is also entirely consistent with the analysis adopted in many other areas of the law, for example, interim injunctions, sex offenders’ orders and orders under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986.

The question whether any act is “prohibited” by section r. of the 1998 Act is not answered by reference to the question whether the preconditions for making an anti-social behaviour order are exactly co-extensive with some other substantive criminal offence— e.g. under the Public Order Act 1986 or the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997. The correct question is whether section 1 itself prohibits any act. It does not. In any event there are substantial differences between, on the one hand, section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986 and section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act and, on the other, section 1: of the 1:998 Act.

Tor the purposes of article 6 there are several reasons why the preconditions to making an anti-social behaviour order take it outside the criminal realm. The order seeks to deal with anti-social behaviour, not with

107,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

798

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

[2003] 1 AC

crime, and it seeks to do so by preventing future crimes rather than by punishing past ones. If a sanction is imposed for the purposes of deterrence or punishment, then it is likely to be regarded as a criminal penalty: see Oztiirk v Germany (1984) 6 EHRR 409; Han v Customs and Excise Comrs [2.001] 1 WLR 2253. By contrast, a sanction that is imposed for preventive reasons is not so regarded (even if it involves a restriction on liberty, and/or an interference with property rights, and/or it is imposed in the context of criminal proceedings: see Raimondo v Italy (1994) ŁHRR 237; M v Italy (1990) 70 DR 59. A decision whether to impose an anti-social behaviour order does not involve the determination of a criminal charge simply because the matters on which reliance is placed might also happen to constitute the necessary elements of a criminal offence: see Pelle v France (1986) 50 DR 263; McFeeley v United Kingdom (1980) 3 EHRR 161. Finally, the existence of past misconduct cannot of itself trigger an anti­social behaviour order: there must also be a need for protection for the future under section r(I)(b).

An anti-social behaviour order is clearly not a criminal penalty. Section 1(4) precludes any order being made other than as a prohibition. The court can neither fine nor imprison a person. There is a very significant difference in the European jurisprudence between imposing a restriction on a person’s liberty (which will not be a criminal penalty) and depriving a person of his liberty (which will be a criminal penalty): see Guzzardi v Italy 3 LEIRR 333; Raimondo v Italy 18 EHRR 237. The court cannot deprive a person of his liberty under the cloak of an anti-social behaviour order, and the fact that an order might interfere with his freedom of movement (e g by excluding him from designated areas) does not convert it into a criminal penalty.

The fact that a person may be imprisoned for acting in breach of an anti­social behaviour order doc not mean that the imposition of the order itself involves any criminal penalty: see by analogy Ibhotson v United Kingdom (1998) 27 EHRR CD 332. The reason why a different conclusion was reached in Steel u United Kingdom 28 EHRR 603 was that the penalty was available to he imposed at the outset by the sentencing court in order to enforce compliance with the order. The difference in Ibbotson was that in that case separate proceedings would have to be brought for a breach of the statutory obligation before any criminal sanction could be imposed. The same is true under section 1 of the 1998 Act.           ^

Steel v United Kingdom 28 EHRR 603, Garyfallou AEBE v Greece 28 EHRR 344 and Lauko v Slovakia 33 EHRR 994 merely illustrate the application in very different factual situations of the three criteria in Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) 1 EHRR 647 without adding any points of principle.        ___

Applying the criminal standard of proof is wrong in three respects. First, it undermines one of the purposes of section 1 of the 1998 Act, namely, to render it easier to obtain an anti-social behaviour order than it would be to obtain a conviction for a comparable offence. Second, it conflates the two elements in section 1 of the 1998 Act. There is no reason why the criminal standard should be applied in relation to the question whether section I.(1 )(b) is satisfied: that is a matter of evaluation as to future risk, and simply does not lend itself to being tested by reference to the criminal standard of proof. Third, in relation to the issues generally under section 1, the Court of

108,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

799

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

Appeal’s approach subverts the proper classification of an anti- social behaviour order as involving civil proceedings.

The civil standard of proof should be regarded as a single fixed standard. However, the more serious the allegation the more cogent the evidence will need to be see in re H (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563.

Solley QC in reply. Kostovski v Netherlands (1989) 12 EHRR. 434 and Saidi v France (1993) 17 EHRR 251 involved a lack opportunity to examine witnesses.

The criminal standard of proof would not lie comfortably with the hearing of hearsay evidence under the Civil Evidence Act 1995. There should be a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Fulford QC in reply. Raimondo v Italy 18 EHRR 237 and Guzzardi v Italy 3 EHRR 333 involved very different proceedings from an anti-social behaviour order. See also Krone-Verlog GmbH v Austria (Application No 28977/95) (unreported) 21 May 1997 and Nottingham City Council v Zain (A Minor) [2002] 1 WLR 607.

Their Lordships took time for consideration.

17 October. LORD STEYN

· My Lords, section 1. of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (“the Act”) provides for the making of anti-social behaviour orders against any person aged ten years or over. It came into force on 1 April 1999. Between 1 April 1999 and 31. December 2001. magistrates in England and Wales made 588 such orders and refused 19. It is important social legislation designed to remedy a problem which the existing law failed to deal with satisfactorily. This is the first occasion on which the House has had to examine the implications of section 1.

· There are two appeals before the House. They are unrelated but raise overlapping issues. Both cases involve the power of the magistrates’ court under section 1 of the Act, upon being satisfied of statutory requirements, to make an anti-social behaviour order prohibiting a defendant from doing prescribed things. Breach of such an order may give rise to criminal liability. That stage has, however, not been reached in either case. In the case of Clingbam no order has been made. In the case of the McCann breathers anti­social behaviour orders have been made against all three. The appeals are therefore concerned only with the first stage of the procedure under the Act, namely, the application for such an order, and the making of it, and not with the second stage, namely proceedings taken upon an alleged breach of such an order.

· Clingham the district judge gave a preliminary ruling on 14 September 2000. In the McCann case the recorder gave judgment on an appeal from a stipendiary magistrate on 16 May 2000. E11 both cases the Human Rights Act 1998 is not directly applicable: R v Kansal (No 2) I2002] 2 AC 69. The House has, however, been invited by all counsel to deal with the appeals as if the Human Rights Act 1998 is applicable. My understanding is that your Lordships are willing to do so.

109,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

800

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (Ł)

Lord Steyn

[2003] AC

· The principal issues ^

· It is common ground that proceedings taken for breach of an anti­social behaviour order are criminal in character under domestic law and fall within the autonomous concept “a criminal charge” under article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998. The principal general and common questions are:

· (a) whether as a matter of domestic classification proceedings leading to the making of an anti-social behaviour order are criminal in nature; and

· (b) whether under article 6 of the European Convention such proceedings involve “a criminal charge”. Underlying these questions are two specific issues, namely:

· (c) whether under section 1 of the Act hearsay evidence is admissible in proceedings seeking such an order.

1. what the standard of proof is in such proceedings. The evidential c question arises primarily in the Clingham case and the question as to standard of proof arises mainly in the McCann case. On the other hand, counsel for the defendants to a considerable extent adopted each other’s submissions.

· Jurisdiction

· If under domestic law an application for an anti-social behaviour order under section r of the Act properly fails to be classified as civil proceedings, the House may not have jurisdiction in the Clingham case. The House has, however, jurisdiction to inquire into its own jurisdiction and to deal with all relevant matters pertinent to that inquiry. Moreover, the jurisdictional issue causes no real problem since the points which arise in the Clingham case arguably could arise in the McCann case. All parties wish the House to deal with the genera! and specific issues outlined which could arise in many proceedings under section 1. In these circumstances the jurisdictional question can be considered briefly at the very end of this judgment.

HI Section 1. of the Act and article 6 of the European Convention           

· In order to render the proceedings and issues intelligible it is necessary to set out section 1. of the Act. It appears in Part I of the Act under the heading “Prevention of Crime and Disorder”. The material parts of section 1 read as follows:

“(1) An application for an order under this section may be made by a c relevant authority if it appears to the authority that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to any person aged ten or over, namely—(a) that the person has acted, since the commencement date, in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself; and (b) that such an order is necessary to protect persons in the local government area in which the harassment, alarm or distress was caused or was likely to be caused from further anti­social acts by him; and in this section ‘relevant authority’ means the council for the local government area or any chief office:: of police any part of whose police area lies within that area.

110,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

SO)

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

A relevant authority shall not make such an application without

consulting each other relevant authority.

Such an application shall be made by complaint to the magistrates’ court. . .

@(4) If, on such an application, it is proved that the conditions mentioned in subsection (1) above are fulfilled, the magistrates’ court g may make an order under this section (an ‘anti-social behaviour order’) which prohibits the defendant from doing anything described in the order.

“(5) For the purpose of determining whether the condition mentioned in subsection (I)(a) above is fulfilled, the court shall disregard any act of the defendant which he shows was reasonable in the circumstances.

“(6) The prohibitions that may be imposed by anti-social behaviour order are those necessary for the purpose of protecting from further anti­social acts by the defendant—(a) persons in the local government area; and (b) persons in any adjoining local government area specified in the application for the order. . .

“(7) An anti-social behaviour order shall have effect for a period (not less than two years) specified in the order or until further order.

“(8) Subject to subsection (9) below, the applicant or the defendant

may apply by complaint to the court which made an anti-social behaviour order for it to be varied or discharged by a further order.

“(9) Except with the consent of both parties, no anti-social behaviour order shall be discharged before the end of the period of two years beginning with the date of service of the order.

“(10) If without reasonable excuse a person does anything which he is prohibited from doing by an anti-social behaviour order, he shall be liable—(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both; or (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.

“(11) Where a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (to) above, it shall not be open to the court by or before which he is so convicted to make an order under subsection (t)(b) (conditional discharge) of section 1A of the Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 (‘the 1973 Act’) in respect of the offence.”

The section falls into two distinct parts. Subsection (r) deals with the making of the application, the requirements for the making of an order, C the making of an order, and consequential matters. Subsections (10) and (T 1) deal with the consequences of a breach of the order.

· Article 6 of the European Convention provides as follows:

“(12) In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion

111,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] 1 AC

802

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: (a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; (b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence; (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; (d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him; (e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.”

While the guarantee of a fair trial under article 6(1) applies to both criminal and civil proceedings article 6 prescribes in paragraphs 2 and 3 additional protections applicable only to criminal proceedings. It is also well established in European jurisprudence that “the contracting states have greater latitude when dealing with civil cases concerning civil rights and obligations than they have when dealing with criminal cases”: Dombo Beheer B v The Netherlands (1993) 18 EHRR 213, 2.2.9, Para 32

IV The C Mangham case

· In late February 2000, the Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council received a report by a housing trust about the behaviour of the defendant, then aged 16, who lived on an estate within the borough. After detailed investigations the borough resolved to apply to the magistrates’ court for an anti-social behaviour order. The complaint was supported by witness statements containing some first-hand evidence of the defendant’s behaviour. The application was, however, primarily based on hearsay evidence contained in records of complaints received by the trust and in crime reports compiled by the police. The latter contained information relating to a wide range of behaviour, from allegations of verbal abuse to serious criminal activities including assault, burglary, criminal damage, and drug dealing dating from April 1998 to December 2000. The allegations revealed a high level of serious and persistent anti-social behaviour. The material from the records of the trust and the police fell into three categories: (I) anonymous complaints where the source was never known; (ii) complaints where the source was known but was not disclosed; (iii) computerised reports made by police officers in the course of their duties, where the source of the complaint was either unknown or not disclosed. The borough served its supporting material on the defendant. In substance the material in its cumulative effect was, subject to any answer by the defendant, logically probative of the statutory requirements under section r, The statements and exhibits were not, however, accompanied by a hearsay notice under the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999 (SI 1999/681).

· Pursuant to an order by the judge a hearsay notice was served on the defendant. The defendant challenged the validity of the hearsay notice on

112,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] 1 AC

803

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

the ground that it did not identify the makers of the hearsay statements. At a pre-trial review the district judge ruled that on reflection, the 1999 Rules did not apply as the borough’s supporting material involved no hearsay. The judge stated a case for the decision of the Divisional Court which raised questions about the admissibility of hearsay evidence in the proceedings under section 1(1) of the Act.

· In the Divisional Court [2001] EWHC Admin 582 the view of the district judge as to what amounted to hearsay evidence was rejected. In an unreported judgment Schiemann. I.,J observed that “If the policeman could only say that he had been told by such persons [who had seen the behaviour in question] that Mr Clingham had behaved in an anti-social manner that would be hearsay evidence of the behaviour”: para 15. Relying on the then unreported decisions of the Divisional Court in R (McCann) v Crown Court at Manchester [2001] 1 WI..R 358 and B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340 the Divisional Court ruled that the proceedings were not criminal proceedings under domestic law and did not involve a criminal charge under article 6. In these circumstances Schiemann LJ concluded, in paras 19-20:

“The |hearsay] evidence can be admitted. If its weight is slight or it is not probative the judge can say so. If he comes to an unlawful conclusion his decision can be appealed ... In the light of this judgment, it is unnecessary for us to make any order. The matter will remain to be dealt with by the magistrates’ court. That court will consider the evidence on the basis that it is hearsay evidence and therefore subject to the criticisms which can be made of hearsay evidence. The court will have to consider what weight to give to the evidence in the light of those criticisms. I do not consider it appropriate for this court to express any views as to weight.”

Poole [ took the same view, at paras 21 and 22.

The McCann cases

· I gratefully refer to the account given by my noble and learned friend Lord Hope of Craighead of the background to these cases. I can therefore deal with the matter briefly. Between May and September 1999 die Chief Constable of Greater Manchester collected evidence with a view to seeking anti-social behaviour orders against the three McCann brothers who were then respectively aged 13, 15 and 16. They had been accused by various members of the public of criminal activity and other anti-social behaviour including burglary, theft, threatening and abusive behaviour, and criminal damage in the Beswick area of Manchester. Complaints were duly lodged by the Chief Constable against them. The applications sought various prohibitions against them including orders excluding them from Beswick. The seriousness and persistence of their alleged anti-social behaviour is dearly described by Lord Hope of Craighead, (he evidence against them consisted of oral evidence of eye witnesses, as well as hearsay evidence consisting of a number of witness statements, and police evidence of what had been reported to them by complainants.

· A stipendiary magistrate found the requirements of section 1(1) satisfied and made anti-social behaviour orders against all three McCann brothers on 15 December 1999. Each order provided as follows:

113,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] 1 AC

804

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

“[The defendant] is prohibited from entering the Beswick area as defined, edged in red, on the map attached- [The defendant] is prohibited from using or engaging in any abusive, insulting, offensive, threatening or intimidating language or behaviour in any public place in the City of Manchester. [The defendant] is prohibited from threatening or engaging in violence or damage against any person or property within the City of Manchester. [The defendant] is prohibited from encouraging any other person to engage in any of the acts described in paragraphs a and 3 within the City of Manchester.”

The defendants appealed to the Crown Court.

· Sir Rhys Davies QC, the Recorder of Manchester, sat with two magistrates. After a review of the domestic and European case law he concluded that the proceedings under section 1(1) are correctly to be classified as civil under domestic law and for the purposes of article 6. The recorder then turned to the argument that, despite this classification, the criminal standard should apply under section 1(1). He cited an observation in B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2.00:1) 1 WLR 340, 354, para 31, where Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ described, in the context of section z of the Act, which deals with orders against sex offenders, the heightened civil standard of proof as “for all practical purposes . . . indistinguishable from the criminal standard”. I the recorder stated:

“Having considered this authority and the arguments, we are satisfied that the standard to be applied is the civil standard, but how are we to give effect to the guidance of the Lord Chief Justice, that is to apply the civil standard with the strictness appropriate to the seriousness of the matters to be proved and the implications of proving them. This is not an easy task and we have brought to bear the judicial experience of all three of us which, it is has to be said, is considerable, and we have concluded that in reality it is difficult to establish reliable gradations between a heightened civil standard commensurate with [the] seriousness and implications of proving the requirements, and the criminal standard. And we have concluded chat for the purposes of this particular case, and we do not intend to lay down any form of precedent, so I emphasises that for the purposes of this particular case, we will apply the standard of being satisfied so that we are sure that the conditions are fulfilled before we would consider the making of an order in the case of each [defendant] severally, because, of course, each case must be considered separately.”

This is an important observation, by a highly experienced judge, to which I must in due course return.     ^

· The defendants appealed to the Divisional Court. Lord Woolf CJ (with the agreement of Rafferty J) ruled that the proceedings under section 1(1) were properly to be classified under domestic law and under article 6 of the European Convention as civil proceedings and not criminal proceedings. The court dismissed the appeal: R (McCann) v Croum Court at Manchester [2.001] 1 WLR 3 58,

·  The defendants then appealed to the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). The leading judgment was given by Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR; Kennedy and Dyson IJJ agreed: R (McCann) 1/ Crown

114,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

805

[2003] I AC   

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

A Court at Manchester [2001] t WLR 1084. In a detailed judgment Lord Phillips MR concluded that both under domestic law and under article 6 the correct categorisation of proceedings under section 1 of the Act is civil. He then turned to the issue whether the standard of proof should nevertheless be the criminal one. He referred to the observation of Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ in B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary that the heightened civil standard is for all practical purposes indistinguishable from the criminal standard: p 1101, para 65. He quoted the passage from the judgment of the recorder about the difficulty of establishing “reliable gradations between a heightened civil standard commensurate with the seriousness and implications of proving the requirements, and the criminal standard” and pointed out that the Crown Court decided to apply the criminal standard. Lord Phillips MR observed, at p 1102, para 67:

“I believe that the course followed by the Crown Court in this case is

likely to be appropriate in the majority of cases where an anti-social behaviour order is sought, and I would commend it.”

At present therefore the position is that in proceedings under section I.(t) magistrates have to decide, on a case by case basis, what standard of proof to 0 apply. The Secretary of State has challenged this ruling of the Court of Appeal. Counsel submitted on his behalf that it is preferable to apply a single fixed standard of a balance of probabilities.

V! The social problem

· Before the issues can be directly addressed it is necessary to sketch the social problem which led to the enactment of section t{I) and the

E technique which underlies the first part of section 1. It is well known that in some urban areas, notably urban housing estates and deprived inner-city areas, young persons, and groups of young persons, cause fear, distress, and misery to law-abiding and innocent people by outrageous anti-social behaviour. It takes many forms. It includes behaviour which is criminal such as assaults and threats, particularly against old people and children, F criminal damage to individual property and amenities of the community, burglary, theft, and so forth. Sometimes the conduct falls short of cognisable criminal offences. The culprits are mostly, but not exclusively, male. Usually they are relatively young, ranging particularly from about 1.0 to t,8 years of age. Often people in the neighbourhood are in fear of such young culprits. In many cases, and probably in most, people will only report _ matters to the police anonymously or on the strict understanding that they will not directly or indirectly be identified. In recent years this phenomenon became a serious social problem. There appeared to be a gap in the law. The criminal law offered insufficient protection to communities. Public confidence in the rule of law was undermined by a not unreasonable view in some communities that the law failed them. Ibis was the social problem which section 1 was designed to address.

2. The legislative technique

· The aim of the criminal law is not punishment for its own sake but to permit everyone to go about their daily lives without fear of harm to person or property. Unfortunately, by intimidating people the culprits, usually

115,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] 1 AC

806

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

small in number, sometimes effectively silenced communities, bear of the consequences of complaining to the police dominated the thoughts of people: reporting incidents to the police entailed a serious risk of reprisals.

The criminal law by itself offered inadequate protection to them. There was a model available for remedial legislation. Before 1998 Parliament had, on a number of occasions, already used the technique of prohibiting by statutory injunction conduct deemed to be unacceptable and making a breach of the g injunction punishable by penalties. It may be that the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 was the precedent for subsequent use of the technique. The civil remedy of disqualification enabled the court to prohibit a person from acting as a director: section 1(1) of the 1986 Act: R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex p McCormick [1998] BCC 379, 395C-F; Official Receiver v Stern [2.000] 1 WLR 2.2.30. Breach of the order made available criminal penalties: sections 13 and 14 of the 1986 Act. In 1994 c Parliament created the power to prohibit trespassory assemblies which could result in serious disruption affecting communities, movements, and so forth: see section 70 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which amended Part II of the Public Order Act 1986 by inserting section 14A. Section 14B which was introduced by the 1994 Act, created criminal offences in respect of breaches. In the field of family law, statute created the power to make residence orders, requiring a defendant to leave a dwelling house; or non-molestation orders, requiring a defendant to abstain from threatening an associated person: sections 3 3 (3)(4) and 42 of the Family Law Act 1996. The penalty for breach is punishment for contempt of court. The Housing Act 1996 created the power to grant injunctions against anti-social behaviour: section 152; section 153 (breach). This was, however, a power ^ severely restricted in respect of locality. A broadly similar technique was adopted in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997: section 3; section 3(6) (breach). Post-dating the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which is the subject matter of the present appeals, Parliament adopted a similar model in sections 14A and 14J (breach) of the Football Spectators Act T989, inserted by section 1(1) of and Schedule 1 to the Football (Disorder) Act 2000: Gough v Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2002J QB 459. In all these cases the requirements for the granting of the statutory injunction depend on the criteria specified in the particular statute. The unifying clement is, however, the use of the civil remedy of an injunction to prohibit conduct considered to be utterly unacceptable, with a remedy of criminal penalties in the event of disobedience.

· There is no doubt that Parliament intended to adopt the model of a civil remedy of an injunction, hacked up by criminal penalties, when its enacted section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The view was taken that the proceedings for an anti-social behaviour order would be civil and would not attract the rigour of the inflexible and sometimes absurdly technical hearsay rule which applies in criminal cases. If this supposition was wrong, in the sense that Parliament did not objectively achieve its aim, it would inevitably follow that the procedure for obtaining anti-social behaviour orders is completely or virtually unworkable and useless. If that is what the law decrees, so be it. My starting point is, however, an initial scepticism of an outcome which would deprive communities of their fundamental rights: sec Brown v Stott I2003] 1: AC 681, per Lord

116,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

807

[2003] 1 AC  

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

Bingham of Cornhill, at p 704E-F; per Lord Hope of Craighead, at pp 718G, 719B-C; my judgment, at p 707G-H.

· The classification under domestic law

3. It is necessary to consider whether under domestic law proceedings under the first part of section 1 should be classified as criminal or civil fi proceedings. In law it is always essential to ask for what purpose a classification is to be made or a definition is to be attempted. It is necessary in order to decide whether the provisions of the Civil Evidence Act 1995, which permits the admission of hearsay evidence in civil proceedings, and the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999, are available to establish the requirements of section 1(1). It is also relevant to the appropriate standard of proof to be adopted.

2.0 In a classic passage in Proprietary Articles Trade Association v

Attorney General for Canada [1:931] AC 310, 314 Lord Atkin observed:

“Criminal law connotes only the quality of such acts or omissions as are prohibited under appropriate penal provisions by authority of the state. The criminal quality of an act cannot be discerned by intuition; nor can it be discovered by reference to any standard but one: Is the act ^ prohibited with penal consequences?”

In Customs and Excise Conns v City of London Magistrates' Court [2000]

1 WLR 2,02,0, 2025 Lord Bingham of Cornhill C.1, expressed himself in similar vein:

“It is in my judgment the general understanding that criminal  proceedings involve a formal accusation made on behalf of the state or by a private prosecutor that a defendant has committed a breach of the criminal law, and the state or the private prosecutor has instituted proceedings which may culminate in the conviction and condemnation of the defendant.”

2. Absent any special statutory definition, in the relevant contexts, this general understanding must be controlling. Counsel for Gingham invited the House CO approach the question from the point of view of the meaning given in decided cases to the words “criminal cause or matter” which appear in section I(r)(a) of the Administration of justice Act 1.960 and section 1 8(I)(a) of the Supreme Court Act 198 1. The decided cases on both sides of the line are helpfully summarised in Taylor On Appeals (2000), pp 51:6—518, paras 14-020-14-021. The cases were decided in the context of regulating and determining the appropriate appeal route. Often pragmatic considerations played a role. These cases do not help the true inquiry before the House and distract attention from the ordinary meaning of civil proceedings which must prevail Similarly, the fact that proceedings under the first part of section r of the Act are classified as criminal in order to ensure the availability to defendants of legal assistance is in my view entirely W neutral: see section 12(2) of the Access to Justice Act 1.999 and paragraph t(I) of the Access to justice Act 1999 (Commencement No 3, Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2000 (SI 2000/774). I would approach rite matter by applying the tests enunciated by Lord Atkin and Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ.

117,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

80S

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)      

[2003] 1 AC

Lord Steyn

· Counsel for the defendants accepted that the purpose of Parliament A was to cast proceedings under the first part of section I, as opposed to proceedings for breach, in a civil mould. However, counsel submitted that objectively considered the objective was not achieved. They argued that in reality and in substance such proceedings are criminal in character. This is

an important argument which must be carefully examined. The starting point is that in proceedings under the first part of section I the Crown Prosecution Service is not involved at all. At that stage there is no formal accusation of a breach of criminal law. The proceedings are initiated by the civil process of a complaint. Under section x(I}(a) all that has to be established is that the person has acted “in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself ’. This is an objective inquiry: men’s rea as an ingredient of particular offences need is not proved. It is unnecessary to establish criminal liability. The true purpose of the proceedings is preventative. This appears from the heading of Part I. It is also clearly brought out by the requirement of section I(I)(b}:

“that such an order is necessary to protect persons in the local government area in which the harassment, alarm or distress was caused or was likely to be caused from further anti-social acts by him. It follows that the making of an anti-social behaviour order is not a conviction or condemnation that the person is guilty of an offence. It results in no penalty whatever. It cannot be entered on a defendant’s record as a conviction. It is also not a recordable offence for the purpose of taking fingerprints: see section 27 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1:984.

· Counsel for the defendants sought to avoid the consequences of this analysis by various arguments. First, they argued that the procedure leading to the making of an order under section 1(4) must be considered together with the proceedings for breach under section 1(1.0), the latter being undoubtedly criminal in character. I do not agree. These are separate and independent procedures. The making of the order will presumably sometimes serve its purpose and there will be no proceedings for breach. It is

in principle necessary to consider the two stages separately.

· Counsel next made a comparison between the requirements of section 1 and the ingredients of an offence under section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. They submitted that there was a striking similarity. This proposition was not made good. It is sufficient to point out that section 4A of the 1986 Act requires proof of men’s rea whereas section 1(1) does not. In any event, this is a barren exercise. It elides the critical point that section 1 itself does not prohibit any act. An anti-social behaviour order under C section 1(4) does prohibit conduct specified in the order but by itself does not amount to a condemnation of guilt, ft results in no penal sanction.

· Counsel for the defendants also emphasised the consequences which an anti-social behaviour order may have for a defendant. This is an important factor. Section 1 is not meant to be used in cases of minor unacceptable behaviour but in cases which satisfy the threshold of persistent and serious anti-social behaviour. Given the threshold requirements of section 1 (1) it can readily be accepted that the making of such an order against a person inevitably reflects seriously on his character. In response to this argument Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR observed 1200 t] 1: W I R 1084,1094-1095, para 39:

118,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

12003] I AC

809

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))

Lord Steyn

“Many injunctions in civil proceedings operate severely upon those against whom they are ordered. In matrimonial proceedings a husband may be ordered to leave his home and not to have contact with his children. Such an order may be made as a consequence of violence which amounted to criminal conduct. But such an order is imposed not for the purpose of punishment but for protection of the family. This demonstrates that, when considering whether an order imposes a penalty or punishment, it is necessary to look beyond its consequence and to consider its purpose.”

Similarly, Mareva injunctions, which are notified to a defendant’s bank, may have serious consequences. An Anton Filler order operates in some ways like a civil search warrant and may be particularly intrusive in its operation. Breach of such orders may result in penalties. Nevertheless, the injunctions are unquestionably civil.

· The view that proceedings for an anti-social behaviour order under section 1 are civil in character is further supported by two important decisions. In B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001] 1 WLR 340 the question arose whether proceedings for a sex offender order under section 2 of the Act are civil. Section 2 is different in conception from section 1 in as much as an order can only be made in respect of a person who has already been convicted as a sex offender. On the other hand, its purpose is preventative “to protect the public from serious harm from him”. Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ held, at p 3 52, para 25:

“The rationale of section 2 was, by means of an injunctive order, to seek to avoid the contingency of any further suffering by any further victim. It would also of course be to the advantage of a defendant if he were to be saved from further offending. As in the case of a civil injunction, a breach of the court’s order may attract a sanction. But, also as in the case of a civil injunction, the order, although restraining the defendant from doing that which is prohibited, imposes no penalty or disability upon him. I am accordingly satisfied that, as a matter of English domestic law, the application is a civil proceeding, as Parliament undoubtedly intended it to be.”

To the same effect was the detailed reasoning in Gough v Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary [2002] QB 459; an^ 0,1 appeal [2002] QB 121.3. h was held that a football banning order under sections 14A and 1.4B of the Football Spectators Act 1989 do not involve criminal penalties and are therefore civil character.

· conclude that proceedings to obtain an anti-social behaviour order are civil proceedings under domestic law.

4. The classification under article 6

· The question now arises whether, despite its domestic classification, an anti-social behaviour order nevertheless has a criminal character in accordance with the autonomous concepts of article 6. The fair trial guarantee under article 6(1) applies to both “the determination of a (person’s) civil rights” and “the determination of any criminal charge”. On the other hand, only the latter attract the additional protections under article 6(2} and 6(3). In so far as the latter provisions apply to “everyone charged with a criminal offence” it is well established in the jurisprudence of

119,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

810

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (E)

Lord Steyn

the European Court of Human Rights that this concept is co-extensive with A the concept of the determination of any criminal charge: Lutz v Germany {1987) 10 EHRR i8z. Germane to the present case is the minimum right under article 6'( 3 )(d) of everyone charged with a criminal, offence to examine or have examined witnesses against him or to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him. If the proceedings under section 1 of the Act are fi criminal within the meaning of article 6, this provision is applicable. If it is civil, article 6(3){d) is inapplicable.

· Before I examine directly in the light of European jurisprudence the question whether proceedings involve a criminal charge, it is necessary to make clear that this is not one of those cases where the proceedings may fall outside article 6 altogether. Examples of such cases are given by Emmerson

& Ashworth, Human Rights and Criminal Justice (2001), pp 152—166. In C the cases before the House the two principal respondents accept that the proceedings are civil in character and that they attract the fair trial guarantee under article 6(1). Counsel for the Secretary of State in the McCann case reserved his position. For my part, in the light of the particular use of the civil remedy of an injunction, as well as the defendant’s right under article 8 to respect for his private and family life, it is dear that a defendant Q has the benefit of the guarantee applicable to civil proceedings under article 6(1). Moreover, under domestic English law they undoubtedly have a constitutional right to a fair hearing in respect of such proceedings.

· In Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) (1976) 1 EHRR 647, 678-679, para 82, the European Court established three criteria for determining whether proceedings are “criminal” within the meaning of the Convention, namely (a) the domestic classification, (b) the nature of the offence, and (c) the severity of the potential penalty which the defendant risks incurring.

The character and attributes of the proceedings for an anti-social behaviour order have been outlined. Domestically, they are properly classified as civil.

That is, however, only a starting point. Turning to factor (b), the position is that the order under the first part of section 1 does not constitute a finding that an offence has been committed: contrast the community charge decision

in Benhatn v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 293. It is right, however, to observe that the third factor is the most important. Here the position is that the order itself involves no penalty. The established criteria suggest that the proceedings were not in respect of a criminal charge.

· The House has been taken on a tour d’horizon of the leading decisions of the European Court: see the judgment of Potter LJ in Han v Customs and Excise Comrs [2001] 1 WLR 2253, 2269-2273, paras 55-64 C for a recent review of the European case law. It will serve no purpose to review again decisions far removed from the present case. What does emerge, however, is that there is, as Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ pointed out in B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary [2001]

1 WLR 340, no case in which the European Court has held proceedings to be criminal even though an adverse outcome for the defendant cannot result in ^ any penalty. It could be said, of course, that there is scope for the law to be developed in this direction. On the other hand, an extensive interpretation of what is a criminal charge under article 6(r) would, by rendering the injunctive process ineffectual, prejudice the freedom of liberal democracies to maintain the rule of law by the use of civil injunctions.

120,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

81 1

[2003] 1 AC   R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (Ł)

Lord Steyn

A 32 The closest case in support of the defendants' submission is Steel v United Kingdom (1998) 28 EHRR 603, 635-636, paras 48-49, which is authority for the proposition that proceedings whereby in England and Wales a person may be bound over to keep the peace involve the determination of a criminal charge for the purposes of article 6. This power goes back many centuries: see Percy v Director of Public Prosecutions [1995] 1 WLR 1382, 138911-139011. It is in a very real sense a judicial power sui generis. The European Court found a punitive element in the fact that the magistrates may commit to prison any person who refuses to be bound over not to breach the peace where there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that his or her conduct caused or was likely to cause a breach of the peace and that he would otherwise cause a breach of the peace: para 48. There was an immediate and obvious penal consequence. Properly analysed this case does not assist the defendant’s argument.

· The conclusion I have reached is reinforced by a cogently reasoned judgment on the interpretation of article 6 by the Lord President (Lord Rodger of Earls ferry) in S v Miller 2001 SC 977. Section 52(2) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 provides that a child may have to be subjected to compulsory measures of supervision when he “has committed an offence”. The question arose whether in such proceedings article 6 is applicable. The Lord President observed, at pp 989-990: at the stage when S was arrested and charged by the police on 31 October, he was indeed ‘charged with a criminal offence’ in terms of article 6, since he was liable to be brought before a criminal court in proceedings which could have resulted in the imposition of a penalty. He remained ‘charged with a criminal offence’ in terms of article 6 until the procurator fiscal decided the following day—in the language of section 43(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act— ‘not to proceed with the charge’. At that point the criminal proceedings came to an end and the reporter initiated the procedures under the 1995 Act by arranging a hearing in terms of section 63(1), In my view, once the procurator fiscal has decided not to proceed with the charge against a child and so there is no longer any possibility of proceedings resulting in a penalty, any subsequent proceedings under the 1995 Act are not criminal for the purposes of article 6. Although the reporter does indeed intend to show that the child concerned committed an offence, this is not for the purpose of punishing him but in order to establish a basis for taking appropriate measures for his welfare. That being so, the child who is notified of grounds for referral setting out the offence in question is not thereby ‘charged with a criminal offence’ in terms of article 6.

“24, It is not now disputed, of course, that the children’s hearing proceedings involve the determination of civil rights and obligations. Article 6 therefore applies. But, since the proceedings are not criminal, the specific guarantees in article 6(2) and (3) do not apply.”

I am in complete agreement with this reasoning as correctly reflecting the purpose of article 6. And it applies a fortiori to proceedings under section 1. After all, section 1(1) does not require proof of a criminal offence.

· In my view an application for an anti-social behaviour order does not involve the determination of a criminal charge.

121,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

812

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

[2003] 1 AC

· The admission of hearsay evidence

5. Having concluded that the proceedings in question are civil under domestic law and article 6, it follows that the machinery of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings) Rules 1999 allow the introduction of such evidence under the first part of section 1. The weight of such evidence might be limited. On the other hand, in its cumulative effect it could be cogent. It all depends on the particular facts. In my view the ruling of the Divisional Court, set out in paragraph Ro above, was correct.

6. It is submitted that, even if the relevant proceedings are civil, words must be implied into the Civil Evidence Act 1995 which give the court a wider power to exclude hearsay evidence. As the Divisional Court judgment makes clear this is unnecessary and unwarranted. Counsel in the Clingham case then argued that, even if the proceedings are civil, nevertheless the introduction of hearsay evidence infringes a defendant’s right to a fair trial under article 6(1) “in the determination of his civil rights and obligations”. This is a misconceived argument. The case has not been heard. Such a challenge is premature. Upon a due consideration of the evidence, direct or hearsay it may turn out that the defendant has no answer to the case under section 1 (1). For the sake of completeness, I need only add that the use of the Civil Evidence Act 1:995 unless in cases under the first part of section 1 are not in any way incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998.

· The standard of proof

7. Having concluded that the relevant proceedings arc civil, in principle it follows that the standard of proof ordinarily applicable in civil Ł proceedings, namely the balance of probabilities, should apply. However,

I agree that, given the seriousness of matters involved, at least some reference to the heightened civil standard would usually be necessary: In re H (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [ 1996] AC 563, 586D-H, per Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead. For essentially practical reasons, the Recorder of Manchester decided to apply the criminal standard. The Court of Appeal said that would usually be the right course to adopt. Lord Bingham of Cornhill has observed that the heightened civil standard and the criminal standard are virtually indistinguishable. I do not disagree with any of these views. But in my view pragmatism dictates that the task of magistrates should be made more straightforward by ruling that they must in all cases under section 1 apply the criminal standard. If the House takes this view it will be sufficient for the magistrates, when applying section t(I ){a) to be sure c that the defendant has acted in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself. The inquiry under section I(I)(b), namely that such an order is necessary to protect Persians from further anti-social acts by him, does not involve a standard of proof: it is an exercise of judgment or evaluation. Ibis approach should facilitate correct decision-making and should ensure consistency and predictability in this corner of the law. In coming to this conclusion I bear in mind that the use of hearsay evidence will often be of crucial importance.

For my part, hearsay evidence depending on its logical proactiveness is quite capable of satisfying the requirements of section 1.

122,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] AC

813

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Steyn

A XII The submissions of Liberty

· The House gave permission to Liberty to intervene in the McCann case in writing and orally. The contribution of Liberty has helped to sharpen the focus of the debate on issues under the Human Rights Act 1998. It is, however, unnecessary to deal separately with the submissions of Liberty. The reasons I have given are also dispositive of the issues and arguments

g raised by Liberty.

8. Jurisdiction

· Section x(x)(a) of the Administration of Justice Act i960 only permits an appeal from a decision of the High Court “in any criminal cause or matter”. In my view the proceedings under the first part of section 1 do not satisfy this criterion. It follows that in the Clingman case the House did not have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

9. Disposal

· For these reasons as well as the reasons given by Lord Hope of Craighead I would dismiss the appeals in the McCann case and formally declare that there was no jurisdiction to hear the Clingham case.

LORD HOPE OF CRAIGHEAD

· My Lords, in a democratic society the protection of public order lies at the heart of good government. This fundamental principle has a prominent place in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Among the grounds on which a public

· authority may interfere with the rights described in articles 8 to t 1: of the Convention, are public safety, the protection of public order and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. It is only in article 10(1) that one finds an express declaration that the exercise of freedoms carries with its duties and responsibilities. But it is a theme which runs right through the Convention. Respect for the rights of others is the price that we must all pay for the rights and freedoms that it guarantees.

· On the whole we live in a law-abiding community. Most people respect the rights of others, most of the time. People usually refrain from acts which are likely to cause injury to others or to their property. On the occasions when they do not, the sanctions provided by the criminal law are available. But it is a sad fact that there are some individuals for whom respect for the law and for the rights of others has no meaning. Taken one by one, their criminal or sub-criminal acts may seem to be, and indeed often are, relatively trivial. But, taken together, the frequency and scale of their destructive and offensive conduct presents a quite different picture. So does the aggression and intimidation with which their acts are perpetrated. 1 he social disruption which their behaviour creates is unacceptable. So too is the apparent inability of the criminal law to restrain their activities. This provides the background to the enactment of section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 with which your Lordships are concerned in these appeals.

· The main question which they raise is the familiar one of classification. If proceedings under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 are to be classified as criminal proceedings for the purposes of

123,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument.pdf

[2003] AC

814

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL (Ł)

Lord Hope of Craighead

article 6 of the Convention, all the normal rules of evidence which apply to a criminal prosecution in domestic law must be applied to them. This is of crucial importance to the use which may be made in these proceedings of hearsay evidence. In domestic terms, hearsay evidence under the Civil Evidence Act 1995 would be inadmissible in these proceedings if they are too, he classified as criminal. In Convention terms, the persons against whom anti-social behaviour orders were sought would be entitled to the protection g of article 6(3){d) if it applies to them. Under that paragraph every person charged with a criminal offence has the right to examine or have examined the witnesses against him. But much of the benefit which the legislation was designed to achieve would be lost if this is how these proceedings have to be classified. It would greatly disturb the balance which section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 seeks to strike between the interests of the individual and those of society.

· The reason for this is not hard to find. So often those who are directly affected by this conduct lack both the inclination and the resources to do anything about it. Above all, they have been intimidated and they are afraid. They know that they risk becoming targets for further anti-social behaviour if they turn to the law for their protection. It is unrealistic to expect them to seek the protection of an injunction under the civil law. Reports to the police about criminal conduct are likely to result in their having to give evidence. In this situation the opportunity which civil proceedings provide for the use of hearsay evidence is a valuable safeguard.

It greatly increases the prospect of persuading those who are likely to be exposed to further anti-social behaviour to co-operate with the authorities in protecting them from such conduct.

The facts

· The facts of the Clingham case have been described by my noble and learned friend Lord Steyn, and I gracefully adopt his account. As he has pointed out, it is a striking feature of that case that two of the statements relied on were anonymous and two of them were by persons who were in fear of reprisals if they were to be called on to give evidence. I should like to ^ deal in my speech with the facts in the case of McCann, which has similar characteristics.

· The defendants in the case of McCann are three brothers who all live

in the Ardwick area of Manchester. They were aged 16, 15 and 1.3 011 1:7 May 2000 when anti-social behaviour orders were made against them by Judge Rhys Davies QC, the Recorder of Manchester, sitting in the Crown Court with lay magistrates.

· The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester had been collecting evidence against the defendants for a period of about five months between May and September 1999. They had been accused by various members of the public in the Beswick area of Manchester of threatening and abusive behaviour, causing criminal damage, theft, and burglary. On 28 September 1999 the Chief Constable consulted with Manchester City Council, the council for the relevant local government area, as required by section 1 of

the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. I hey agreed that an application for anti­social behaviour orders should be made. 1 the Chief Constable laid complaints against the defendants at Manchester Magistrates’ Court on 22 October 1999, and summonses were served on them on 1 November

124,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] I AC    R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E))

Lord Hope of Craighead

19951. On 15 December 1999 Mr Alan Berg, a stipendiary magistrate, made anti-social behaviour orders against each of them, which they then appealed. Their appeal was heard in the form of a rehearing by the Crown Court.

· The stipendiary magistrate held that the defendants had acted in a manner which caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as themselves by offensive, abusive, insulting, threatening and intimidating words and behaviour as well as violent behaviour towards people in the local authority area of Manchester. He also held that an anti-social behaviour order was necessary to protect persons in that area and he made prohibitions against each of them. Dismissing their appeals, the Crown Court made identical orders to those made by the magistrate which prohibited each of them: (x) from entering the Beswick area as defined, edged in red on the map attached; (2) from using or engaging in any abusive, insulting, offensive, threatening or intimidating language or behaviour in any public place in the City of Manchester; (3) from threatening or engaging in violence or damage against any person or property within the City of Manchester; (4) from encouraging any other person to engage in any of the acts described in paragraphs 2 and 3 within the City of Manchester.

· The evidence against the defendants consisted in part of direct

evidence and in part of hearsay evidence. Four members of the public gave evidence of various acts of anti-social behaviour. One said that he had been abused on one occasion by two of the defendants and that he had been threatened and assaulted on another occasion by the third. The second said that he had been abused on one occasion by one of the defendants, who on the same occasion also assaulted an unknown youth. the third was an employee of a local supermarket who said that on a number of occasions between April and November 1999 she had been abused, threatened, harassed, and alarmed by all three defendants. The fourth said that he and his customers had been abused by all three defendants between April and September 1999 and that the defendants had sought to intimidate them. Three police officers also gave evidence. One said that on one occasion the oldest defendant caused alarm and physical danger to others by driving a vehicle recklessly. Another said that, on another occasion the same defendant was party to the theft of a bag from a car. A third gave direct evidence of threats and abuse by two of the defendants of a householder by banging on the door and interfering with the electrics of the property. This incident was also the subject of anonymous hearsay evidence. Anonymous hearsay evidence was also given by the police of four other incidents. One was burglary of domestic premises by two of the defendants. The second was damage to a motor vehicle by the same two defendants. The third was the throwing of items into the street from scaffolding which they had climbed. The fourth was the abuse by one of them of market stall holders. There was also a hearsay witness statement of the abuse by two of the defendants of firefighters.       _

· The overall picture which was painted by the evidence was of a prolonged course of behaviour which caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to many people in the local government area during this six-month period. The contribution which was made to the picture by the hearsay evidence, while not perhaps crucial, was certainly significant.

125,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] 1 AC

816

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hope of Craighead

Classification in domestic law

· I agree with Lord Steyn, for all the reasons that he has given, that proceedings leading to the imposition of an anti-social behaviour order under section r of the Crime and Disorder Act 199^ are civil proceedings in domestic law. I should like to add only a few observations to what he has

said.     .

· Section 19 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides tor the g imposition of anti-social behaviour orders in Scotland. There are some differences of detail in the scheme which this section lays down from that which section 1 lays down for use in England and Wales. But the broad aim

is the same. It is designed to deal with persons who have acted in an anti­social manner or have pursued a course of anti-social conduct that caused or was likely to cause alarm or distress. A conviction for breach of an anti­social behaviour order in Scotland carries with it the same penalties under section 22(1) as those prescribed for England and Wales by section r(io)- The important point for present purposes lies in the choice which Parliament has made as to the proceedings which are to be used for making these applications in Scotland. Section 19(2) provides that an application for an anti-social behaviour order shall be made by summary application to the sheriff within whose sheriffdom the alarm or distress was alleged to have been caused or was likely to have been caused.

3 The question whether a summary application to a sheriff a civil proceeding in Scots domestic law is quite straightforward in comparison with the equivalent and more complex question under English law. This is because the Scottish system has always maintained a firm distinction at levels between criminal and civil procedure. The civil nature of the _ procedure for the imposition of anti-social behaviour order is indicated at the outset by the fact that section 19(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides that an application for an anti-social behaviour order is to be made by the local authority. Criminal proceedings cannot be brought by a local authority in Scotland. They can be brought only by or on the authority of the Lord Advocate. Then there is the nature of the procedure that is prescribed by section 19(2). A summary application to the sheriff is defined by section 3 (p) of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907 as including all applications, whether by appeal or otherwise, brought under any Act of Parliament which provides, or, according to any practice in the sheriff court, which allows that the same shall be disposed of in a summary manner, but which does not more particularly define in what form it is too he heard, tried or determined. The long title of the 1907 Act states that it is an Act to regulate and amend the laws and practice relating to the civil procedure in sheriff courts in Scotland. An appeal against the judgment of the sheriff on a summary application lies to the sheriff principal and to the Court of Session, cither direct or from the sheriff principal, under sections 27 and 28 of the 1907 Act. The fact that appeals do not He to the High Court of Justiciary, which has exclusive jurisdiction for the hearing of appeals in criminal cases, is a further sign, if more were needed, that in domestic terms this is a civil proceeding.

It is worth noting that in S v Miller 2001 SC 977, 988, para 19 Lord President Rodger said that children’s hearings under section 52 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, a«<J- the related proceedings before the sheriff, have always been regarded as being civil in character, even where they

126,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

31 7

[2003] I AC    R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hope of Craighead

contain a ground for referral under section 5i(I){I) which is chat the child has committed an offence. In McGregor v D 1977 SC 330, 336 Lord President Emslie said, with reference to the provisions of Part III of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 which have now been re-enacted with amendments in Part II of the Children (Scotland) Act T.995, that in no sense were these proceedings criminal proceedings. As he put it, they are on the contrary civil proceeding’s sui generis. Where the ground of referral is that the child has committed an offence and the sheriff is asked to consider whether this ground has been established under section 68 of the 1995 Act, the standard of proof which must be applied is that which is required in criminal procedure: section 68(3)(b). The Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988 provides for the abolition of corroboration and the admission of hearsay evidence in civil proceedings. But section 9 of that Act excepts from the definition of “civil proceedings” for the purposes of chat Act any hearing by a sheriff of an application under what is now Part II of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 where the ground of referral was that the child has committed an offence. Nevertheless, the proceedings which Parliament has laid down for the determination of these applications by the sheriff is civil procedure. The reason for this, as the Lord President said in S v Miller 2001 SC 977, 988, para 20, is that, even though the proceedings may involve establishing that the child has committed an offence, there is no possibility of the child being punished for the offence under them by the imposition of a penalty. This approach is consistent with the principle which was referred to by Lord Wright in Amand v Home Secretary [1943] AC 147, r6T where he said that a criminal cause or matter was one which, if carried to its conclusion, might result in the conviction of the person charged and in a sentence of some punishment.

I think that two important points can be derived from these provisions relating to Scotland in support of the proposition that proceedings which are brought in England and Wales under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 are civil proceedings. The first is that the fact that Parliament chose to provide for the use of civil proceedings in applications for anti-social behaviour orders in Scotland strongly suggests that its intention was that applications for these orders which were made in England and Wales should be made by way of civil proceedings also. The grounds on which these applications may be made in both jurisdictions are similar, and the consequences of the making of an anti-social behaviour order are the same. In neither jurisdiction does an anti-social behaviour order have them. character of a punishment for an offence such as a fine or imprisonment. The fact that an anti-social behaviour order has been made against him does not appear on the person’s criminal record. On the contrary, the order is described in both section 1(4) and section 1:9(3) as a prohibition. In this respect it has the character of a civil injunction or, in Scotland, a civil interim interdict. A criminal sanction is available in both jurisdictions if the person is convicted of having breached the order: see section 1 (Ro) for England and Wales and section 1 for Scotland. But the proceedings which must be brought in the event of a breach are separate proceedings. Overall, the scheme is so similar in both jurisdictions that the intention of Parliament as to the nature of the proceedings under which the application was to be made can be taken, in the absence of any contrary indication, to have been the same.

127,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

818

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

[2003] AC

Lord Hope of Craighead

The second point is that it would not be inconsistent with a finding that the proceedings under section I(I) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 were civil proceedings for your Lordships to hold that the standard of proof to be applied was that which is required in criminal proceedings. In Constanda v M r 997 SC 217 the ground on which the child had been referred to a children’s hearing was that he was exposed to moral danger in terms of section 3 2.(2.)(b) of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. The Court of Session held that, as the whole substratum of the ground of referral was that the child had performed certain acts which constituted criminal offences, the commission of these offences had to be proved to the criminal standard. This was despite the fact that the proceedings before the sheriff were civil proceedings, and in the absence of any rule laid down by the Act which required the criminal standard to be applied in any case other than where the child had been referred under section 32(2)^) on the ground that he had committed an offence.

Classification under the Convention

· The fact that the proceedings are classified in our domestic law as civil proceedings is not conclusive of the question whether they are of that character for the purposes of article 6 of the Convention. It provides no more than a starting point, as the question has to be examined in the light of the common denominator of the legislation of the contracting states: Engel v The Netherlands (No 1) 1 EHRR 647, 678, para 82.

· The examination must begin with the wording of article 6 itself, and in particular with the opening sentence of article 6(1). It provides:

“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.”

Then there are the opening words of article 6(3) which provides chat everyone “charged with a criminal offence” is to have the minimum rights which are set out in that article.

· There are two aspects of the wording of article 6 that I think are worth noting before I turn to the authorities. The first is that, for article 6 to apply at all, the proceedings must be capable of being classified either as proceedings for the determination of the person’s “civil rights and obligations” or as proceedings for the determination of a “criminal charge” against him. Rut it would be wrong to approach the article on the assumption that all that is in issue is the question as to which of these two descriptions better fits the nature of the proceedings. It is not a straight choice between one description and the other. It is possible that the proceedings which are in. issue in a given case will fit neither description. In Albert and Le Compte v Belgium (1983) 5 EHRR 533, 539, para 25 the court observed that there are some cases which are not comprised within either of these categories and which thus fall outside the ambit of article 6(1). For example, in Ravnsborg v Sweden (1994) r8 EHRR 38 the court held that article 6 did not apply to proceedings where the applicant had been fined for making improper statements in written observations before the Swedish courts. The proceedings were regarded as being outside the ambit of article 6 because they were disciplinary in character: p 51, para 34. In

128,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

[2003] I AC

819

R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Ct (HL(E)

Lord Hope of Craighead

A Raimondo v Italy (1994) 18 EHRR 237 the court held that article 6 did not apply to the proceedings which led to the applicant being placed under special police supervision.

· The second aspect of the wording that is worth noting is that those parts of article 6 which refer to criminal proceedings make it clear that the essential feature of proceedings that have that character for the purposes of

g the Convention is that the person is “charged with a criminal offence”. This expression is to be interpreted as having an autonomous meaning in the context of the Convention: Adolf v Austria (1982) 4 EHRR 313, 322, para 30. So careful attention must be paid to the meaning which has been attached to these words by the Strasbourg court. As is by now very well known, the case law has established that there are three criteria to be considered. They are not always stated in precisely the same language, but they are usually said to be (1) the classification of the proceedings under national law, (2) the nature of the offence and (3) the nature and degree of severity of the penalty: Engel u The Netherlands (No 1) 1 EHRR 647, 678-679, paras 82-83; Benham v United Kingdom 22 EHRR 293, 323, para 56.

· The words “criminal charge” themselves suggest that the proceedings which they have in mind are not just proceedings where a

“charge” is made. The question is whether they are proceedings which may result in the imposition of a penalty. This point emerges clearly from the French text of article 6(r), as Lord President Rodger pointed out in S v Miller z001 SC 977, 988, para 21. It states that the matter which is to be determined must be either a dispute “sur ses droits et obligations de Ł caractere civil” or an “accusation en matiere penale”. The words “en matiere penale” indicate it is envisaged that there will be a penal element. The court seems to have had this point in mind when, in Engel v The Netherlands (No 1), at p 678, para 82, it asked itself when it was setting out the first criterion “whether the provision(s) defining the offence charged belong, according to the legal system of the respondent state, to criminal law, disciplinary law or both concurrently.” In other words, proceedings ^ involving a charge which is merely disciplinary in character will not fall within the ambit of article 6.

· In Oztiirk v Germany (1984) 6 EHRR 409, 421, para 50 the court said that the first matter to be ascertained was “whether or not the text defining the offence in issue belongs, according to the legal system of the respondent state, to criminal law”. In the continental systems the texts in question are likely to be found in a code, and there is often a separate criminal code which can readily be identified. As the Lord President observed in S v Miller 2001 SC 977, 988-989, para 21:

“the very titles of such codes of criminal law will often reveal that they are indeed concerned essentially with ‘matiere penale’. For instance, in France there is a ‘code penaie’, in Italy a codice penale1, in Spain a codigo penal’ and in Germany a ‘Strafgesetzbuch’. It follows that when, in such cases as Ozturk, the court investgiates whether the text defining the offence belongs to criminal law, it is investigating whether the text belongs to an area of the law where proceedings can result in a penalty being imposed.”=

129,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Contents

Appendices     58

Appendix A Early intervention and tackling offending behaviour by under-10s      58

Appendix B County Court Practice Direction according to the Civil Procedure Rules         60

Appendix C Order form          62

Appendix D Summons form   64

Appendix E Step-by-step process for anti-social behaviour orders and orders on conviction 65 Appendix F Public funding for defendants 68

Further reading           69

3

130,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Ministerial foreword

It is now seven years since anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) were introduced following the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Since then over 7,300 ASBOs have been issued. We often hear from residents up and down the country about how useful they are in bringing respite to communities suffering anti-social behaviour, The drive to tackle anti-social behaviour has been pioneered by anti-social behaviour practitioners and other interested parties all over England and Wales.

During this time much has happened:

· For our part we have adjusted policy and response to changing demands prompted by practitioners to ensure that the tool continues to be effective.

· The Together Action Line, website and Academy events have provided an excellent source of advice and ensured spread of good practice.

· Practitioners have developed protocols and helpful leaflets to improve communication between themselves.

· A number of organisations have also organised seminars and conferences to bring practitioners together, debate problem areas and resolve issues between them.

· The courts have responded and played their part and we particularly welcome Lord Justice Thomas’s guidance, which has been referred to substantially for the revision of this guidance, and which provides the latest case law for practitioners in a very clear and methodical manner.

The fundamental ethos of ASBOs remains that they combine the twin-track approach of enforcement and support.

However, there have also been some developments and policy adjustments as the courts have interpreted ASBO legislation as more and more cases come before them.

After ASBOs were first introduced, orders on conviction were introduced to improve access and timing; and interim orders for extreme cases where communities needed protecting urgently. Since May 2004 courts have been able to issue individual support orders to juveniles issued with ASBOs on application. This is a positive measure, attaching positive conditions to ensure that young people get all the support they need to change their behaviour. I urge agencies to make the greatest possible use of them.

We are also extending the power to apply for orders to the Environment Agency and Transport for London.

We continue to listen to the views of practitioners and stakeholders and to adjust policy and legislation accordingly. One illustration of this has been the development of the one-year review of ASBOs issued to young people, which is explained in this guidance. Although it is not yet enshrined in legislation, we feel that this formalises existing good practice to ensure that young people are provided with the right support throughout the duration of their ASBO.

We also hope to introduce later this year measures to empower the courts to apply rigorous case management in ASBO proceedings.

This guidance is also issued in the context of the Respect programme which builds on the Government’s anti-social behaviour strategy. Under the Respect drive, we will maintain and build on the strong enforcement action that has helped us make so much progress, but extend this further through a comprehensive strategy to deliver:

· a new approach to tackling problem families.

· a wide-ranging programme to address poor parenting.

· measures to improve behaviour and attendance in schools.

4.

131,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

A! ii I is tennl foreword

· initiatives to provide constructive activities for young people; and

· a drive to strengthen communities through more responsive public services.

I am delighted to introduce this new guidance which I am sure everyone working in the field of anti-social behaviour will find to be a source of reference that is both useful and informative.

TONY Mc NULTY

August 2006

5

132,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Introduction

This guidance on ASBOs draws on the experience of the police service, local authorities, youth offending teams, the courts and other organisations, it is intended for use by practitioners - people with a professional responsibility for tackling anti-social behaviour, whether they represent local authorities, the police, youth offending teams, registered social landlords, prosecutors, the courts, or any other agency which seeks to tackle the problem of anti-social behaviour.

The crime and disorder reduction partnership lies at the heart of the Government’s approach to the reduction of both crime and anti-social behaviour (much of which is of course criminal in nature). All crime and disorder reduction partnerships have an anti­social behaviour co-ordinator and access to them is published on the Together website (www.together.gov.uk).All partnerships, too, are required to draw up strategies for the reduction of anti-social behaviour in their areas, and the anti-social behaviour co-ordinators are in the best position to ensure that those strategies genuinely reflect the needs of the community served by the partnerships.

Anti-social behaviour is given a wide meaning by the legislation - to paraphrase the (Time and Disorder Act 1998, it is behaviour that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more people who are not in the same household as the perpetrator. Among the forms it can take are.

· graffiti - which can on its own make even the tidiest urban spaces look squalid and can act as a magnet for further anti-social behaviour and crime.

· abusive and intimidating language too often directed at minority groups.

· excessive noise, particularly late at night.

· fouling the street with litter.

· drunken behaviour in the streets, and the mess it can result in; and

· dealing drugs, with all the problems to which it gives rise.

· There has been considerable criticism of the current wording being too wide. However, the House of Commons Select Committee looked at this in its report on anti-social behaviour and concluded that it would be a mistake to make it more specific because:

· the definitions work well from an enforcement point of view and no significant practical problems appear to have been encountered.

· exhaustive lists of the kind of behaviour considered anti-social by central government would be unworkable and anomalous; and

· anti-social behaviour is inherently a local problem and may be of a different nature in different localities.

· This flexibility is therefore a major strength of the current statutory description of anti­social behaviour.

Anti-social behaviour is an issue that concerns everyone in the community. Incidents that cause harassment, alarm and distress cannot be written off as generational issues - they impact on the quality of life of young and old alike. And they require a response that puts partnership into action.

Just as the problems of anti-social behaviour are wide-ranging, the solutions too must operate equally effectively on many levels. While an energetic and constructive police response is essential, it must be supplemented by engagement from a wide variety of partners. To take only the most obvious, schools need to have effective policies in place against truancy and bullying, and the police need to work closely with licensing authorities in order to tackle alcohol-related problems. Local authorities and registered social landlords need to take responsibility for acting against anti-social behaviour by them

6

1 House or Commons Select Committee, Anti-Social Behaviour: 5th Report of Session 2004 -05, recommendation 7.

133,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Introduction

tenants and against their tenants. Social services need to ensure that they are taking the welfare of the whole community fully into account when making decisions, as well as taking care of the perpetrators. And, just as important, all of these bodies need to be sharing information with each other to the fullest possible extent in order to act fairly and decisively against the problems of anti­social behaviour.

7

134,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· Anti-social behaviour orders: the basics

What are anti-social behaviour orders?

Anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) were introduced by section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 in England and Wales and have been available since April 1999.The powers to deal with anti-social behaviour were strengthened and extended by the Police Reform Act 2002, which introduced the power to make similar orders on conviction in criminal proceedings, and in county court proceedings, and the power to make interim orders. Orders can now also extend across any defined part of England and Wales. The provisions relating to orders on conviction under section 1C and interim orders under section ID in the magistrates’ courts were inserted in the 1998 Act by the Police Reform Act 2002 and came into force on 2 December 2002.

The provisions relating to orders in county court proceedings (section 1B) were also inserted in the 1998 Act by the Police Reform Act 2002 and came into force on 1 April 2003.

ASBOs are civil orders to protect the public from behaviour that causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. An order contains conditions prohibiting the offender from carrying out specific anti-social acts or from entering defined areas and is effective for a minimum of two years. The orders are not criminal sanctions and are not intended to punish the offender.

Applications for ASBOs are made to the magistrates’ court by ‘relevant authorities’ which include local authorities, chief officers of police, registered social landlords, housing action trusts or any other person or body specified by the order of the Secretary of State (as previously mentioned, it is intended that the Environment Agency and Transport for London be specified for this purpose).

A similar order can be applied for during

related proceedings in the county court and can be requested on conviction of certain offences in the criminal courts. It remains a civil order irrespective of the issuing court.

ASBOs are community-based orders that involve local people not only in the collection of evidence to support an application but also for the purpose of helping to enforce breaches. By their nature they encourage local communities to become actively involved in reporting crime and disorder and to contribute actively to building and protecting the community. The civil status of ASBOs has implications for the nature of the proceedings at which applications are heard. For example, hearsay and professional witness evidence can be heard. This is an extremely important feature of ASBOs that can help protect victims and witnesses of anti-social behaviour.

What sort of behaviour can be tackled by ASBOs?

Anti-social behaviour that can be tackled by ASBOs includes:

1. harassment of residents or passers-by.

2. verbal abuse.

3. criminal damage.

4. vandalism.

5. noise nuisance.

6. writing graffiti.

7. engaging in threatening behaviour in large groups.

8. racial abuse.

9. smoking or drinking alcohol while underage.

10. substance misuse.

11. joyriding.

12. begging.

13. prostitution.

14. kerb-crawling.

15. throwing missiles.

16. assault; and

17. vehicle vandalism.

135,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Anti-soda! behaviour orders' the basics

The terms of each order should be tailored to the circumstances of the individual case.

Tackling prostitution and drug-related anti-social behaviour at Kings Cross

Issue

Kings Cross was one of the most infamous drug and vice hotspots in the country. For years the authorities had struggled to improve the area.

Approach

'flic anti-social behaviour partners meet to discuss individual cases and offer appropriate help, including housing and rehabilitation services. If the perpetrators of the anti-social behaviour fail either to engage or to change their behaviour, acceptable behaviour agreements (ABAs) are often used to bring to the offenders’ attention the impact of their behaviour on the community.

Outcomes

This worked very well with only 4 out of 32 ABAs progressing to ASBO applications. But where the ASBO was deemed necessary by the partners, Camden police officers put together bundles of evidence, with Camden Council’s legal team making the ASBO application. Impact statements were taken from local community activists and councillors to prove the need for the orders. Since then, having issued 45 ASBOs with prohibitions within the area, Kings Cross is completely unrecognisable from its previous image. The partners have also been successful in working with perpetrators to facilitate a significant sustainable change in behaviour. One crack cocaine addict recently wrote to the local paper apologising to the people of Kings Cross for his behaviour. Another went on to be a drugs worker in Brixton while a third is now working in the Home Counties and has had her ASBO discharged with the consent of the authorities.

Contact

Ian Walker

Email: ian.waiker@camden.gov.uk

Legal definition of anti-social behaviour for the purpose of obtaining an order

Under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the agency applying for an ASBO must show that:

· the defendant behaved in an anti-social manner; and an order is necessary for the protection of people from further anti-social behaviour by the defendant.

This is sometimes referred to as the ‘two-stage test’.

Section 1(1) of the Act describes acting in an ‘anti-social manner’ as acting in ‘a manner which causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as the perpetrator.

The wording is intentionally wide-ranging to allow for the orders to be used in a variety of circumstances.

The expression likely to cause’ has the effect that someone other than a victim of the anti­social behaviour can give evidence of the likelihood of its occurring. This is intended specifically to enable the use of professionals as witnesses where those targeted by the behaviour feel unable to come forward, for example for fear of reprisals or intimidation.

Standard of proof

In the case of McCann (R v Crown Court at Manchester ex parte McCann (FC) and Others (FC)), the House of Lords, while confirming that ASBOs were civil orders, set out the law on the standard of proof as follows:

‘they [magistrates] must in all cases under section 1 apply the criminal standard... it will be sufficient for the magistrates, when applying section 1(1 )(a) to be sure that the defendant has acted in an anti-social manner, that is to say in a manner which caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself.’ (Lord Steyn, paragraph 37)

9

136,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Antisocial behaviour orders; the basics

This means that the criminal standard of proof applies to acts of anti-social behaviour alleged against the defendant.

However, Lord Steyn went on to explain:

‘The inquiry under section 1(1)(b), namely that such an order is necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him, does not involve a standard of proof: it is an exercise of judgement or evaluation.’

It should be noted that it is the effect or likely effect of the behaviour on other people that determines whether the behaviour is anti­social. The agency applying for the order does not have to prove an intention on the part of the defendant to cause harassment, alarm or distress. Under section 1(5) of the 1998 Act, the Court will, however, disregard any behaviour shown to be reasonable in the circumstances.

The most common behaviour tackled by ASBOs is general loutish and unruly conduct such as verbal abuse, harassment, assault, graffiti and excessive noise. ASBOs have also been used to combat racial harassment, drunk and disorderly behaviour, throwing fireworks, vehicle vandalism and prostitution. Many other problems, for instance the misuse of air guns, could also lend themselves to this approach.

The wide range of anti-social behaviour that can be tackled by ASBOs and the ability to tailor the terms of the order to each specific case illustrates their flexibility. There have been cases where the chief executive of a company has been issued with an ASBO for anti-social behaviour committed by the company. This is because ASBOs must be issued against individuals and not against organisations. ASBOs may also be used, for example in the misuse of mini motors, where warnings and other measures have failed.

Against whom can an order be made?

An order can be made against anyone aged 10 years or over who has acted in an anti-social manner, or is likely so to act, and where an order is needed to protect people and the wider community from further anti-social acts. A list of interventions available for children under 10 is at Appendix A. the orders are tenure-neutral and can be used against perpetrators living in any type of housing (not just social housing). Because the order is specific to the person, if someone moves to a new house, it still remains in force, ASBOs can be used to combat anti-social behaviour in a wide range of situations and settings.

They are highly relevant to misconduct in public spaces such as parks, shopping centres and transport hubs, but they are by no means confined to such areas.

Where groups of people are engaged in anti-social behaviour, a case needs to be made against each individual against whom an order is sought. However, the cases can be heard together by the court. Agencies have found that targeting ringleaders with orders is an effective deterrent to other members of the group.

When investigating complaints about anti­social behaviour, it is vital that agencies satisfy themselves that complaints are well founded. In particular, they should consider the possibility that complaints may have been motivated by discrimination, perhaps on racist grounds, or to further a pre-existing grudge. However, failing to act against instances of anti-social behaviour can lead to an escalation of the problem by increasing fear of crime or leading those subjected to the anti-social behaviour to retaliate. Nipping unacceptable behaviour in the bud is therefore the best option.

Who can apply for an order?

Agencies able to apply for orders are referred to as ‘relevant authorities’ in the legislation (section 1(1 A) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). These are:

· local authorities - by virtue of sections 1(A) and 1(12) of the 1998 Act, a local authority is, in England, the council of a county, district or London Borough, the Isle of Wight or the Isles of Scilly, or, in Wales, the council of a county or county borough; police forces, including the British Transport Police (BTP);

· registered social landlords (RSLs), that is a body registered as a social landlord under section 1 of the Housing Act 1996; and Housing Action Trusts (I-IATs).

1.0

137,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Anti-social behaviour orders: the basics

The Environment Agency and Transport for London are to be designated as relevant authorities in due course.

Local authorities and the police may apply for an order where they consider it necessary to protect persons in their area (‘relevant persons’) from further anti-social behaviour irrespective of where the original anti-social behaviour took place. An order can be sought which provides protection not just to the relevant persons but also, where necessary, to any persons in England and Wales.

The BTP, RSLs and HATs are empowered to apply for orders by virtue of changes introduced under the Police Reform Act 2002, which enable these agencies to deal with their particular problems of anti-social behaviour in a more effective and timely manner. RSLs and HATs may apply for orders against non-residents as well as residents and should consider doing so where the anti­social behaviour of non-residents is affecting the quality of life for residents.

Applications from the BTP, RSLs or HATs must concern anti-social behaviour related to the premises for which they are responsible by persons who are on or in the vicinity of such premises or likely to be either on or in the vicinity of such premises.

The BTP, RSLs and HATs are required to consult both the local authority and local police force when applying for an order. The agencies are not compelled to use the power. The police or local authority may still apply for ASBOs on their behalf.

Under section 17 of the 1998 Act, the police and local authorities have a joint responsibility to develop and implement strategies for tackling anti-social behaviour and disorder in the local area. This responsibility is not changed in any way by allowing the BTP, RSLs and HATs to apply for orders.

Which courts can make ASBOs?

ASBOs can be made by:

* magistrates’ courts (acting in their civil capacity).

· county courts (where the relevant authority or the person against whom the

· order is sought is a party to the proceedings and the non-party is joined to these proceedings);

· magistrates’ courts (on conviction in criminal proceedings).

· the Crown Court (on conviction in criminal proceedings).

· youth courts (on conviction in criminal proceedings); and

· at the time this guidance was being revised, 11 county courts, which were trialling hearings for ASBO cases for children and young people. These are as follows:

Ř  Bristol

Ř  Central London

Ř  Clerkenwell

Ř  Dewsbury

Ř  Huddersfield

Ř  Leicester

Ř  Manchester

Ř  Oxford

Ř  Tameside

Ř  Wigan

Ř  Wrexham

The pilot will be evaluated in autumn 2006.

The table overleaf sets out what each type of court can do.

Length of orders

Orders are issued for a minimum of two years and can be issued for an indefinite period pending a further order. They can also be varied or discharged on application by either party, although they cannot be discharged in the first two years without the consent of both parties. In the ease of young people, ASBOs should be reviewed each year as explained on page 45.

Anti-social behaviour response courts

Within Her Majesty’s Courts Service there is now a network of specialist anti-social behaviour response courts across the country - existing courts that are better able to respond to the issue of Anti-social behaviour. They ensure that magistrates and court staff are specially trained and follow a framework - including specialist sessions, witness care, local community engagement and appropriate media strategies. This ensures courts are able to respond properly to anti-social behaviour cases in a visible and consistent way.

11

138,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Magistrates' court - acting in their…

…Civil

capacity

...Criminal

capacity

County court

Youth court

Which

ASBO?

No restrictions

Only on conviction in criminal proceedings

Pilots taking place for children and young people until September 2006

Only on conviction in criminal proceedings as it has no civil jurisdiction

Disposals available if ASBO breached - under-18s

n/a

n/a

n/a

Sections 90 and 91 cases - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, detention and training order, action plan order, referral order, attendance centre order, supervision order, reparation order, parenting order, fine, community punishment and rehabilitation order (16-17-year olds), absolute discharge

All sentences to the community are open to the following orders: curfew order, parenting order, drug testing and treatment order

Disposals available if ASBO breached - adult

Maximum five years’

imprisonment.

community

order,

absolute

discharge,

fine,

compensation order, deferred sentence

Maximum five years’

imprisonment; community order, absolute discharge, fine compensation order, deferred sentence

Maximum five years’

imprisonment; community order, absolute discharge, fine, compensation order, deferred sentence

n/a

Untouchable gang’s reign of terror on a anti-social behaviour response courts Issue

A gang of 10 youths who believed they were beyond the reach of the law were regularly terrorising vulnerable residents on a street in Thornton, Merseyside. The youths had been smashing windows, breaking into and throwing missiles at vehicles, and verbally abusing people, Victims included the young, elderly and vulnerable and the gang’s behaviour created such fear locally that residents would not go out after dark or leave their properties unattended. Many of them installed CCTV Only the most serious incidents were repented at the time they occurred but victims would not press charges for fear of being singled out and targeted by the gang.

Merseyside street ends in the Approach

The neighbourhood police officer carried out a detailed investigation of the problem to bring a case for arresting the perpetrators and bringing them before the courts.

Previous police logs and reports were scrutinised, and impact statements taken from the majority of witnesses in anonymity to use as hearsay evidence. One family, which had been singled out by the perpetrators, was given support by the police with daily contact and visits. The victims installed CCTV and kept a diary of all the incidents which was exhibited as evidence.

The police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) worked closely together to prepare the case and the police gathered strong evidence. Interviews with perpetrators were carefully planned so that when faced with

139,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Antisocial behaviour orders: The busies

the evidence against them all 10 perpetrators admitted their responsibility.

In advance of the case, the CPS specialist prosecutor for the area worked to set up a special anti-social behaviour response court. Advance disclosure of evidence to the judge and other parties prior to the court hearing meant that the case was dealt with quickly once in court.

At the hearing, nine perpetrators were charged on criminal offences ranging from disorderly behaviour to attempted arson. Three of the gang were given ASBOs and six of the gang signed acceptable behaviour agreements.

Conditions attached to the ASBOs were designed to protect the community from any recurrence of the behaviour. The perpetrators were restricted to sleeping at their nominated address and were not allowed out between 6.00pm and 6.00am unless accompanied by a parent or appropriate adult. They were clearly instructed not to approach or interfere with any prosecution witnesses. They were also prohibited from being verbally abusive and from throwing missiles at any residential property or from

carrying anything which they could use to launch a missile.

The CPS advised the local media of the anti­social behaviour response court and the press reported this operation on the front pages of the local papers. This is part of a strategy to publicise successful action of the police, CPS and judiciary working in partnership to tackle anti-social behaviour. Its aim is to encourage the community to report anti-social behaviour, knowing that it will be dealt with effectively.

Outcome

The operation provided much needed relief for the residents in the area. A parent of one of the gang members has since become proactive in a local community action group which is working to increase diversionary activities for young people in the area.

For the professionals involved in the case, the operation has underlined the importance of taking impact statements as a matter of course when victims fail to press charges due to fear of reprisals. The multi­agency partnership approach works best if one officer who is aware of all the facts of the case co-ordinates the case.

Orders made in county court proceedings (section IB of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998)

For an application to be made in the county court, both the applicant and the person against whom the application is made must be parties to the ‘principal proceedings’

(such as an eviction). Where the relevant authority is not a party to the principal proceedings, an application to be had a party and the application for an order should be made as soon as possible after the authority becomes aware of the principal proceedings. Where the person alleged to have committed the anti-social behaviour is not a party but the relevant authority thinks that his anti-social acts are material to the principal proceedings, the authority can apply to have him joined in the proceedings and apply for an order. The county court will be able to grant orders where the principal proceedings involve evidence of anti-social behaviour.

Enabling the county courts to make orders may remove the need for a separate legal process in the magistrates’ court and make it possible for the public to be protected from anti-social behaviour more quickly and more efficiently.

An order made in county court proceedings might, for example, be useful to prevent an individual, evicted from his accommodation for harassing his neighbours and/or others in the area, from returning to the same area to continue the abusive behaviour.

13

140,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

· Taking a strategic approach

Orders can only work properly when they are based on partnership in action. They are powerful instruments, and they will be at their most effective when all the agencies confronted by an individual’s anti-social behaviour collaborate to make the best possible use of them.

Orders made on conviction in criminal proceedings

Criminal courts - the magistrates’ court, the Crown Court and the youth court - can make- orders against an individual who has been convicted of a criminal offence, and this is known as an 'order on conviction’ (sometimes also called a ‘CRASBO’). Some county courts are currently trialling stand-alone ASBO cases for children and young people until the end of September 2006.These are not proceedings on conviction.

The order on conviction is considered at a civil hearing after the verdict. It is not part of the sentence the offender receives for the criminal offence.

The order will be granted on the basis of the evidence presented to the court during the criminal proceedings and any additional evidence provided to the court after the verdict, although it is possible for the order to be granted on the basis of the criminal proceedings alone. There is a statutory requirement for a conviction to be for an offence committed after the date on which the insertion of the relevant provisions by the Police Reform Act took effect.

The court may make an order on conviction either on its own initiative or following an application by the prosecutor (see section 1 C (3) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). Alternatively, the order can be requested by the police or local authority, who may make representations to the court in support of the request. Orders on

conviction cannot be made if there is a deferred sentence for the relevant offence.

The court may adjourn the proceedings following conviction to allow an application for an order on conviction to be made.

By virtue of section l D (l)(b) of the 1998 Act (inserted by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005), the court may also make an interim order.

The order on conviction is a civil order and has the same effect as an ASBO made on application - ft contains prohibitions rather than penalties and is made in civil proceedings. It is similar to the football banning order on conviction in that it is a civil order made following a criminal procedure,2 3

If the offender is detained in custody, the court may make provision for requirements of the order on conviction to become effective on their release. For this period the order takes effect immediately, but its terms are suspended until release.

Where is an ASBO valid?

Before the changes introduced by the Police Reform Act 2002, the conditions an order could impose extended only to the applicant’s area and adjoining areas. An order can now extend across any defined area within England and Wales. '

The power to make an order over a wide area is for use where there is reason to believe that the person concerned may move or has already moved. It goes some way to addressing the problem of offenders moving to other areas and continuing the behaviour.

An order covering a wider area could address problems such as ticket touting at different train stations or anti-social behaviour on trains, and could help deal with the minority

Section 10(21 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 states that the court may make an order which prohibits the offender from doing anything described in the order. Section 14A of the Football Spectators Act 1989 places a duty on the court to impose a football banning order if a person is convicted of a relevant offence or to state in open court why such an order has not been made.

The geographical area which an order may cover is indicated by section 1(6) for ASBOs and orders made in county court proceedings; and by section l C (2)(b) for orders made on conviction in criminal proceedings.

14..

141,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Taking a strategic approach

of the travelling community who persistently engage in anti-social behaviour around the country, Careful thought needs to be given to the consequences of extending the exclusion area so that it does not simply result in displacing the behaviour into a neighbouring area.

Any evidence of the itinerant nature of the defendant’s lifestyle, of the likelihood of the individual moving to another area, or of wide geographical spread of offending behaviour should be submitted with the application file, The applicant does not have to prove that anti-social behaviour will occur elsewhere, just show that it is likely to.

The more serious the behaviour, the greater the likelihood that the court will grant a geographically wide order. Orders that seek to operate in the whole of England and Wales will not be granted without evidence that that is the actual or potential geographical extent of the problem. Further detail about effective prohibitions is given in Chapter 7.

Can interim orders be made?

Interim orders are available under section ID of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended by section 65 of the Police Reform Act 2002 and the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) 2005) in both the magistrates’ court and the county court. This is an order made at an initial court hearing held in advance of the full hearing. This temporary order can impose the same prohibitions and has the same penalties for breach as a full order.

The interim order can, with leave of the justices’ clerk, be made without notice of proceedings being given to the defendant.

A without notice interim order has no effect until it has been served on the defendant. If it is not served within seven days, it will cease and will not have effect. The benefit of the interim order is that it enables the courts to order an immediate stop to anti-social behaviour and thereby to protect the public more quickly. It reduces the scope for witness intimidation by making it unlawful for the offender to continue the behaviour while the ASBO application is being processed. It also removes any delay in the proceedings.

Section 139 of SOCPA 2005 gives the court the power to grant an interim order pending an adjourned hearing for an order on conviction.

The interim order will send a clear message to the community that swift action against anti-social behaviour is possible.

The order can be made at the outset of proceedings for an ASBO application if the court considers that it is just to make such an order. The applicant authority should, if possible, request an interim order at the same time as submitting an application for a full order.

When considering whether to make an interim order, the court will be aware that it may not be possible at the time of the interim order application to compile all the evidence which would prove that a full ASBO is necessary. Rather the court will determine the application for the interim order on the question of whether the application for the full order has been properly made and where there is sufficient evidence of an urgent need to protect the community

Applications for interim orders will be appropriate, for example, in cases where the applicant feels that persons need to be protected from the threat of further anti­social acts which might occur before the main application can be determined. Where an interim order is granted without notice of proceedings to the defendant, it is expected that the court will usually arrange an early return date.

An individual who is subject to an interim order will have the opportunity to respond to the case at the hearing for the full order. The defendant is also able to apply to the court for the interim order to be varied or discharged. In this instance the matter will be dealt with at a hearing dealing specifically with the interim order.

The interim order:

· will be for a fixed period.

· can be varied or discharged on application by the defendant.

· will cease to have effect if the application for the ASBO or county court order is withdrawn or refused.

15

142,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Taking a strategic approach

· may extend over any defined area of England and Wales; and

18. has the same breach penalties as for a full order.

The court procedures and forms to be used when applying for or making an interim order are set out in the Magistrates’ Courts (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders) Rules 2002 (available at www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/ 20022784.htm).

Interim orders made in the county courts

A relevant authority may apply for an interim order in the county court once it is party to the ‘principal proceedings. The application for an interim order should be made early in the proceedings.

The procedure for making applications for orders in the county court is set out in the Practice Direction of the updated Cavil Procedure Rules 65.24 to 26 (Appendix B).

Orders against children and young people

Under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, applications for ASBOs against young people aged 10 to 17, and in certain circumstances 18-year-olds, can be heard in the magistrates’ court. As a result of the recent practice direction (the Magistrates’ Courts (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders) Composition of Benches practice direction, February 2006), the justices constituting the court should normally be qualified to sit in the youth court unless to do so would result in a delayed hearing. Applications for orders are not heard in the youth court as a matter of course because of the civil status of the orders, although youth courts may make orders where appropriate on conviction.

Practitioners familiar with dealing with young people’s cases will be aware of the restrictions on reporting that apply under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933- However, automatic reporting restrictions do not apply to stand-alone ASBOs as they are civil orders.

In orders on conviction cases, the court does have discretion under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 to impose reporting restrictions. Reporting

restrictions will always apply to the criminal proceedings on which the order on conviction is based but in till other cases, the presumption is that publicity will be allowed. See page 52 for detailed guidance on promoting awareness of orders.

A court making an ASBO does have the power to impose restrictions to protect the identity of a person under 18. But the imposition of reporting restrictions may restrict the effectiveness of the order if the effectiveness of the ASBO will largely depend on the wider community knowing the details. Please see the separate sections on publicity and on children and young people.

Breach of an order

Breach of an order is a criminal offence; criminal procedures and penalties apply.

The standard of proof required is the criminal standard. Guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Breach proceedings are heard in the magistrates' court and may be committed to the Crown Court. Such proceedings are the same irrespective of whether the order is a full or interim order made on application to the magistrates’ court or the county court, or an order on conviction in criminal proceedings.

Expert prosecutors

A team of 14 anti-social behaviour expert prosecutors has been set up with funding from the Together campaign to support all Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutors dealing with anti-social behaviour-related cases. The team drives improvements in performance across the country.

The team:

19. promotes better partnership working between local prosecutors, the police, focal authorities, registered social landlords and others involved in taking action against anti-social behaviour.

20. delivers training to prosecutors on the new powers to obtain orders on conviction provides advice to prosecutors on the full range of enforcement measures and key issues such as prosecution of ASBO breach; and

16

143,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Hiking v stnitegic cipjrraacb

• works with court clerks and magistrates in improving their response to anti-social behaviour.

In addition to the 14 specialist prosecutors, anti-social behaviour co-ordinators have now been appointed CPS-wide to ensure that there is a focus on anti-social behaviour issues in every CPS area. Their role is to drive this work forward. Further information can be obtained from Sarah Johnston at sarah.johnston@cps.gsi.gov.uk.

Standard ASBO form

A copy of the order form used by the magistrates’ courts can be found at Appendix C.

Disposals

The maximum penalty for breach of an order is five years’ imprisonment tor an adult offender. A conditional discharge is not available for breach of an ASBO.

The full range of disposals of the youth court is available, and custody should only be considered as a last resort in cases of serious and persistent breach (if appropriate, breach may be dealt with by way of a final warning). Where custody is deemed by the court to be necessary, the maximum sentence for breach by children and young people is a detention and training order (DTO), which has a maximum term of 24 months - 12 months of which is custodial and 12 months is in the community. The DTO is available for 12 to 17-year-olds (although 12 to 14-year-olds must be persistent (criminal) offenders to be given a DTO). A 10 to 11 -year-old can be given a community order for breach of an ASBO. The sentence given should be proportionate and reflect the impact of the anti-social behaviour. It must relate to all the relevant circumstances, such as the number of breaches and how the breach relates to the finding of anti-social behaviour. Proceedings should be swift and not fractured by unnecessary adjournments either during the proceedings or before sentencing. Information on how to handle breaches of ASBOs by young people is contained in page 26 of the anti-social behaviour guidance issued by the Youth Justice Board, Home Office and Association of Chief Police Officers.

The leading precedent for the approach on sentencing on this point is R v Lamb \ 20051 EWCA Crim 2487. In this judgment the court drew the distinction between a breach that represents further anti-social behaviour and those that are merely breaches of the terms of an order, for instance, as in that case, not to enter a particular metro system. Differing from earlier decisions - in particular from the case of R v Morrison [2005] EWCA Crim 2237 - the court held that the orders are properly designed to protect the public from frequent and distressing repeated misbehaviour.

In the case of Morrison, it was determined that if the breach amounted to a specific criminal offence that carried a particular penalty, the sentence for breach of the ASBO could not be greater than that.

As the court in Lamb pointed out, this would merely encourage people to commit criminal offences rather than breach their ASBOs in other ways. The court has therefore laid down a series of steps for consideration prior to the imposition of a sentence.

Where a breach does not involve harassment, alarm or distress, a community order may be considered to assist the defendant to learn to live with the terms of the ASBO. This is entirely consistent with the guideline on breach proceedings issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council, where it is pointed out that custody should be used as a last resort, and the primary purpose of breach proceedings should be to ensure that the order itself is observed.

However, Lamb confirmed that where there is a persistent breach without harassment, alarm or distress, it may become necessary to impose custody to preserve the authority of the court. In those circumstances, the sentence should be as short as possible, and in Lamb the individual sentences were reduced to two months in custody. However, where the new breach amounts to further harassment, alarm or distress, then the court thought orders of eight months, on a guilty plea, were appropriate, applying R v Braxton [2005] 1 CRAPP R (S) 36,7? v Tripp [20051

Youth Justice Board, Home Office and Association of Chief Police Officers (2006) Anti-social Behaviour: A guide to the role of Youth Offending Teams in dealing with antisocial behaviour. This can be downloaded at www.youth-justice-board.gov.uk/Putilications/Scr!pts/prodView.asp?id[)roduct=212&ep-

17

144,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Hiking a strategic approach

EWCA Grim 2253 and R v Dickinson

[2005] 2 CR APP R (S) 488.

When the offender has been found guilty of breaching an order, and before sentencing, the court may take reports from the local authority or police and any applicant agency. The court should also consider the original reasons for the making of the order.

A copy of the court order (ASRO) as granted (including any maps and details of any prohibitions) can be put before the court during breach proceedings as evidence that an order has been made without the need for a statement formally proving that an order was made. This provision was introduced by SO CPA 2005 on 1 July 2005.

18

145,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· Managing the application process

This section focuses on the main issues involved in applying for an order. For an ASBO to be effective, the process of evidence gathering and applying to the courts should be as swift as possible.

Groups of organisations and partnerships such as crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs) may wish to consider buying specialist legal advice in blocks or pooling expertise and experience. This is likely to be more cost effective than buying in legal advice on a case-by-case basis.

Partnership working

A fully co-ordinated approach is essential if anti-social behaviour is to be tackled. Effective defence of communities depends on all agencies - including housing organisations, social services, education authorities and youth services - accepting that the promotion of safe anti orderly neighbourhoods is a priority and working together to agree a response to unacceptable behaviour. The consultation arrangements are important but should be organised so that they do not cause delays in dealing with cases.

Agencies and communities join to tackle anti-social behaviour in Slade Green

Issue

Slade Green in Bexley was once described as 'a cluster of low-rise estates centred on a precinct of shops and Slade Green railway station, where vandalism, burglary and drugs blight the lives of residents’. Slade Green has experienced high levels of crime and social deprivation and features among the top 1.6% of the most deprived wards in England. Bexley Police identified Slade Green as a hot spot for residential and non-residential burglary, auto crime, disorder, domestic violence and race crime. Residents, local housing providers and the leader of the Slade Green Community Safety Forum were alarmed at the escalation of anti-social behaviour in the area. Residents regularly experienced threats and actual violence, making them afraid of giving evidence to the police.

Approach

A meeting between resklents and the local partnership team produced an outline action plan. Community meetings, local press coverage and ‘Have A Say’ days led to key witnesses being willing to give evidence.

The partnership team applied for ASBOs against the six men identified as the most prolific perpetrators. In total, 30 witnesses gave evidence, most in the form of hearsay, with nine giving evidence in person at the court hearing. The policing team involved in the case supported witnesses by being at court to provide additional reassurance. Victim Support’s witness support service also helped. Strong witness evidence and a compelling case prepared by the police and the council legal department convinced the court to agree to all six applications.

Outcome

The impact of these ASBOs on crime and fear of crime in the area was significant. For the period 2003/04, robbery incidents fell by 53%, burglary by 21%) and auto crime by 40%. Of the original six to receive an ASBO, one person has been prosecuted for breach of the ASBO condition relating to criminal damage to a car, for which he received a custodial sentence.

A community safety action zone (CSAZ) was established in Slade Green with the aim of reducing crime and disorder in the area.

A multi-agency operations group was formed

146,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Managing the application process

to find the grass roots issues leading to these problems. The addition of environmental and security improvements has enhanced the appearance of the area and have made it a safer and more secure place to live. These improvements have included improved street lighting, removal of graffiti, removal of fly-tipping, removal of abandoned and unlicensed cars and improvements to play areas.

A survey was carried out before the start of the CSAZ which found that 22% of residents in Slade Green who responded felt safe at night in their area. After the CSAZ had been set up, 93% of residents surveyed in Slade Green felt safe at night in their area.

Contact

Charlotte Shrimpton Telephone: 020 8284 5503

Taking ownership

It is vital that a specified individual within the lead agency takes on a lead role with responsibility for the ownership, director, and management of the case. 1'his will help ensure that there is no confusion about who is expected to make sure that the necessary actions are taken on the right timescale.

The lead individual should manage and co-ordinate the involvement of other agencies so that they add value by contributing their own specialist knowledge and expertise.

A multi-agency approach should be adopted so that all agencies that could hold information on the individual in question are involved in the process at an early stage.

Such agencies include the Probation Service, social services, health services, the youth offending team (YOT) and voluntary organisations, all of which may have come into contact with the individual or members of their family.

GDRPs should consider adopting the anti­social behaviour action group (ASBAG) approach developed by Watford Borough Council.

Watford’s partnership approach involves all relevant statutory and voluntary agencies and engages the local community in taking a stand against the perpetrators of anti-social behaviour.

They have developed a problem-solving approach to issues and apply the SARA model:

· Sean for all available intelligence in relation to the anti-social behaviour issue.

· Analyse the intelligence, looking for the root cause of the problem.

· Respond with a clear action plan designed to address the behaviour.

· Assess the progress/success of the action plan on a monthly basis.

Delivery is through the monthly multi-agency ASBAG, which includes cross-boundary working as required.

Watford’s anti-social behaviour strategy allows for a range of diversionary activities and intervention as alternatives to enforcement, if the ASBAG agrees they are appropriate to effectively tackle an individual and their anti-social behaviour, such as:

· verbal warnings.

» written warnings.

· acceptable behaviour contracts (ABGs);

· mentoring programmes.

· intervention programmes.

· educational programmes.

· supporting youths and their parents; and

· restorative justice (when and where appropriate for victims and localities).

Information is exchanged between stakeholders and members of the CDRP at each monthly ASBAG meeting.

This strategy works in parallel with the prolific and priority offender strategy and a representative from the prolific offender unit is represented on the ASBAG to avoid duplication of work.

If the level of anti-social behaviour is such that the risk of further behaviour or escalation of behaviour is imminent, the Watford anti-social behaviour co-ordinator may convene an immediate action plan meeting with the police anti-social behaviour officer and a legal representative from Watford Borough Council acting on the ASBAG’s

147,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

MuiUtkins’ the application process

behalf in the interests of managing the risk to public safety without delay.

Watford CDRP works to the principles of the National Intelligence Model for tasking and co-ordination.

Each action plan is performance-managed by the ASBAG and is subject to monitoring and scrutiny by quarterly feedback to the Watford responsible authority group by the Watford Borough Council anti-social behaviour co-ordinator. The ASBAG performs a full self-evaluation and review every 12 months.

Contact

Matt Leng

Anti-social Behaviour Coordinator Watford Borough Council Matt.Leng@watford.gov.uk

Other considerations

Local authorities have a duty under the NHS and Community Care Act 1990 to assess any person who may be in need of community care services. If there is any evidence to suggest that the person against whom the order is being sought may be suffering from drug, alcohol or mental health problems or an autistic spectrum disorder, the necessary support should be provided by social services or other support agencies. Such support should run parallel with the collection of evidence and application for an order, where an application for an order is deemed necessary. This ensures that the court can balance the needs of the community with the needs of any alleged perpetrator.

From December 2006, provisions in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 will come into force which make unlawful discrimination by a public authority in the exercise of public functions. There are some exemptions for listed persons and certain acts including (in broad terms) legislation, prosecution and judicial acts. However, the new prohibition of discrimination covers functions carried out, for example, by local authorities and the police. The definition of discrimination includes, in some circumstances, not making a reasonable- adjustment to the way a function is carried out. Chapter 11 of the guidance, which the Disability Rights Commission will issue shortly (entitled Code of Practice - Rights of

Access: services to the public, public authority functions, private clubs and premises) includes advice on how the Act now impacts on those carrying out public authority functions. It will be available on the Commission’s website (www.drc.org.uk).

Statutory consultation requirements

Section IE of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended by section 66 of the Police Reform Act 2002) sets out the consultation requirements for agencies applying for orders. These are that:

· the police and local authorities must consult each other; and

· the British Transport Police (BTP), registered social landlords, housing action trusts and any other person or body designated by the Secretary of State as a relevant authority must consult both the local authority and the police force for the area.

Consultation takes place with the authority or force whose area includes the address where the subject of the order resides or appears to reside. Each district or borough council and police division/basic command unit should have a nominated contact. Care should be taken (where the local authority is the applicant) that if the subject is under local authority care there is no conflict of interest. They must ensure that the social worker involved in the ease is consulted. Where a young person is the alleged perpetrator, the YOT should be consulted.

Consultation is required to inform the appropriate agency or agencies of the intended application for the order and to check whether they have any relevant information. The agencies must take into consideration at the earliest possible opportunity the relevant information necessary to apply for an individual support order or a parenting order. Information on these is contained in a separate section on children and young people.

Where the partnership working arrangements recommended in earlier paragraphs are in force, they will normally satisfy (and exceed) the statutory requirement for consultation,

The statutory requirement for consultation does not mean that the agencies must agree

21

148,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Managing the application process

to an application being made but rather that they should be told of the intended application and given the opportunity to comment. This should ensure at the very minimum that actions taken by each agency regarding the same individual do not conflict.

While no agency has a veto over another agency’s application for an order, the expectation is that any reservations or alternative proposals should be discussed carefully against the background of the overriding need to bring the anti-social behaviour to a speedy end. Again, the case conference procedure is designed to ensure that this happens.

A signed document of consultation is all that is required by the court. This should not indicate whether the party consulted was or was not in agreement. This is not required by the legislation. Supporting statements or reports from partner agencies should be provided separately.

The changes introduced by the Police Reform Act 2002 reduce bureaucracy by removing the need for applying agencies to consult with every local authority and police service whose areas are included in the order.

In addition to the consultation requirements set out above, it may be helpful for police forces to contact the BTP, which may hold information on the anti-social behaviour of the subject. The availability of this information may assist the evidence-gathering process for an order. The BTP holds a national database of offenders committing summary offences (these include railway-specific summary offences as well as those included in Home Office counting rules).

Police forces can request a search on a particular offender, in writing, from the Force Crime Registrar, British Transport Police, Force Headquarters, 15 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SJ.

Collection of evidence

When applying for an order, the lead agency will be required to gather evidence to prove its ease beyond reasonable doubt. This evidence can include hearsay evidence. Further advice on hearsay evidence is provided later in the guidance.

The evidence in support of an application for an order should prove:

· that the defendant acted in a specific way on specific dates and at specific places; and

· that these acts caused or were likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not in the same household as the defendant.

The court then needs to evaluate whether an order is necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by the defendant. This is not a test to which a standard of proof will be applied. Instead, it is an assessment of future risk. The applicant can present evidence or argument to assist the court in making this evaluation. Witness evidence need not prove that they were alarmed or distressed themselves, but only that the behaviour they witnessed was likely to produce such an effect on others. As hearsay evidence is allowed, it may be given by ‘professional witnesses’ - officers of public agencies whose job it is to prevent anti-social behaviour. Since civil rules apply to these orders, it is unnecessary to disclose the names of the witnesses,

Experience has shown that elaborate court files are not normally required or advantageous. Where the anti-social behaviour has been persistent, agencies should for us on a few well-documented cases. A large volume of evidence and/or a large number of witnesses creates its own problems. There is more material for the defence to contest and timetabling issues may increase delays in the process.

Agencies applying for orders should strike a balance and focus on what is most relevant and necessary to provide sufficient evidence for the court to arrive at a clear understanding of the matter.

Evidence may include:

· breach of an A B C;

· witness statements of officers who attended incidents.

· witness statements of people affected by the behaviour.

· evidence of complaints recorded by the police, housing providers or other agencies.

149,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Managing the application process

· statements from professional witnesses, for example council officials, health visitors or truancy officers.

· video or CCTV evidence (effective where resolution is high and high-quality still images can be used);

· supporting statements or reports from other agencies, for example probation reports.

· previous successful civil proceedings that are relevant, such as an eviction order lor similar behaviour.

· previous relevant convictions.

· copies of custody records of previous arrests relevant to the application; and

· information from witness diaries.

Together campaign fact sheet

The Together campaign has produced a fact sheet giving step-by-step guidance on evidence collection which is available on the website www. together.gov.uk

Southampton shopping area blighted by anti-social behaviour

Issue

Lordshill centre was suffering from a large amount of anti-social behaviour, especially around the local supermarket. There was a substantial amount of shoplifting, criminal damage and harassment of visitors and shoppers. At the other end of the centre was a large bingo hall frequented by older patrons who were becoming increasingly afraid to go after 6pm.The supermarket was also shutting earlier in response to these incidents.

Approach

The local anti-social behaviour team’s senior investigator met with the manager of the supermarket, together with the local police, and discussed possible ways of working more closely to deal with the issues, They were provided with a log book to record all incidents and this was checked weekly by the anti-social behaviour investigator and the police. This information was then put into a schedule to identify times and dates of the issues and also the perpetrators. Logbooks were provided to the local library and the bingo hall, as well as the supermarket, in an attempt to collate a large amount of evidence. It’s Your Call’ posters were put up in all shops in the area and premises were visited regularly by a member of the multi­agency team.

Outcome

Because of the joint working and shared support, the stores felt able to tackle those causing the problem. As a result of information provided by the shops, an ASBO was obtained against the main perpetrator, with an exclusion from the whole shopping area.

There was also a Crime Reduction and Environment Week in the area, and a youth project has been funded by the supermarket, which has also provided paint to repaint the subway. This has prevented graffiti reappearing. There is also a dispersal order in place now to complement the ASBO and the perpetrator has not returned to the area. Residents and visitors can now shop in peace and the supermarket is looking to invest more money in the area.

Contact

Jane Mieinicezek Anti-social Behaviour Manager Telephone: 023 8083 3988

23

150,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

' mon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· Time limits

Magistrates' courts (acting in their civil capacity)

Under section 127 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980, a complaint must be made within six months of the time when the matter of the complaint (the behaviour) arose. One incidence of serious anti-social behaviour may be sufficient for an order to be made. Earlier incidents may be used as background information to support a case and show a pattern of behaviour. As long as the complaint is made within the six-month timeframe, a summons may be served outside this time period, although delay is not encouraged.

24

151,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

· Use of hearsay and professional witness evidence

Hearsay and professional witness evidence allow for the identities of those too fearful to give evidence to be protected. This is especially vita! as cases often involve anti-social behaviour in residential areas by local people and those targeted by the behaviour feel unable to come forward for fear of reprisals. Hearsay evidence cannot be excluded (at the request of defence lawyers) simply on the grounds that it is hearsay.

Hearsay evidence

Evidence of anti-social behaviour which occurs at any time after the commencement of section H may be considered when the court considers whether or not to grant an order on conviction under section 1C.

The House of Lords judgment in the McCann case confirmed that hearsay evidence is admissible. Lord Steyn stated that:'1

‘Having concluded that the proceedings in question are civil under domestic law and article 6, it follows that the machinery of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and the Magistrates’ Courts (Hearsay Evidence in Cavil Proceedings) Rules 1999 allow the introduction of such evidence under the first part of section 1.

'... use of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and the Rules in eases under the first part of section 1 are not in any way incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998,

‘... hearsay evidence will often be of crucial importance. For my part, hearsay evidence depending on its logical proactiveness is quite capable of satisfying the requirements of section 1(1).’

It is a matter for the judge or magistrate to decide what weight they attach to hearsay evidence. 5 6

Hearsay allows a police officer to provide a statement on behalf of a witness or witnesses who remain anonymous. Hearsay evidence must be relevant to the matters to be proved. It could include details such as dates, places, times, specific descriptions of actions, who was present and who said what.

Hearsay can include evidence from the person taking the statement. The person giving the hearsay evidence may attest to the observable conditions of the witness, for example that the witness appeared upset, and may give evidence based on their own judgement of the situation.

Where an applicant intends to rely on hearsay evidence in the county court, they must act in accordance with part 33 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Written notice must be given at least 21 days before the hearing to the other party and to the court.

Professional witnesses

Professional witnesses can be called to give their opinions as to matters within their expertise and can give evidence about their assessments of the respondent or his/her behaviour. Examples of witnesses who may be called as professional witnesses include council officials, health visitors, railway staff, teachers, doctors and police officers.

Care should be taken to ensure that a professional witness does not inadvertently enable vulnerable or intimidated witnesses to be identified, for example from their home address.

Vulnerable and intimidated witnesses

Witnesses who are willing to testify in court provide the best form of evidence and, where possible, should be encouraged to come forward. The new provisions introduced in Section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force on 1 April 1999, Taken from paragraphs 35. 36 and 37 of Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (on Appeal from a Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division); R v Crown Court at Manchester ex parte McCann (FC) and Others (FC),

25

152,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Use of hearsay and professional witness evidence

the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 make it easier for victims of anti-social behaviour to attend court and give evidence in person. The Act permits the ‘special measures’ that were formerly reserved for criminal hearings to be used in anti-social behaviour cases. This will enable witnesses who wish to give direct evidence to do so in private, from behind a screen or by video link.

Vulnerable witnesses are all witnesses aged under 17 years or whose quality of evidence is likely to be diminished because they have a mental disorder or learning disability or have a physical disability or physical disorder.

Intimidated witnesses are witnessing whose quality of evidence is likely to be diminished because they are in fear or distress about testifying. It is for the court to decide whether the quality of a witness’s evidence is likely to be diminished.

Witness development and support

The principal purpose of an order is to protect those who directly experience anti­social behaviour. The protection provided should include, where necessary, those who are personally targeted by perpetrators, other witnesses who see this happen and the wider local community. It follows that engaging, developing, and supporting these individuals and groups of people must be a primary concern for any agency managing a case and seeking to use these orders. Without the initial complaint of the witness, the agency will have no detailed knowledge of the problem. Without their continuing engagement, there will be no evidence on which to build a case.

Local strategies to promote the use of orders should have the interests of the witnesses and the community at their centre. The welfare and safety of residents whose complaints form the basis of any action must at every stage of the process be the first consideration. The use of hearsay evidence and professional witnesses is one way of achieving this (see section on hearsay evidence above).

While professional witnesses may have a duty to engage, lay witnesses can only be expected to do so if they can see a point in doing it; if the agency is credible and authoritative;

if the case work is visibly focused on the interests of the witnesses; if the order protects them and stops the anti-social behaviour quickly and effectively; and if the case manager offers them well-informed, practical personal support throughout the period of evidence collection, court proceedings and afterwards, as necessary.

The experience of witnesses must be given value and significance by case managers. The status and importance of witnesses in case development must be made clear. They should be provided, as appropriate, with:

· a simple method of capturing information - diaries, video/audio recording facilities and translation services.

· information on services and procedures - about the way witness support services work, service access points, telephone numbers and the name of the case manager working on the case.

· an active and respected role in developing the case - the case strategy should reflect their needs, particularly for reassurance about their safety, and they should have control over any information they provide, including agreeing the form in which it will be provided to the defence;

· protection for themselves and their family - security for door and window access, emergency contact equipment, panic alarms and mobile phones may all be appropriate in particularly serious cases.

· regular contact from the case manager, including telephone contact as agreed with the witness (daily, weekly, etc).

· support for any court appearance - a briefing on court procedures and what they should expect, the presence with them in court of the case manager, transport to and from court (if necessary) and a secure space separate from perpetrators in which they can wait to be called; and

· support after a court appearance - speedy delivery of information, copies of any orders which have been made and an explanation of the implications of the court decision.

Each key witness should also be engaged in a face-to-face meeting with the agencies, including those who do not wish to give a statement or attend court.

153,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Use of hearsay anti professional v Unless evidence

Agencies should publicise positive results - one way this can be done is through leaflet drops (these can be cost effective when targeted appropriately).

Witness support is an area where the benefits of partnership working can be clearly seen local authorities and the police have different skills and resources and can combine them to give well-rounded support.

Methods of supporting witnesses currently being used by agencies also include:

· enclosing a letter with the summons advising the respondent to stay away from witnesses.

· a higher police presence in the vicinity.

· giving witnesses the personal mobile telephone number of a named police officer who can be called if they are threatened.

· visits from neighbourhood wardens at pre-arranged times (sometimes daily); and

· phone calls from the local authority at pre-arranged times.

The interim order enables witnesses to be protected from the outset of the court process. Sections 48 and 49 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 make it an offence to intimidate witnesses in civil proceedings such as those for ASBOs.

Improving protection of witnesses in court

Manchester City Council protects witnesses

Issue

Witnesses felt anxious about giving evidence. Their concerns included the prospect of appearing in court, coming face to face with defendants and being threatened by defendants at the court building, as well as uncertainties about waiting room and refreshment facilities.

Approach

Manchester City Council negotiated the following arrangements with local courts for anti-social behaviour cases:

· access to a quiet room for witnesses.

· a video link for perpetrators in prison where it would be expensive to bring them back for an ASBO or injunction hearing (this also has the benefit of being less stressful for the witnesses).

· a video link for children and young people; and

· police presence, where appropriate.

In addition, the council provides practical information and support to witnesses.

They are made aware of what to expect, including the court layout, where they and the defendant(s) will be sitting and how people will be dressed. Practical support also includes transport to and from the court, being met by a council officer on arrival and information about refreshment and bathroom facilities.

Outcome

The result has been reassurance and physical security for witnesses. This has led to a reduction in the anxiety about the prospect of appearing in court or accidentally meeting a defendant. Witnesses are better able to focus on the ease. The ease manager is also able to keep witnesses informed of progress and to manage the case more effectively.

Contact

Nuisance Strategy Group Telephone: 0161 234 46l 1

154,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· Information sharing

Section 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 empowers any person to disclose information, where necessary or expedient for the purposes of the Act, to a ‘relevant authority’, namely a chief officer of police, police force, local authority, probation service or health authority, or to a person acting on their behalf. Where the agency requesting the information clearly needs it for the purposes of reducing anti-social behaviour, the presumption should normally be that it will be supplied.

As a result of the findings of the Crime and Disorder Act review, the Police and Justice Bill before Parliament seeks to strengthen section 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act further.

For example, the power to disclose personal information has not changed but it places a duty on relevant authorities to share depersonalised data which is relevant lor community safety purposes and already held in a depersonalised format.

Information sharing and registered social landlords

A ‘relevant authority’ (as defined by section 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998) may disclose information to a registered social landlord where the landlord is acting on behalf of the relevant authority for the purposes of the provisions of the Act.

In order to be ‘acting on behalf of the relevant authority, the person or body so acting must have authority and must have consented to do so. Such authority may be given in writing or orally. Authority may also be implied from the conduct of the parties or from the nature of employment. Authority may be confined to a particular act or be general in its character. If authority is general, then it will that be confined to acts that the relevant authority itself has power to do.

Information sharing protocols

It may be useful for partners to negotiate information sharing protocols, examples of which can be obtained from the Home Office Information Sharing Team at informationsharing@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

www.crimereduction.gov.uk/ information sharing

If possible, the protocol should be published, so that the public can see that information is being shared in an appropriate way.

The model protocol can be accessed at www.crimereduction.gov.uk/infosharing.htm

Information sharing issues can also be discussed with the Information Commissioner’s Office, whose website (www.ico.gov.uk) gives further details.

28

155,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· The terms of the order (the prohibitions)

The role of the agencies

Although it is for the court to decide what prohibitions are to be imposed by the order, the applicant agency should propose conditions (including duration) to the court.

A full order should be drawn up using the form in the court rules. The courts find it helpful if applicants can ensure that they are equipped to amend and print off the final version of the order at the end of the hearing. This improves efficiency and helps ensure that the defendant leaves the court with a clear understanding of the prohibitions.

In the county court, the proposed order should accompany the application. The process for the county court is set out in the Practice Direction at Appendix B.

Where the order is made on conviction in criminal proceedings, an agency concerned in the case, such as the police, may propose prohibitions or the court may draw them up of its own volition. It should be noted that the order may not impose positive requirements, only prohibitions.

Careful thought needs to be given to the formulation of the conditions so they cannot be easily circumvented and can be easily understood by the perpetrator.

The prohibitions

The prohibitions:

· should cover the range of anti-social acts committed by the defendant.

· should be necessary for protecting person(s) within a defined area from the anti-social acts of the defendant (but, as a result of the recent changes, that defined area may be as wide as necessary and could in appropriate cases include the whole of England and Wales);

· should be reasonable and proportionate.

· should be realistic and practical.

· should be clear, concise, and easy to understand.

· should be specific when referring to matters of time if, for example, prohibiting the offender from being outside or in particular areas at certain times.

· should be specific when referring to exclusion from an area, including street names and clear boundaries such as the side of the street included in the order (a map with identifiable street names should also be provided).

· should be in terms that make it easy to determine and prosecute a breach.

· should contain a prohibition against

· inciting/encouraging others to engage in anti-social behaviour.

· should protect all people who are in the area covered by the order from the behaviour (as well as protecting specific individuals).

· may cover acts that are anti-social in themselves and those that are precursors to a criminal act, for example a prohibition on entering a shopping centre rather than on shoplifting.

· may include a general condition prohibiting behaviour which is likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress, but where this is done there must be further clarification of what type of behaviour is prohibited; and

· may include a prohibition from approaching or harassing any witnesses named in the court proceedings.

Examples of AS BO prohibitions can be found on the Crime Reduction website at www.crimereduction.gov.uk

The courts

The absence of a precise definition of anti­social behaviour within the legislation means that orders can be used to tackle a wide range of behaviour. In recent years, courts have imposed orders to prevent behaviour such as joyriding, verbal abuse, vandalism, begging,

156,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

The terms of the order (the prohibitions)

drinking underage and assault. While the proceedings and the making of the order itself can curb behaviour, the extent to which the order succeeds also depends on the prohibitions imposed, which in turn require effective wording.

ft is good practice for the applicant to provide a draft of the prohibitions sought, but the final wording of the order will be a matter for the court. Problems have arisen when prohibitions have been drafted too widely or in such ways that enforcement is made difficult, if not impossible. Guidance and genera! principles on drafting prohibitions have come from legislation, case law and shared best practice. The following section draws together these principles and provides suggestions and comments for consideration.

There is now a requirement for the court to set out its findings of fact in relation to anti­social behaviour on the face of the order, following the cases of Wadmore and Foreman.

Effective prohibitions

If the conditions for making an order are met, the court may make an order which prohibits the defendant from doing anything described in the order (section 1(4) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA)).The facts leading to the order should be recorded and the court should provide its reasons for making the order (C v Sunderland Youth Court [ 2003 J EWHC 2385).

The effect of the order should be explained to the defendant and the exact terms pronounced in open court. Most courts now have a practice of serving the defendant with a copy of the court order before he or she leaves court and may also require his or her acknowledgement. The order should set out in full the anti-social behaviour in relation to which the order was made (7? v Shane Tony P

· EWCA Grim 287).

Once the court has decided that the order is necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by the defendant, the court must then consider what prohibitions arc appropriate to include. Each order and therefore prohibition will need to be targeted to the individual and the type of anti-social behaviour it is to prevent.

The prohibitions that may be imposed are those necessary to protect persons from further anti-social behaviour by the defendant (section 1 (6) CDA) and must not impose positive obligations. Therefore each prohibition must be:

· negative in nature.

· precise and target the specific behaviour that has been committed by the defendant.

· proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and commensurate with the risk to be guarded against, which is particularly important where an order may interfere with an ECHR right (7? v lioness [2005] EWCA 2395); and expressed in simple terms and easily understood.

· Identification of some of the best practice used within the courts suggests that the following issues should be borne in mint! when formulating prohibitions:

· A court should ask itself before making an order are the terms of this order clear so that the offender will know precisely what it is, he or she is prohibited from doing?’ (R v lioness |2005| EWCA 2395).

· Less common phrases such as ‘curtilage’, ‘paraphernalia’ or ‘environs’ should be avoided as they may cause confusion.

· Can it be enforced? Those who will enforce the order must be able to identify and prove a breach.

· Are any excluded areas clearly delineated? Most courts require a map to be included and it may be necessary to delineate which side of the road forms the boundary. If a line is drawn down the middle of a road, there may be arguments as to which side of the road the defendant was standing.

· Does the prohibition clearly identify those whom the defendant must not contact or associate with?

· Where the defendant is a foreign national, some courts consider it good practice for the order to be translated into the native tongue.

· testing the prohibition by considering ways in which it could be breached may highlight its limitations (7? v McGrath EWCA Crim 353).

· There is no requirement that the acts prohibited by an order should by themselves give rise to harassment, alarm, or distress (7? v McGrath [20051 EWCA Crim 353).

157,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

* Curfews are substantially prohibitive and, while also a sentence of the court, there is nothing legally objectionable to a curlew as a prohibition if the necessary protection of the public justifies its inclusion (7? (Lonergan) v Lewes Crown Court [2005] EWHC 457 (Admin)).

A prohibition can prohibit behaviour that is in any event unlawful, although previously the courts have encouraged inclusion of comparatively minor offences only (R v Shane Tony P [2004] EWCA Crim 287). However, recently the Court of Appeal has indicated that prohibiting behaviour that is in any event a crime does not necessarily address the aim of an order, which is to prevent anti-social behaviour. Prohibitions should enable agencies to act before the anti-social behaviour takes place rather than waiting for a crime to be committed (R v Bones [2005] EWCA 2395). Therefore, bail conditions provide a useful analogy when considering what prohibitions to impose.

The Court of Appeal provided some hypothetical examples by way of guidance.

If faced with a defendant who causes criminal damage by spraying graffiti, then the order should be aimed at facilitating action to be taken to prevent graffiti spraying by him before it takes place. For example, the prohibition could prevent the offender from being in possession of a can of spray paint in a public place, giving an opportunity to take action in advance of the actual spraying. This makes it clear to the defendant that he has lost the right to carry such a can for the duration of the order.

If a court wished to make an order prohibiting a group of youngsters from racing cars or motor bikes on an estate or driving at excessive speed (anti-social behaviour for those living on the estate), then the order should not (normally) prohibit driving while disqualified. It should prohibit, for example, the offender while on the estate from taking part in, or encouraging, racing, or driving at excessive speed. It might also prevent the group from congregating with named others in a particular area of the estate. Such an order gives those responsible for enforcing the order on the estate the opportunity to take action to prevent the anti-social conduct before it takes place. Neighbours can alert the police, who will not have to wait for the commission of a particular criminal offence.

The order will be breached not just by the offender driving but by his giving encouragement by being a passenger or a spectator.

The court also seemed to leave open the door for the continued use of a prohibition to prevent conduct that also amounts to an existing offence which carries only a monetary penalty, for example loitering for the purpose of prostitution. The court should not impose such a prohibition merely to increase the sentence for the offence but must go through all the steps to make sure that an order is necessary.

Further details can be found on the Together website at www.together.gov.uk

Length of prohibitions

In R (lonergan) v Lewes Crown Court [2005] EWHC 457 (Admin), Maurice Kay LJ referred to the duration of prohibitions, saying:

A curfew for two years in the life of a teenager is a very considerable restriction of freedom. It may be necessary, but in many cases I consider it likely that either the period of curfew could properly be set at less than the full life of the order or that, in the light of behavioural progress, an application to vary the curfew under section 1(8) might well succeed.’

Consequently, just because an order must run for a minimum of two years, it does not follow that each and every prohibition within the order must endure for the life of the order. This approach was endorsed by the Court of Appeal in R v Bones [2005] EWCA 2395 which considered that it might be necessary to amend or remove a prohibition after a period of time, for example if the defendant started work.

ASBOs on juveniles should be reviewed yearly, and further details are given on page 45.

Targeting specific behaviour

As noted above, prohibitions must target the defendant’s specific anti-social behaviour.

But assuming the prohibitions are negative, specific and enforceable, the appropriateness of

31

158,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

The ter nix of the order (the prohibitions)

the prohibitions imposed can be judged only on the facts of each case. Therefore, a number of common scenarios are included below for consideration, these are based on orders made by the courts, although facts and prohibitions have been altered to highlight specific issues. While these types of behaviour have been made the subject of orders, this should not imply that such behaviour will automatically be held to be subject to orders in the future.

Further examples of prohibitions can be found on the Crime Reduction website at www.crimereduction.gov.uk

The following are examples of prohibitions that were drawn up but were found to be too wide or poorly drafted:

· Not to be a passenger in or on any vehicle, while any other person is jsic] committing a criminal offence in England or Wales.

(A breach could be occasioned by travelling in a bus, the driver of which, unknown to the subject of the order, was driving without a licence (R (W) v Acton Magistrates’ Court [2005] EWHC 954 (Admin)).

· Not to associate with any person or persons while such a person or persons is engaged in attempting or conspiring to commit any criminal offence in England or Wales. (A similar result to the above, in that he could be associating with someone who, unknown to him, was conspiring to commit an offence.)

· Entering any other car park, whether on payment or otherwise, within the counties of |...]. (This was considered to be too draconian as it would prevent the defendant from entering, even as a passenger, any car park in a supermarket (R v McGrath [2005] EWCA Crim 353).)

· Trespassing on any land belonging to any person, whether legal or natural, within those counties. (As above, in that any wrong turn onto someone else’s property would risk custody.)

· Having in his possession in any public place any window hammer, screwdriver, torch or any tool or implement that could be used for the purpose of breaking into motor vehicles. (Unacceptably wide, as the meaning of any tool or implement’ is impossible to ascertain.)

° Entering any land or building on the land that forms a part of educational premises, except as an enrolled pupil with the

agreement of the head of the establishment or in the course of lawful employment.

(It was held that the term ‘educational premises’ lacked clarity, for example it could have included teaching hospitals or premises where night classes were held. Also, there was a danger that the defendant might unwittingly breach the order if he played on playing fields associated with educational premises (R v lioness [2005] EWCA 2395).)

· In any public place, wearing, or having with you, anything that covers, or could be used to cover, the face or part of the face this will include hooded clothing, balaclavas, masks or anything else that could be used to hide identity. (This was found to be too wide and a breach could occur by wearing a scarf or carrying a newspaper.)

· Doing anything that may cause damage.

(Far too wide, as it may include the defendant scuffing his shoes.)

· Committing any criminal offence. (Taken with other prohibitions, the divisional court commented that this was very plainly too wide (R (on application of W) v DPP [2005] EWHC 1333 (Admin).)

Further examples and consideration of prohibitions made for football-related violence may be found in the ease of (R v lioness [2005] EWCA 2395).

Duration of an order

The minimum duration of an order is two years, which was set in order to give respite to communities from anti-social behaviour. There is no maximum period and an order may be made for an indefinite period. It is for the court to decide the duration of an order, but the applicant agency should propose a time period as part of its application.

The duration applied for should take into account the age of the recipient, any special conditions that might affect their behaviour, the severity of his or her anti-social behaviour, the length of time it has gone on for and the recipient’s response to any previous measures to deal with the behaviour. A longer order will generally be appropriate in the case of more serious or persistent anti-social behaviour. Orders issued to children and young people should be reviewed annually and careful consideration must be given to the case for applying for such orders to last beyond two years.

159,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

· Applying to the courts

Summons procedure

Magistrates’ court (acting in its civil capacity)

The lead individual in charge of the case should arrange for an application form and three copies of the summons form to be completed and served upon the court. Once these proceedings have been issued, the applicant should serve the defendant with the following:

1. the summons.

2. a copy of the completed application form.

3. documentary evidence of statutory consultation.

4. guidance on how the defendant can obtain legal advice and representation.

5. notice of any hearsay evidence.

6. details of evidence in support of the application as agreed with the applicant agency’s solicitor; and

7. a warning to the defendant that it is an offence to pervert the course of justice, and that witness intimidation is liable to lead to prosecution.

Wherever possible, the lead officer in charge will ensure that service of the summons is made on the defendant in person. If personal service is not possible, the summons should be served by post as soon as possible to the last known address.

Where a child or a young person is concerned, a person with parental responsibility must also receive a copy of the summons. This could be a local authority social worker in the case of a looked-after child as well as, or instead of, the parent. (’Parent’ has the same meaning as under section 1 of the Family Law Reform Act 1987, and ‘guardian’ is defined in section 107 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.)

The summons forms are set out within the Magistrates’ Courts (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders) Rules 2002. See Appendix D.

County court

The process for the county court is set out in the Practice Direction of the updated Civil Procedure Rules at 65.21 -65.26.

Disclosure

Before evidence is disclosed, the applicant should consult the police and other agencies to ensure that all reasonable steps have been taken to support witnesses and minimise any potential for witness intimidation. Evidence should not be disclosed without the express permission of the witness. However, evidence that is not disclosed cannot be relied on.

The applicant should seek to maintain witness anonymity and ensure that it does not identify them by default (for example through details of location, race, personal characteristics or age).

Court procedures

It is important that those hearing the case are fully briefed on the purpose of an order. There should be no confusion as to the purpose of the order, which is to protect the community. Where the case concerns a child, the welfare of the child is, of course, to be considered, and indeed the making of the order should contribute to this by setting standards of expected behaviour. But the welfare of the child is not the principal purpose of the order hearing.

Whether or not the subject of the application is present, the court should be asked to make the order. Adjournments should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

Magistrates’ court (acting in its civil capacity)

An application for an order in the magistrates’ court is made by complaint. This means that the court will act in its civil capacity. The provisions governing civil applications for

33

160,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Applying to the courts

orders in magistrates’ courts are set out in the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

The application, under section 1(3) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, should be made to the magistrates’ court whose area includes the local government area or police area where people need to be protected from the anti-social behaviour.

The lead officer in charge of the case should ensure that all the evidence and witnesses are available at the hearing, including evidence in support of any need for the court to make an immediate order.

Under section 98 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, evidence will be given on oath. Any magistrate or judge may hear the case.

Where a defendant fails to attend a hearing, the applicant may, after substantiating the complaint on oath, apply to the court to issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest. Various provisions for adjournment, non-attendance at court and the issue of a warrant for arrest are contained in sections 54 to 57 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980.

County court

An application for an order in the county court must be made in accordance with the procedure set out in the Practice Direction at Appendix B.

Where the applicant is the claimant in the principal proceedings, the application for the order should be included in the claim form. Where the applicant is the defendant in the principal proceedings, the application should be made by way of an application notice,

How to prepare a court tile for an application

A file to support the application for an order should be prepared by the lead agency or the solicitor acting on their behalf.

A minimum of eight identical court bundles will be required as follows.

· three for the magistrates.

· one for the legal adviser.

· one for the applicant’s solicitor.

· one for the defence solicitor.

· one for the defendant; and

· one for the witness box.

The files are in loose-leaf format (in an A4 ring binder) and should be indexed and paginated.

The index and contents should include, as appropriate:

· the summons for the order, together with proof of service.

· the application for the order (in the format provided by the Magistrates’ Court (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders) Rules 2002);

· the defendant’s details.

· the defendant’s previous convictions.

· the defendant’s acceptable behaviour contract (ABC) agreements.

· a summary of the incidents being relied upon by the applicant.

1. a map and description of the exclusion area.

2. an association chart (showing relationships and connections where the alleged anti-social behaviour is by a group of people).

3. documentation of statutory consultations.

4. supporting statements from any multi­agency consultation.

5. a statement from the officer in the case.

6. any other statements obtained.

7. hearsay notices.

8. a draft order for approval by the court; and

9. a home circumstances report where the subject of the order is a child or young person (if necessary and completed).

The bundle should be prepared and served on the solicitor for the defendant as soon as the summons is served. The applicant’s solicitor should attempt to have the contents of the bundle agreed prior to any pre-trial review. Disclosure should be transparent and complete.

Contact

Niamh No one, Lancashire Constabulary

Email: niamh.noone@lancashire.police.uk

Telephone: 01772 412919

161,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Applying to he courts

which should accompany the defence. If the applicant is not a party to the principal proceedings, an application to be had a party and for the order must be made to the court in the same application notice.

Orders made on conviction in criminal proceedings

After a defendant has been convicted of an offence, the prosecutor may make an application for an order. Alternatively, the court may make an order of its own volition.

Orders on conviction can be made by the magistrates’ court, the youth court or the Crown court. The form of these orders is set out in the Magistrates’ Court Rules and the Crown Court Rules. An order may be made only if the court sentences or conditionally discharges the offender for a relevant offence.

The Crown Prosecution Service usually requests the court to make an order on conviction, as there is no formal application process for this order. The court has to consider that:

· the offender has acted in an anti-social manner, that is in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as the offender; and

· an order is necessary to protect any persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him.

· Evidence

· Evidence should explain to the court the context of the anti-social behaviour and its effect on other people. It can include:

· direct witness statements.

The head of a noisy household gets an ASBO for ignoring repeated official warnings and threatening complaining neighbours and council officers

Issue

In March 2004, neighbours of a house in Lowestoft were subjected to frequent and persistent loud music, resulting in 17 complaints over the course of a month. The perpetrator, who was a housing association tenant, had intimidated, threatened, and verbally abused her neighbours, council officers and visitors.

Approach

A noise abatement notice was served on the perpetrator by environmental health officers under section 80 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Audio equipment was confiscated following breach of the noise abatement notice. During the confiscation, the perpetrator verbally abused the council officers.

After seven warning letters, two abatement notices and the confiscation of more than Ł1,000 of musical equipment, the council was still receiving complaints.

Failure to comply with an abatement notice without reasonable excuse is an offence, and the noisy neighbour was taken to court. The council consulted Suffolk Police and the

housing association and proposed terms for an order on conviction that achieved much more than the original abatement notice was capable of.

The magistrates granted the council’s application for an order on conviction with the following prohibitions:

· not to play loud music that could be heard outside her dwelling; and

· not to verbally (or otherwise) abuse: employees or agents of the council; neighbours; or visitors to the neighbourhood.

Outcome

The order on conviction had several advantages over the noise abatement notice as an enforcement tool. It was easier to enforce as the evidence of experts such as environmental health officers to prove statutory noise nuisance would not be required. The order on conviction reduced the test of compliance to a simple (non­expert) factual observation of audibility’ beyond the confines of the defendant’s dwelling - a simple matter of observable fact that, say, a police officer could witness.

35

162,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Applying to the courts

The second prohibition to deal with the tenant’s threatening and abusive behaviour was beyond the scope of the original abatement notice. It was granted as the council was able to produce evidence of the tenant’s behaviour to justify the restriction gained from early consultations with Suffolk Police and the housing association, which proved it was a reasonable restriction to impose on the defendant.

The resulting order on conviction did not cost any more than the noise prosecution would have cost on its own. Obtaining these restrictions in this way avoided the need for a stand-alone ASBO application in respect of the other aspects of the defendant’s behaviour, saving money, avoiding several weeks' delay, and achieving faster and more readily enforceable relief for the wider community.

Valuable lessons were learnt by environmental health and other enforcement authorities in this action.

In particular, early consultation with relevant agencies in the process of investigation and enforcement are important to an ASBO’s success. And if the applicant for an order offers the other relevant agencies the opportunity to assist in drafting appropriate prohibitions, a successful outcome, which offers relief for the community ‘on all fronts’, is more likely.

Contact

Andrew Reynolds, Principal Environmental Health Officer, Waveney District Council Telephone: 01502 562111

· professional witness statements.

· hearsay evidence.

· CCTV footage.

· letters of complaint (including anonymous complaints) to the police, the council or a landlord.

· articles in the local press.

· the number and nature of the charges against the defendant.

· the defendant’s character and conduct as revealed by the evidence.

· the content of the victim’s personal statement.

· other offences that have been taken into consideration (TICs);

· details of final warnings or previous convictions.

· the risk assessment in any pre-sentence report.

· records of any non-compliance with other interventions, e.g. ABCs or warnings; and

· the community impact statement (CIS).

A CIS can be written by a caseworker (such as a housing officer or community safety officer) and/or by the local police. The purpose of a CIS is to outline the effect the anti-social behaviour is having on the wider community in a way that is clear and concise for the judge’s consideration. In certain circumstances, some elements of evidence, such as hearsay, CCTV footage and letters of complaint, can be put in a (Vis.

Adjournments

Section 1.0(3) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 permits adjournments to be made after conviction and before sentence to enable enquiries to be made or, in this context, to determine the most suitable way of dealing with an application for an order under section 1C of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.Where the court adjourns and delays sentencing to consider the order, it can impose bail conditions in the normal manner.

Section 139 of (he Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 has amended section 1C of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to allow lor adjournments after sentencing the offender for the purpose of considering an order. Powers are also available to compel a defendant to return to court after sentencing to attend the adjourned hearing.

interim orders on conviction

An interim order on conviction can be sought to protect vulnerable witnesses and communities from threats of violence, intimidation and further anti-social behaviour by the defendant pending the hearing of an application for a full order. This change to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was also introduced by section 139 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. For more information on interim orders, see the

163,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Applying to the courts

article ‘What are interim anti-social behaviour orders?’ on the Together website at www. together, gov.uk

Step-by-step guide

A step-by-step guide to the process can be found at Appendix E.

Public funding for defendants

A guide to public funding for defendants can be found at Appendix F.

164,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

·         Children and young people

The Home Office, Youth Justice Board and Association of Chief Police Officers have issued separate guidance on the role of the youth offending team (YOT) in dealing with anti-social behaviour.7 There is also separate guidance on the interventions available for children under 10 at Appendix B.

This section sets out the procedures for applying for ASBOs and similar orders in respect of children and young people, and the procedures for managing the case afterwards.

Who can apply for an order?

Agencies able to apply for orders are the same as those for adults, and the consultation requirements are the same.

The role of the YOT needs to be clearly set out in terms of what it can offer in the prevention of anti-social behaviour, and in the ASBO process. All other agencies should involve the YOT in any consideration of an order at an early stage as it is likely to have much information to share about that young person. The YOT has a responsibility to prevent crime and anti-social behaviour by young people, and should help partners to obtain an order to stop the behaviour continuing where it is deemed appropriate.

If there are any doubts about the option of obtaining an order, these should be explored at an early stage with the YOT and other partners, rather than in court. The YOT can also have a role in explaining the conditions of an order to the young person and their parents, explaining the impact of that person’s behaviour on the community, and making it dear that the order is the consequence of that behaviour. In addition, the YOT and other partners should offer support in order to aid compliance.

In cases of a breach of an order, the pre-sentence report (PSR) provided to the court by the YOT should outline the impact title behaviour has had on the community.

The YOT can also use the PSR in criminal proceedings to recommend an order on conviction where that course of action has been agreed and deemed appropriate.

The PSR should also address the issue of parenting and further support to the young person. Courts can make a parenting order with an ASBO or similar order, if a voluntary approach has failed and it will help improve behaviour, together with an individual support order (ISO). The YOT has a key role in both of these interventions. Details on these are set out below,

Applications to the magistrates’ court acting in its civil capacity

Since the youth court has no civil jurisdiction, applications for orders against under-18s will be heard by the magistrates’ court (except where the youth court is asked to impose an order on conviction).A pilot to allow children and young people to be joined to proceedings in the county court, for the purpose of obtaining an ASBO where the anti-social behaviour is material to the principal proceedings, is currently under way in 11 county courts and is due to run until September 2006.

The officer in charge of the application should contact the justices’ clerk in advance of the hearing to ensure that it will be conducted in a way that is suitable for the child or young person.

Where there is an application to a magistrates’ court lor an ASBO under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, or an application to a magistrates’ court for an ASBO to be varied or discharged under section 1(8) of the Act, and the person against whom the order is sought is under 18, the justices constituting the court should normally be qualified to sit in the youth court.

Unlike a youth court, which is closed to the general public, the magistrates’ court is Youth Justice Board, Home Office and Association of Chief Police Officers (2006), Antisocial Behaviour: A guide to the role of Youth Offending Teams in dealing with antisocial behaviour. This can be downloaded at

www.youthjuslice board.gov.uk/Publication’s/Scnpts/pro(IView.asp?icfproduct=212&ep =

165,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Children and young people

Dealing effectively with persistent young perpetrators in Norfolk

Issue

Improved partnership working between the police and the YOT was key to effectively tackling anti-social behaviour by young people.

Approach

Regular liaison meetings of YOT and youth inclusion and support panel (YISP) staff were held at the Safer Communities Unit. Community reparation projects were planned which impacted on sensitive communities or resonated with vulnerable members of the community. Police officers forged contact with youth groups and educational centres. Part of the action plan required YISP workers to attend a police tasking and co-ordination meeting.

Outcomes

The YOT discussed, and was helpful to and supportive of, community reparation

projects that added to increased public reassurance. Work commissioned included graffiti clearance in priority areas, and the cleaning of home Watch’ street signs that were covered in algae, and where householders were elderly and not able to carry out that work. Two respected local officers maintained their links with a local community youth project through a weekly radio broadcast. On the Beat1, on the first community radio station in Norfolk. The Safer Communities inspector became a member of the steering group of that project. Community team officers enjoyed good relations with the Excellence Centre, a unit for excluded or disengaged children of school age, as evidenced by the support of the centre manager for the Constabulary’s recent ‘Chartermark’ award.

Contact

Inspector Peter Walsh

Email: walshp@norfolk.pnn.police.uk

open to the general public and has no automatic restrictions to prevent public and press access or to prevent reporting of the proceedings or to protect the identity of a child or young person (or adult) who is the subject of an application.

· The court should have a good reason, aside from age alone, to impose a discretionary order under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 to prevent the identification of a child or young person concerned in the proceedings.

· The applicant may resist a call from the defendant’s representatives for such restrictions if the effectiveness of the ASBO will largely depend on the wider community knowing the details.

The applicant should note the following.

· Under section 98 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, evidence will be given on oath, except the evidence of a child under 14 years of age, which is given unsworn.

· Section 34A of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 requires the attendance of a parent or legal guardian at court for any person under 16 years of age. Every effort should be made before a hearing to ensure that this takes place to avoid unnecessary adjournments.

· The court will require information about the child’s or young person’s background, home surroundings and family circumstances. Such information should be available to avoid the need for an adjournment.

Assessment of needs

When applying for an order against a young person aged between 10 and 17, the YOT should make an assessment of their circumstances and needs. This will enable the local authority to ensure that the appropriate services are provided for the young person concerned and for the court to have the necessary information about them.

It is vital that any assessment does not delay the application for an order. The lead agency should therefore liaise closely with the local social services department or YOT from the start of the process so that, where a new assessment is required, it can be begun quickly. In some cases an up-to-date assessment may already be available.

3

166,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Children and young people

Councils with social services responsibilities have a duty, arising from section 17 of the Children Act 1989, to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their areas who may be in need the assessment of the needs of such children is expected to be carried out in accordance with the Framework for the assessment of children in need and their families? The guidance sets out the content and timescales of the initial assessment (seven working days) and the core assessment (35 working days). A core assessment is required when an initial assessment has determined that the child is in need. The assessment will cover the child’s needs, the capacities of their parents and wider family, and environmental factors. This enables councils to determine whether the child is a ‘child in need’ and what services may be necessary in order to address the assessed needs.

The assessment of the child’s needs should run in parallel with evidence gathering and the application process. Statutory agencies, such as social services, the local education authority or the health authority, have a statutory obligation to provide services to under-18s.They should do so irrespective of whether an ASBO application is to be made and the timing of that application. The ASBO application does not prevent such support and can proceed in parallel, or indeed prior to, that support.

Parenting orders

This section should be read in conjunction with Government guidance on parenting contracts and parenting orders. ’There is also information on the Together website (www.together.gov.uk).The applicant for parenting orders is the YOT. (Provisions in the Police and Justice Bill currently before Parliament aim to extend to registered social landlords and local authorities the power to apply lor parenting orders.)

Parenting orders are available alongside other court action where:

· an ASBO or a sex offender order has been made in respect of a child or young person; or a child or young person has been convicted of a criminal offence.

· Parenting orders can be made for children aged between 10 and 17 provided that the conditions in section 8 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 are not. This section stipulates that a parenting order is desirable only if it is made ‘in the interest of preventing repetition of the behaviour which led to the order being made.’

· The court can decide to make the order; it is not necessary to obtain the consent of the parent or guardian.

It is essential that parents and guardians take responsibility for the behaviour of their children. If an ASBO or an order on conviction is made against a child or young person, the court must also consider making a parenting order in respect of the parents or guardians of the child or young person. Where the parent or child has a disability, a practitioner with specialist knowledge should be involved in the assessment process to help establish whether the behaviour is a result of disability and whether it could or should be addressed.

Parenting orders are civil orders that help to engage parents8 9 10 11 to address their child’s offending or anti-social behaviour, and to establish discipline and build a relationship with their child. This may help the conditions of the ASBO to be met and thereby reduce the chances of the young person breaching the order.

The parenting order requires the parent or guardian to comply, for a period of not more than 12 months, with such requirements as are specified in the order, being those which the court considers desirable in the interests of preventing any repetition of the anti-social behaviour (for example ensuring that the Department of Health (2000) Framework for the assessment of children in need end their families.

Home Office, Youth Justice Board, Department for Constitutional Affairs. Parenting Contracts and Orders Guidance, February 2004.

Provision for parenting orders is set out in sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.The orders can be made in proceedings where a child safety order, an ASBO or sex offender order has been made; a child or young person is convicted of an offence: or a person is convicted of an offence under sections 443 or 444 of the Education Act 1996.

1.1. For the purposes of the 1998 Act, the term 'parent' has the same meaning as that contained within section 1 of the Family Law Reform Act 1987, that is either of the child’s or young person's natural parents whether or not married to each other at the time of their birth. 'Guardian' is defined in section 117 of the 1998 Act with reference to section 107 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, and includes any person who, in the opinion of the court, has for the time being the care of the child or young person. This may include people who may not have parental responsibility for the child or young person as defined in the Children Act 1989, such as stepparents.

40

167,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Children and young people

child attends school regularly, avoids certain places, or is home by a certain time at night).

The parent or guardian is required to attend a counselling or guidance programme for up to three months. This element is compulsory and must be imposed in all cases when an order is made (except where the parent or guardian has previously received a parenting order - section 8(5)). Programmes can cover setting and enforcing consistent standards of behaviour and responding more effectively to unreasonable adolescent demands.

The court needs to consider an oral or written report before making a parenting order, unless the child or young person has reached the age of 16.T0 avoid unnecessary adjournments, such a report should be available early in the court process.

A ‘responsible officer’, who will generally be from the local YOT, social services, probation service or local education authority, supervises delivery of the parenting order.

The officer will have responsibility for, among other things, arranging the provision of counselling or guidance sessions and ensuring that the parent complies with any other requirements which the court may impose.

If the parent does not comply with the order, the responsible officer can refer the matter to the police for investigation. Such action is generally expected only where non­compliance is sufficiently serious to warrant possible prosecution - the responsible officer is expected to work with the parent to improve compliance. But if prosecuted and convicted for non-compliance, the parent can be fined up to Jo 1,000 (level 3 on the standard scale).

Individual support orders

Section 1AA of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which was inserted by section 322 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, provides for the making of ISOs, which have been available since May 2004.They are civil orders and can be attached to ASBOs made against young people aged between 10 and 17 years old. They impose positive requirements on the young person and are designed to tackle the underlying causes of their anti-social behaviour.

ISOs are available for stand-alone ASBOs made in the magistrates’ courts only. Where a magistrates’ court makes an ASBO against a young person, it must also make an ISO if it considers that an ISO would help to prevent further anti-social behaviour. ISOs are not available for orders on conviction, where it is expected that sentencing will address the underlying causes of the offence.

ISOs can last up to six months and require a young person to comply with such requirements as may be specified in the order and any directions given by the responsible officer to that end. Such requirements must be those which the court considers desirable in the interests of preventing repetition of the anti-social behaviour and may include requirements to participate in certain activities, to report to a specified person at specified times or to comply with educational arrangements, but in no case should they require attendance on more than two days a week. An example would be support sessions tailored to the individual’s needs and designed to address the causes of the behaviour that led to the ASBO being made, such as counselling for substance misuse or an anger management programme. The ISO may name specific activities the individual must participate in and can also specify dates and places where attendance is required.

ISO application process

There is no need for a specific application for an ISO, although it might be helpful to raise the issue with the court. Where a magistrates’ court is making an ASBO (stand-alone only) against a person under 18 years old, it is obliged to make an ISO at the same time if the following conditions are met:

· the ISO would be desirable in the interests of preventing any repetition of the anti­social behaviour which led to the ASBO being made.

· the young person is not already subject to an ISO; and

· the Secretary of State has notified the court that arrangements for implementing the ISO are available (this was done in April 2004 in Home Office Circular 025/2004).

The court should ensure the requirements of the ISO and the consequences of breach are explained to the defendant. If an ISO is not made, then the court must state why it

41

168,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Children and young people

considers that the conditions for making the order arc not met. ISOs are not available for orders on conviction.

Role of the youth offending team

The YOT advises the magistrates’ court on whether an ISO is necessary and the conditions an ISO should contain. This information is based on a need’s assessment of the young person.

The YOT is responsible for co-ordinating delivery of the ISO and also has a role in ensuring that the terms and conditions of both the ASBO and ISO are understood by the defendant. The conditions within the ISO are overseen by a responsible officer who is usually a member of the YOT, social services or local education authority.

Variation and discharge

An application to vary or discharge the ISO may be made by either the young person subject to the ISO or the responsible officer. The need to very an ISO may arise where support proves to be inappropriate or the individual moves out of the area. Equally if the ASBO linked to the ISO is varied by a court, the court may also vary or discharge the ISO at the same time.

If the ASBO comes to an end or is discharged, the ISO also ceases to have effect.

Breach

Breach of an ISO is an offence and criminal penalties apply, for ISOs to be credible, breaches must be dealt with.

The responsible officer is responsible for ensuring compliance with an ISO. It will usually be appropriate for the responsible officer to encourage compliance using warning tetters before instigating proceedings for a criminal prosecution.

The breach is taken forward by the Crown Prosecution Service and breach proceedings are heard in the youth court. If a court finds that the subject of the order has failed to comply with any requirement of the order, they are guilty of an offence. Breach is a summary offence and the court can impose a fine of up to:

· Ł1,000, if defendant aged 14 or over; or

· A.250, if defendant aged under 14.

Where the defendant is under 16, the parent will usually be responsible for payment of the fine. The court also has the discretion to order the parent to pay if the defendant is aged between 16 and 18 (as set out in section 137 of the Powers of Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000.

A referral order is not available for breach of an ISO.

Balcony games for the boys creates corridor of hell for neighbours: ASBOs, ISOs and a house move bring relief for all

Issue

Sons of two neighbouring families were responsible for persistent noise nuisance which caused neighbours great distress for over a year. The children of families X and Y, aged between 10 and 15, lived in first- floor council flats where they played rowdy games outside their flats. Family X had a secure tenancy while family Y had a short-term tenancy. Residents frequently complained to the housing office or to the local police community support officers (PCSOs).

Approach

Police and the housing office worked closely together on the case and discovered a pattern of nuisance. PCSOs and the estate manager mediated between families X and Y and their neighbours. When mediation failed, joint visits were made to warn the families of the consequences of their continued anti­social behaviour. Formal warnings followed, outlining the consequences of the boys’ actions in terms of potential ASBOs and possible loss of their parents’ tenancy. When all warnings had failed, a multi-agency team obtained an interim ASBO on the five boys to put an immediate stop to the nuisance.

Evidence provided by PCSOs and the estate manager was used at the hearing, and interim orders were granted.

Minor breaches over the Christmas period were reported to the police by witnesses between the interim and full hearing, and

42

169,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Children and young people

these strengthened the ease for the ASBOs at the full hearing.

Witnesses who were previously fearful of giving evidence were willing to do so at the full hearing where the ASBOs were granted, and an ISO was attached to each ASBO to tackle some of the underlying causes of the behaviour.

The conditions of the ASBOs on the five boys ordered them:

· not to cause nuisance within the vicinity of their dwellings.

· to stop knocking on doors and windows; and

· not to play games on the balcony. Outcome

The main benefit of the ASBOs was the relief that they brought to the neighbours, who felt they had been supported through the process by police and the housing office.

The ISO, devised and facilitated by Norfolk Youth Offending Team, consisted of four hour-long sessions aimed at helping the boys develop an understanding of how their anti-social behaviour, their constant shouting and banging, impacted on themselves as a group, on their immediate family, and on their neighbours.

The first session defined the ground rules for the group, including showing respect, listening with only one person talking at a time, no shouting, and with each member

being allowed to voice an opinion. The second session got the boys listening to what people were saying around them. The third session introduced elements from a social skills game that focused on the boys’ finding different ways of asking each other something without resorting to shouting. In the fourth session, a worker from Positive Futures helped the boys think about what leisure activities were available as alternatives to playing on the balcony. The youth worker kept the boys’ parents up to date on what was happening in the sessions.

Family X, who were relocated away from family Y, kept their tenancy and no further problems were reported. Similarly, family Y succeeded in stopping their anti-social behaviour.

The ISO gave the boys an opportunity to understand the effect of their rowdy behaviour on themselves and others. As a result of the order and the interventions of the youth worker, the boys took up recreational activities and found constructive ways of spending their time.

Overall, the intervention package was a great success for the community, and for the families themselves.

Contact

Karl Hodgins

Youth Worker, Norfolk YOT Karl.Hodgins@yot.norfolk.gov.uk

In a debate in the House of Commons on 28 June, Vernon Coaker MP, a Home Office Minister, said:

“ISOs are playing their part in the wider battle to combat anti-social behaviour and promote positive behaviour. They have proven potential to help young people to turn around their lives and move away from anti-social behaviour and offending.

I share the enthusiasm for ISOs of my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport, and 1 hope that she and the other hon. Members will encourage local agencies to make more use of such a highly effective intervention tool.”

43

170,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

· Immediate post-order procedure (adults and young people)

Where an ASBO or similar order is granted, it is preferable for a copy of the order to be served on the defendant in person prior to his or her departure from court. It is essential to ascertain that the defendant understands the nature of the prohibitions and the order.

Good practice - managing procedures and timescales

Practitioners handling such orders have taken a range of measures to minimise paperwork and delays, including:

· breaking down the process into clear, manageable stages that are easy to follow for those unfamiliar with the process.

· setting timeframes for each stage of the application to keep the process focused, including a commitment to arrange problem-solving meetings at short notice.

· releasing key staff so that they can concentrate on the application process - this should result in evidence gathering being conducted quickly and efficiently.

· using other agencies, such as neighbourhood wardens and station staff, to collect additional evidence where required (evidence gathering and attending incidents are tasks that local authorities, registered social landlords (R l. s) and the police are already involved in and therefore involve no additional cost);

· adopting strategies to overcome challenges to witness evidence such as ensuring that witness statements corroborate.

· minimising court delays by forewarning the courts of application and using pre-trial reviews.

· sharing costs between partner agencies and utilising the expertise from each agency; and

· not engaging in non-essential problem­ solving meetings in more serious cases in order to get to court more quickly.

Where an individual has not been personally served with the order at the court, the court should be asked to arrange for personal service as soon as possible thereafter.

In without notice proceedings, proof of service of an ASBO is important, since any criminal proceedings for breach may fail if service is challenged by the defence and cannot be proved by the prosecution. While all other orders do not need proof of service in order to prove breach of an order, lack of knowledge of existence of an order will contribute to a reasonable excuse for the defence. In the case of a child or young person, the order should also be served on the parent, guardian or an appropriate adult, and such service should be recorded.

An order comes into effect on the day it is made. But the two-year period during which no order shall be discharged except with the consent of both parties starts from the date of service.

The lead agency, if not the police, should ensure that a copy of the order is forwarded immediately to the police. The agency should also give copies of the order to the anti-social behaviour co-ordinator of the local crime and disorder reduction partnership, the other partner agencies and the main targets and witnesses of the anti-social behaviour, so that breaches can be reported and acted upon. The Justices’ Clerks’ Society guidance states that it is the responsibility of the court to inform the police of the making of an order."

The police should notify the appropriate- police area command on the same working day so that details of the defendant and the conditions of the order can be recorded.

A copy of the order should be provided to the lead agency’s legal representative on the same day as the court hearing, and in the case of a child or young person, the court will provide a further copy for the youth

Campbell, S. (2002) Implementing Antisocial! Behaviour Orders: messages for practitioners. Home Office Findings 160, Sections 1(9), 18(6) and 1C of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as amended. justices’ Clerks' Society. Good practice guide Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. A Guide to Law and Procedure in the Magistrates' Court, 4.5(V).

44

171,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Immediate post-order procedure (adults and your people)

offending team (YOT). The YOT should arrange for action to be taken by an appropriate agency (for example social services) to ensure that the young person understands the seriousness of the order.

It should also consider the provision of appropriate support programmes to help avoid a breach of the order by diverting the offender from the behaviour that led to it, although such programmes cannot, as the law currently stands, be a condition of the order.

Enforcing the order

The obtaining of the order is not the end of the process. The order must be monitored and enforced properly.

Partnership working after the order is made should include information exchange to ensure early warning of problems and clarification of who should do what to safeguard witnesses, as well as what other action should be taken to challenge the perpetrator in such cases.

Agencies need to be alert to the prospect that this should become a statutory requirement in the near future. Adopting this as best practice now will enable them to achieve compliance more readily.

Police National Computer (PNC)

Recording of orders on the PNC will enable police forces to enforce breaches effectively. Local arrangements should be made for orders to be placed on the PNC so that police officers are in a position to access usable data to identify those who are subject to an order. Conditions of the order should be appended clearly along with the identity of the case officer so that the necessary action can be taken in ease of a breach (which is an arrestable offence).

It is essential that breaches of an order, appeals against the sentence and any other actions relating to the management of the case are reported to the agency responsible for the management of the case.

One-year review of juveniles' ASBOs

Orders issued to young people should be reviewed each year, given young people’s continually changing circumstances, to help ensure that they are receiving the support they need in order to prevent breach. The review should be administrative rather than judicial and should be undertaken by the team that decided upon the initial application. Where practicable, the YOT should provide the group with an assessment of the young person. Depending upon progress towards improved behaviour, possible outcomes will include an application to discharge the order or a strengthening of the prohibitions. Applications to vary or discharge the order will have to be made to the court in the usual way. The overriding considerations remain the safety and needs of the community, and the review would have to incorporate the community’s views on the order’s effectiveness.

172,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

· Appeals

Magistrates' court (acting in its civil capacity) and orders on conviction in criminal proceedings

Section 4 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides the offender with the right of appeal against the making of a stand-alone ASBO. Section 108 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 provides a right of appeal against an on- conviction order. An appeal in both cases is to the Crown Court. Rules 74 and 75 of the Magistrates Courts Rules 1981 and 6 to 11 of the Crown Court Rules 1982 apply to appeals against orders. Both parties may provide additional evidence. By virtue of section 79(3) of the Supreme Court Act 1981, an appeal is by way of a re-hearing of the case. In determining an appeal, the Crown Court should have before it a copy of the original application lor an order (if applicable), the full order and the notice of appeal. The lead agency should ensure that copies are sent to the court.

Notice of appeal must be given in writing to the designated officer of the court and the applicant body within 21 days of the order (Crown Court Rules 1982, rule 7). But the Crown Court has the discretion to give leave to appeal out of time (rule 7(5)). The agency that brought the initial application should take charge of defending any appeal against the order. It should also lead in action to guard against witness intimidation.

The Crown Court may vary the order or make a new order. Any order made by the Crown Court on appeal shall be treated for the purpose of any later application for variation or discharge as if it were the original magistrates’ court order, unless it is an order directing that the application be re-heard by the magistrates’ court.

Although on hearing an appeal it is open to the Crown Court to make any incidental

order, for example to suspend the operation of a prohibition pending the outcome of the appeal where this appears to the Crown Court to be just, there is no provision for automatic stay of an order pending appeal.

The order remains in force pending the outcome of the appeal, and breach is a criminal offence even if the appeal subsequently succeeds.

An appeal against the ruling of the Crown Court is to the High Court by way of case stated under section 28 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, or by application for judicial review by virtue of section 29(3) of that Act. It is also open to the applying authority to seek to challenge a magistrates’ decision to refuse to grant an order by way of case stated (judicial review of the decision to the divisional court) by virtue of section 111 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980.

County court

Any appeal against an order made in the county court must be made in accordance with part 52 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Appeals against orders made by district judges will be to a circuit judge and against orders made by circuit judges to the High Court.

Appeals to the High Court by case stated

Any person who was party to any proceedings or is aggrieved by the conviction, order, determination, or other proceedings of the court may question the proceedings on the grounds that it is wrong in law or in excess of jurisdiction.

The court can then be asked to state a case for the opinion of the High Court.

The case stated is heard by at least two High Court judges, and more often three judges sit, including the Lord Chief Justice. No evidence

173,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appeals

is considered, so the hearing consists entirely of legal argument by counsel.

Having heard and determined the question(s) of law, the High Court may reverse, affirm or amend the original determination in respect of which the case has been stated, or remit the matter to the justices with the opinion of the court, or make such an order in relation to the matter as the court may see fit.

Appeals before the Crown Court

The hearing at the Crown Court is an entirely fresh one and, by virtue of section 79(3) of the Supreme Court Act 1981, is a full re-hearing of the case. The judgment in the ease of R v Lamb [2005] EWCA Crim 2487 recommended that circuit judges and above should be dealing with these cases.

Rectification of mistakes

Section 142 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 gives the court power to vary or rescind a sentence or other order imposed or made by it when dealing with an offender, if it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to do so. However, this section is intended to rectify mistakes and applies only to orders made when dealing with an offender in criminal proceedings. Therefore, this power would only be applicable to orders made on conviction, rather than on a stand-alone application.

Application for judicial review

judicial review looks at the lawfulness of actions and decisions. An application can be made for the High Court to consider whether the magistrates’ court has failed to exercise its jurisdiction properly or whether it has made an error of law, which appears on the face of the record.

The High Court has the power to quash the order or make a mandatory prohibiting order.

An application must be made promptly, and in any event within three months of the date on which the grounds for the application arose.

174,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

· Breaches

Breaches by adults

Breach of an order is a criminal offence, which is arrestable and recordable. Prosecutions for breaches of orders can be brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), although a local authority may also do so by virtue of section 1(1 OA) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as inserted by section 85(4) of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003), which states that prosecutions can also be brought by:

1. a council which is a relevant authority.

2. the council for the local government area in which a person in respect of whom an order has been made resides or appears to reside.

The lead officer managing the case should keep the other partner agencies informed of the progress and outcome of any breach investigation. A particular consideration will be the need to protect witnesses. The standard of proof for prosecution of a breach of an order is the criminal standard - ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Provision is made in section 1(10) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 for a defence of reasonable excuse.

The maximum penalty on conviction in the magistrates’ court is six months in prison or a fine not exceeding Ł5,000 or both; at the Crown Court the maximum penalty is five years in prison or a fine or both. Community penalties are available, but a conditional discharge is not.

Agencies and courts should not treat the breach of an order as just another minor offence. (It should be remembered that the order itself would normally have been the culmination of a course of persistent anti­social behaviour.) An order will only be seen to be effective if breaches are taken seriously.

Information on breaches can be received from any source, including the local authority

housing department and other local authority officers, neighbours and other members of the public. Any information received by a partner agency should be passed immediately to the police and lead officer, who should inform the other agencies involved. Breach penalties are the same for all orders, including the interim order. Court proceedings should be swift and not fractured by unnecessary adjournments either during the proceedings or before sentencing.

Where the offender is found guilty of the breach, the court may take reports from the local authority or police and any applicant agency before sentencing. The court should also consider the original reasons for making the order. A copy of the original order as granted (including any maps and details of any prohibitions) can be put before the court as evidence that an order has been made without the need for a statement formally proving that an order was made (section 139 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005).

The sentence given should be proportionate and reflect the impact of the behaviour complained of.

Breaches by children and young people

Breach proceedings for children and young people will be dealt with in the youth court. Breach proceedings in the youth court are not subject to automatic reporting restrictions. The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 removed automatic reporting restrictions for children and young people convicted of a breach of an ASBO (section 341), and thus details about the perpetrator can be made public. The court may still impose reporting restrictions, particularly if they were put in place when the order was initially imposed in a civil court.

48

175,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Hreacbes

Under section 98 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, evidence will be given on oath, except the evidence of a child under 14, which is given unsworn. Section 34 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 requires the attendance of a parent or legal guardian at court for any person under 16 years of age. The court will require information about the young person’s background, home surroundings and family circumstances prior to sentence. This should be provided by the youth offending team or social services.

As with adults, community penalties are available, but a conditional discharge is not. In addition, the youth court should consider whether to make a parenting order, or whether the individual support order should be amended.

49

176,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

·         Variation and discharge of an order

Variation or discharge of an order, including an interim order, may be made on application to the court that originally made it. An application to vary or discharge an order made on conviction in criminal proceedings may be made to any magistrates’ court within the same petty sessions areas as the court that made the order. The application can be made either by the original applicant in the case or the defendant. An order cannot be discharged within two years of its service without the consent of both parties. An order made on conviction cannot be discharged before the end of two years. Prohibitions, however, can be varied, removed or added within that initial two-year period.

The procedure for variation or discharge is set out in the Magistrates’ Courts (Anti-Social behaviour Orders) Rules 2002, the Crown Court (Amendment) Rules 2002 and the Civil Procedure Rules. These are published separately from this guidance and are available on the crime reduction website at www.crimereduetion.gov.uk

If the individual who is subject to the order asks for its variation or discharge, the agency that obtained the order needs to ensure that a considered response is given to the court. If it is decided that the lead agency should contest the application for variation or discharge, it should give the court its reasons, supported as appropriate by evidence gathered in the course of monitoring the effectiveness of the order. The magistrates’ legal adviser will send details of the variation or discharge of any order to the local police force and local authority. The police should record any discharge or variation of the order on their computer system and arrange for any changes to be reflected in the Police National Computer record.

50

177,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

·         Monitoring and recording

Local agencies should agree common procedures for recording and monitoring both their successful and unsuccessful applications. Details of orders granted should be sent to the local crime and disorder reduction partnership (CDRP) anti-social behaviour co-ordinator and the local authority or police as appropriate, as well as to other agencies involved with the offender (including the local youth offending team if the offender is under 3 8 years old).

As a minimum there should be a record of:

· the original application (or details of the prosecution and hearing of any request for the order in the case of an order on conviction), including the name, address, date of birth, gender and ethnicity of the defendant.

· the order itself, including, where applicable, the map showing any exclusion area.

· the date and details of any variation or discharge of the order; and

· the action taken for any breach.

· The following information could also be recorded:

· name, address, age, gender and ethnicity of any victim - or a statement that the case involved no identified victim.

· details of any person or persons who complained of the behaviour.

· details of any contributory issues, for example drugs, alcohol and substance misuse and/or mental health problems.

· details of any aggravating factors, for example racial motivation; and

· assessment of outcome in terms of whether or not the anti-social behaviour ceased,

satisfy themselves and the public that their anti-social behaviour policies do not discriminate. The Act also imposes a duty to promote race equality. As part of this duty, local authorities and the police should therefore ensure that they monitor the impact of their anti-social behaviour policy on the promotion of race equality. Systems to monitor the ethnicity of both defendants and victims will therefore need to be in place.

This information should, where possible, be collected on the basis of self-definition by the defendant.

From December 2006, the new general duty under the Disability Discrimination Act requires a public authority to pay due regard when carrying out its functions to: the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination against disabled people; the need to eliminate disability-related harassment of disabled people; the need to promote equality of opportunity for disabled people; anti the need to take account of disabled persons’ disabilities even where that involves more favourable treatment. Advice on the general duty can also be obtained from the leaflet issued by the Office for Disability Issues (ODI) entitled Disability equality: a priority for all. The Disability Rights Commission website at www.dre.org.uk contains information under the section on publications entitled. Do the Duty’.

Consistency of information will help to assess the effectiveness of orders and inform future local audits and crime reduction strategies.

Local authorities and other agencies, including the police, have a duty under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 to

178,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

·         Promoting awareness of orders

The purpose of the orders is to protect local communities from the harassment, alarm or distress that can be caused by anti-social behaviour. An effective media strategy by the CDRP is therefore essential if local residents and businesses are to be aware of orders and their implications. Using the local press to ensure the community knows the subject and conditions of the order is often a cost-effective strategy. At the same time, the staff of the partner agencies need to understand how and when orders can be used, and how they relate to the other tools to combat anti-social behaviour available to the partnership.

Local agencies and CDRPs should, within the context of their overall strategies for combating anti-social behaviour, devise a strategy for promoting awareness of orders. A designated officer should have responsibility for its delivery. This might most naturally be the CDRP anti-social behaviour co-ordinator. Disclosure of information should be necessary and proportionate to the objective it seeks to achieve.

Suggested aims of the strategy

The aims of an effective local publicity strategy are to:

· increase community confidence in reporting anti-social behaviour and expectations that it can be reduced.

· deter potential offenders from anti-social behaviour.

· ensure that the local population is aware of orders; the powers of the local authority, registered social landlords, Housing Action Trusts, the Environment Agency and the police (including the British Transport Police) to apply for them; and whom to approach if they believe that an order may be appropriate;

· ensure that agency staff have confidence in using orders where they are deemed appropriate; and

· ensure that potential witnesses are aware of the support available to them.

· Publicity

· Phis part of the guidance reflects the judgment of Lord justice Kennedy, presiding judge in the case of R (on application of Stanley, Marshall and Kelly) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Chief Executive of London Borough of Brent 12004] EWHC 2229 (Admin), commonly referred to as Stanley v Brent.

Principles

1. There is no ‘naming and shaming1 - ASBOs are not intended to punish or embarrass individuals but to protect communities.

2. Publicity is essential if local communities are to support agencies in tackling anti­social behaviour. There is an implied power in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and tire Local Government Act 2000 to publicise an order so that it can be effectively enforced.

3. Orders protect local communities.

4. Obtaining the order is only part of the process; its effectiveness will normally depend on people knowing about the order.

5. Information about orders obtained should be publicised to let the community know that action has been taken in their area.

6. A case-by-case approach should be adopted, and each individual case should be judged on its merits as to whether or not to publicise the details of an individual who is subject to an order. Publicity should be expected in most cases.

7. It is necessary to balance the human rights of individuals who are subject to orders against those of the community as a whole when considering publicising orders.

8. Publicity should be the norm, not the exception. An individual who is subject to an order should understand that the community is likely to learn about it.

179,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Promoting contourites of orders

Benefits of publicity

The benefits of publicity include the following:

· Enforcement - Local people have the information they need to identify and report breaches.

· Public reassurance about safety - Victims and witnesses know that action has been taken to protect them and their human rights in relation to safety and/or quiet enjoyment of their property. Making local people aware of an order that is made for their own protection can make a real difference to the way in which they live their lives, especially when they have suffered from anti-social behaviour themselves or lived in fear of it.

· Public confidence in local services - Local people are reassured that if they report anti-social behaviour, action will be taken by local authorities, the police

or other agencies.

· Deterrent to the subject of the order - The perpetrator is aware that breaches are more likely to be reported because details of the order are in the public domain.

· Deterrent to other perpetrators - Publicity spreads the message that orders are being used and is a warning to others who are causing a nuisance in the community.

The decision to publish

Each individual case should be judged on its merits as to whether or not to publicise the details of an individual who is subject to an order. There should be a correlation between the purpose of publicity and the necessity test: that is, what is the least possible interference with privacy in order to promote the purpose identified.

Decision-makers should ensure that the decisions to publicise orders are recorded. However, this should not be seen as an onerous, lengthy task, but merely a way of recording the process they go through to arrive at publication. To ensure it is achieved, it is good practice to identify an individual, such as the anti-social behaviour co-ordinator, to be in charge of the process.

The decision-making process should aim to consider and record several key factors:

· the need for publicity.

· a consideration of the human rights of the public.

· a consideration of the human rights of those against whom orders are made; and

· what the publicity should look like and whether it is proportionate to the aims of the publicity.

The decision-making process should be carried out early on so as to avoid any delay in publicity following the granting of the order.

The decision-making process

Publicity must be necessary to achieve an identified aim - this will involve a necessity test. The identified aim for publicising could be (1) to notify the public that an order has been obtained, to reassure the public that action has been taken; (2) to notify the public of a specific order so that they can help in its enforcement; or (3) to act as a deterrent to others involved in anti-social behaviour, hi some cases two or even all three aims will be relevant.

Disclosure of information should always be necessary and proportionate to achieving the desired aim(s). When identifying the aim(s), decision-makers should acknowledge, in those cases where it is relevant, the ‘social pressing need’ for effective enforcement of an order that prohibits anti-social behaviour to protect the community. In effect, this is a consideration of the human rights of the wider community, including past and potential victims. The decision-maker should recognise and acknowledge that for publicity to achieve its aim, it might engage the human rights of the individual who is subject to the order and potentially those of his or her family. Publicity should be proportionate to ensure that any interference is kept to a minimum. For example, if the legitimate aim is enforcement of the order then personal information, such as the terms of the order, the identity of the individual (including a photograph) and how to report any breach of the terms should normally be included. Usually the consideration of the effect of publicity on family members should not deter decision-makers from the stated aim of publicising the order. However, consideration of the impact of publicity on vulnerable family members should be made and recorded. The defendant and his or her

180,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Promoting a wariness of orders

family should be warned of the intention to publish details.

What publicity should look like; are the contents proportionate?

The contents of the publicity should also be considered and decisions about them recorded. Disclosure of information should always be proportionate to achieving the desired aim. The contents of publicity should include factual and accurate material.

The content and tone of the publicity should be considered carefully. Information must be based on facts, and appropriate language used: for example, the order itself does not mean that an individual has been found guilty of a criminal offence, Words such as ‘criminal’ and ‘crime’ to describe the individual and their behaviour must be used with care and only when appropriate. If the anti-social behaviour was, as a matter of fact, also criminal, then it is permissible to describe it as criminal. Breach of an order is an offence and should be described as such. Publicity should be consistent with the character of the order itself: that is, a civil prohibition (rather than a criminal order) restricting anti-social behaviour (which may be criminal but need not be).

It would be prudent to rehearse the facts of the case and agree on appropriate language to use. Some consideration should be given to the personal circumstances of individuals named on the order when deciding whether to include them in any publicity leaflet, particularly if they are under 18. However, any arguments for not including their names must be balanced with the need to enable those who receive the leaflet to be able to identify a breach.

Details of conditions of non-association named on the order, particularly where those named are also subject to orders or have a recent history of anti-social behaviour, can be included in publicity. Even in cases where the named individuals with whom association is prohibited are not subject to an ASBO it will usually be appropriate to name them once some consideration has been given to their personal circumstances.

Type of information to include in publicity

The type of personal information that might be included in any publicity would be:

· the name of the individual; and/or

· a description; and/or

· the age; and/or

· a photograph; and/or

· his/her address.

· a summary of the individual's anti-social behaviour; and/or

· a summary of, or extracts from, the findings of the judge when making the ASBO; and/or

· a summary of, or extracts from, the terms of the ASBO.

· the identification of any relevant exclusion zone (as illustrated on a map).

· details of conditions of non-associations named on the order, particularly where those named are also subject to ASBOs or have a recent history of anti-social behaviour.

· the expiry date of the order.

· the manner in which the public can report breaches (for example names, telephone numbers, addresses, possibility of anonymous reporting, etc); and/or

· the names of local agencies responsible for obtaining the ASBO.

· local contact numbers, such as those for Victim Support, local police and housing services, with reassurance that reports will be treated in confidence.

· date of publication.

· the identity of the group to be targeted by the publicity (for example businesses or residents in the vicinity); and/or

· those who are suspected to have been subject to anti-social behaviour by the individual; and/or

· those individuals or businesses within and immediately adjacent to an area identified in the ASBO; and

· details of the publication area, for example within the area of any exclusion zone and the area immediately adjacent to the exclusion zone, within the borough.

Age consideration

The age of the person against whom the order was obtained should be a consideration when deciding whether or how to inform people about the order. Factual information should be obtained about whether an individual is particularly vulnerable. 'Phis should be done as early as possible, to avoid

:54 ,

181,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Promoting awareness of orders

delays in informing the public once an order has been obtained. The fact that someone is under the age of 18 does not mean that their anti-social behaviour is any less distressing or frightening than that of an adult.

An order made against a child or young person under 18 is usually made in open court and is not usually subject to reporting restrictions. The information is in the public domain and newspapers are entitled to publish details. But if reporting restrictions have been imposed, they must be scrupulously adhered to. In applications involving children and young people where evidence has consisted of details of their past convictions, and reporting restrictions were not lifted for the proceedings leading to those convictions, the publicity should not refer to those convictions. Similarly, where an order on conviction has been imposed on a child or young person in the youth court, unless reporting restrictions are lifted, details of the offences or behaviour alluded to in that hearing cannot be reported. However, details of the behaviour outlined in the order on conviction hearing can be used, unless the court orders otherwise. Where the court making the order does impose reporting restrictions under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, the press must scrupulously observe these.

A court must have a good reason to make a section 39 order. Age alone is insufficient to justify reporting restrictions being imposed. Section 141 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 reverses the presumption in relation to reporting restrictions in the youth court in cases for breach of ASBOs. Automatic reporting restrictions will not apply but the court retains the discretion to impose them. The prosecutor can make an application to the court for this. While it is the case that from 1 July 2005 no automatic reporting restrictions have applied in cases for breach of ASBOs relating to children and young people, when dealing with the case the court will consider whether reporting restrictions were imposed when the original order was granted. As ASBOs are civil orders, reporting restrictions will not have applied (unless imposed by the court).

If reporting restrictions were imposed at the original ASBO hearing, then unless there has been a significant change in the intervening period, it is likely that the court will impose

reporting restrictions at the hearing for the breach. If no reporting restrictions were imposed at the original ASBO hearing, it is still open to the court to impose reporting restrictions at the hearing of the breach case. If reporting restrictions are not imposed, publicity can be considered, considering all the matters that are relevant when considering publicising the ASBO itself.

Photographs

A photograph of the subject of the ASBO will usually be required so that they can be identified. This is particularly necessary for older people or housebound witnesses who may not know the names of those causing a nuisance in the area. The photograph should be as recent as possible.

Distribution of publicity

This should be primarily within the area(s) that suffered from the anti-social behaviour and that are covered by the terms of the order, including exclusion zones. People who have suffered from anti-social behaviour, for example residents, local businesses, shop staff, staff of local public services, particular groups or households should be the intended audience.

All orders should be recorded on the Police National Computer to assist enforcement.

This is particularly relevant where the order extends across England and Wales. It may be appropriate to extend publicity beyond the area where the anti-social behaviour was focused if there is a general term prohibiting harassment, alarm or distress in a wider area.

It may also be appropriate if there is a danger of displacement of the anti-social behaviour to distribute it just beyond the area covered by the order.

The timescale over which publicity is anticipated to occur should also be given due consideration and decisions recorded. It is important that publicity does not become out of date or irrelevant. Special attention needs to be paid to posters that are distributed to other organisations, as posters should not be left up when the need for them has expired.

It will usually be appropriate to issue publicity when a full order is made, rather than an interim order. However, exceptions can be made, for example where the anti­social behaviour is severe, where there has been extreme intimidation or where there is

55

182,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Promoting awareness of orders

a delay between the making of the interim order and the outcome of the final hearing.

In the case of Keating v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2004] EWHC 1933 (Admin), the judge held that publicity could be used for interim orders. In these circumstances it should be stated in the publicity that the order is temporary and that a hearing for a ‘full’ order will follow, and distribution should be extremely localised.

Consideration of human rights

Consideration of the human rights of the individual who is subject to the order and of the human rights of the public, including the victim(s) and potential victims, should be carried out. Appropriate and proportionate publicity is compliant with the human rights of the individual who is subject to the order. The Stanley v Brent case accepted that publicity was needed for effective enforcement of the order. Individuals do not welcome publicity and may view the effect of publicity as a punishment. However, a subjective assessment by the individual of the effect of publicity is irrelevant in determining the purpose of the publicity. Consideration of the human rights implications of publicity should be recorded.

Consideration of data protection

Publicity is not contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998 as long as authorities are operating in accordance with the Act. There is an exemption in section 29 of the Act let the processing of personal data for the purposes of prevention or detection of crime. This means that personal data can be processed with a view to compliance with a statutory function, where the data has been obtained from a person who possessed it for the purposes of the prevention or detection of crime. This will be the case when considering publicising an ASBO.

Type of publicity

No one directly involved in the case (witnesses and victims) should wait unnecessarily for information about an order. They should be informed immediately when an order is made. This is in addition to keeping them informed of progress throughout the court process and can be done by visits, letters and community meetings or by phone. Victims and witnesses may also be given a copy of the order. It is

recommended that publicity be distributed to targeted households immediately after the order has been granted and by at least a week after the court date. Local people should be informed when variation or discharge of an order relevant to them is made.

The method of publicity can include the following:

· local print and television media.

· local leaflet drop; and

· local newsletter.

Practitioners need to apply the proportionality test when deciding which method is appropriate.

Leaflets and other printed materials, such as posters or residents’ newsletters, allow local agencies to target particular neighbourhoods, streets or households with information.

The public can be informed about an ASBO at any time - publicity can be issued and re-issued according to the circumstances. However, publicity needs to be timely to ensure that people are able to enforce the order as soon as it has been granted and to reassure the public that something is being done.

Working with the media

It is usual for local statutory agencies to have working relationships with local and regional media, including press, television and radio. This is particularly relevant to issues such as anti-social behaviour and where the media are keen to report how local agencies are tackling these issues through the deployment of dispersal orders, ASBOs crack house’ closures, etc.

It is important to work with local media and to make them understand that it is not the purpose of any publicity to punish the individual. Media coverage has the potential to go to a wider audience than leaflets or posters. It is good practice to identify newspapers that report on city, borough and neighbourhood issues, free local press and local radio and television and to develop working relationships with them. This could include being aware of their publication deadlines, giving them exclusives and making sure that the complainant’s (victim’s) point of view is put across. However, it is important to

56

183,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Promoting a wariness of orders

keep close control of the material. Witnesses should not be put at risk by disclosing dates of hearings, and your relationships with the courts should not be jeopardised. Those subject to an ASBO who are considered vulnerable should also not be put at risk.

Issuing a press release is a way of retaining control of the material. There should be an agreed process for authorisation of the press releases. The press release should contain information that meets the identified aim of the publicity. For example, if the aim is to help enforce the order, the information in the press release will be more detailed than the information needed for publicity whose aim is to reassure the community that something is being done. It is good practice to identify a spokesperson to liaise with the press.

57

184,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appendix A

Early intervention and tackling offending behaviour by under-10s

Interventions available

Acceptable behaviour contract (ABC)

An ABC (also known as an acceptable behaviour agreement) is an intervention designed to engage an individual in acknowledging his or her anti-social behaviour and its effect on others, with the aim of stopping that behaviour. An ABC is a written agreement made between a person who has been involved in anti-social behaviour and their local authority, youth inclusion support panel (YISP), landlord or the police. ABCs are not set out in law, which is why they are sometimes called agreements. Any agency is able to use and adapt the model. An ABC or acceptable behaviour agreement is completely flexible and can be adapted for the particular local need. It can include conditions that the parties agree to keep. It may also contain the agreed consequences of a breach of the agreement.

Parenting contracts (section 25 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003)

Parenting contracts are voluntary written agreements between youth offending teams (YOF’s) and the parent/guardian of a child/young person involved, or likely to be involved, in anti-social behaviour or criminal conduct. They are a two-sided arrangement where both the parents and the agency will play a part in improving the young person’s behaviour. The contract contains a statement by the parent(s) agreeing to comply with the requirements for the period specified and a statement by the YOT agreeing to provide support to the parent(s) for the purpose of complying with those requirements. It is important that there is a clear agreement about the consequences if the terms of the parenting contract are not adhered to. If the contract is broken, the YOT may apply to the court for a parenting order (see below), which would include compulsory requirements.

Child safety order (sections 11-13 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 as amended by section 60 of the Children Act 2004)

A child safety order (CSO) allows compulsory intervention with a child under 10 years of age who has committed an act which, had they been aged 10 or over, would have constituted an offence. It is designed to prevent anti-social behaviour when it is not possible to engage on a voluntary basis with a child under 10. A CSO is made in family proceedings in the magistrates’ court on application by a local authority. The order places the child under the supervision of a responsible officer, who may be a local authority social worker or a member of a youth offending team and can include requirements designed to improve the child’s behaviour and address underlying problems.

If the order is not complied with, the parent can be made the subject of a parenting order if that would be in the interests of preventing repetition of the behaviour that led to the CSO being made.

Parenting order

A parenting order can be made in respect of a parent of a child under 10 years of age. It can require parents to attend a parenting programme (lasting up to three months) and specify requirements for the parent regarding supervision of the child (lasting up to 12 months). Failure to comply with a parenting order is a criminal offence punishable by a fine of up to Ł1,000 and/or a community sentence.

Under section 8 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 as amended by the Children Act 2004, a parenting order can be imposed on a parent of a child who is subject to a CSO or when a CSO has been breached.

Section 26 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 enables YOTs to apply to the magistrates’ court for a ‘free-standing’ parenting order. The court must be satisfied that the child or young person has engaged

58

185,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

clearly intervention and Stickling offending behaviour by under

in anti-social behaviour or criminal conduct and that the order would be desirable in preventing further occurrences of such behaviour.

There is provision in the current Police and Justice Bill to extend the power to apply for parenting orders to local authorities and registered social landlords.

For further information on parenting orders, refer to the guidance on parenting contracts and orders at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ parenting-orders- guidance

Local child curfew schemes (section 14 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 as amended by Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001)

These are designed for children and young people 15 years old and below, to help local authorities to deal with the problem of unsupervised children or young people involved in late-night, anti-social behaviour on the streets. Under a local child curlew scheme, a local authority or local police force can ban children under 16 from being in a public place during specified hours (between 9pm and 6am), unless they are under the control of a responsible adult. With children under 10, contravening a ban imposed by a curfew notice (for instance being found outside their homes after the curfew) is one of the conditions under which a family court could make the child subject to a CSO. A local child curfew can last for up to 90 days.

Junior youth inclusion projects

Junior youth inclusion projects are based on high-crime, high-deprivation neighbourhoods across England and Wales and work with the 8-13 age range. Projects aim to prevent youth crime in those neighbourhoods by targeting the 50 most at-risk children and young people in the area, assessing their needs and providing meaningful interventions aimed at addressing those risk factors. Young people typically are either on the cusp of offending or are already involved in low-level offending. Ill order to engage with the 50 most at-risk young people, projects work with around another 100 peers and siblings of core group members.

Youth inclusion support panels

Youth inclusion support panels (YISPs) are multi-agency planning groups that serve to identify those young people in the 8-13 age range who are most at risk of offending and engaging in anti-social behaviour. They offer an early intervention based on assessed risk and need. Parenting support in the form of contracts and programmes is offered as part of a range of tailored interventions.

The suggested criteria for a young person referred to the YISP is as follows:

· The child is aged between 8 and 13 years inclusive (up to 17 in some areas).

· The behaviour of the child is of concern to two or more of the partner agencies and/or their parents/carers, and they consider that it requires a multi-agency response.

· The parent/carer and child are willing to take part, give consent to the referral and the child is willing to co-operate with an integrated support plan.

· The child is exposed to four or more risk factors.

· There is known offending behaviour up to and including a police reprimand or ASBO, or there is concern over potential involvement in criminal or anti-social behaviour.

The panel is made up of representatives from a variety of agencies which can include YOTs; police; social services; housing, probation, and education services; Connexions; voluntary sector organisations; anti-social behaviour units; and the fire service. (This list is not exhaustive and can be tailored to local circumstances.) The panel will meet on a regular basis and consider referrals made to it in order to devise an integrated support plan. The YISP must ensure that a mechanism is in place for the sharing of information. The method, criteria and considerations for this can be found by referring to the Association of Chief Police Officers/Youth Justice Board guidance.

16 Association of Chief Police Officers/Youth Justice Boat’s (2005) Sharing Personal and Sensitive information in Respect of Children and Young People a! Risk of Offending. London: Youth Justice Board,

59

186,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appendix B

County court Practice Direction according to the Civil Procedure Rules

Anti-social behaviour orders under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998

Scope of this Section and interpretation

65.21

(1)

This Section applies to applications in proceedings in a county court under sub-sections (2), (3) or (3B) of section IB of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 by a relevant authority, and to applications for interim orders under section ID of that Act.

 

(2}

In this Section -

 

 

(a)

‘the 1998 Act’ means the Crime and Disorder Act 1998:

 

 

(b)

'relevant authority' has the same meaning as in section 1(1A) of the 1998 Act: and

 

 

(0

'the principal proceedings' means any proceedings in a county court.

Application where the relevant authority is a party in principal proceedings

65.22

(1)

Subject to paragraph (2) -

 

(a) where the relevant authority is the claimant in the principal proceedings, an application under section 1B (2) of the 1998 Act for an order under section 1B (4) of the 1998 Act must be made in the claim form; and

 

(b) where the relevant authority is a defendant in the principal proceedings, an application for an order must be made by application notice which must be filed with the defence.

 

(2)

Where the relevant authority becomes aware of the circumstances that led it to apply for an order after its claim is issued or its defence fiied, the application must be made by application notice as soon as possible thereafter.

 

(3)

Where the application is made by application notice, it should normally be made on notice to the person against whom the order is sought,

Application by a relevant authority to join a person to the principal proceedings

65.23

(1)

An application under section 1B(3S) of the 1998 Act by a relevant authority which is a party to the principal proceedings to join a person to the principal proceedings must be made -

 

 

(a)

in accordance with Section 1 of Part 19;

 

 

(b)

in the same application notice as the application for an order under section 1B (4) of the 1998 Act against the person; and

 

 

(c)

as soon as possible after the relevant authority considers that the criteria in section 1B(3A) of the 1998 Act are met.

 

(2)

The application notice must contain -

 

 

(a)

the relevant authority's reasons for claiming that the person's anti-social acts are material in relation to the principal proceedings; and

 

 

(b)

details of the anti-social acts alleged.

 

(3)

The application should normally be made on notice to the person against whom the order is sought.

60

187,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

County court Practice Direction according to the Civil Procedure Rules

Application where the relevant authority is not party in principal proceedings

65.24

(1)

Where the relevant authority is not a party to the principal proceedings -

 

 

(a)

an application under section 18(3} of the 1998 Act to be made a party must be made in accordance with Section I of Part 19; and

 

 

(b)

the application to be made a party and the application for an order under section 16(4} of the 1998 Act must be made in the same application notice.

 

(2)

The applications -

 

 

(a)

must be made as soon as possible after the authority becomes aware of the principal proceedings; and

 

 

<b)

should normally be made on notice to the person against whom the order Is sought.

Evidence

 

 

 

 

65.25

An application for an order under section 1B (4) of the 1998 Act must be accompanied by written evidence, which must include evidence that section IE of the 1998 Act has been complied with.

Application for an interim order

65.26

(1)

An application for an interim order under section ID of the 1998 Act must be made in accordance with Part 25.

 

(2)

The application should normally be made

 

(a) in the claim form or application notice seeking the order; and

 

(b) on notice to the person against whom the order is sought.

61

188,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appendix C

Order form

FORM

Anti-social behaviour order (Crime and Disorder Act 1998, si)

Magistrates' Court (Code)

Date:

Defendant:

Address:

On the complaint of Complainant:

Applicant Authority:

Address of Applicant Authority:

189,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Order form

The court found that:

· the defendant acted in the following anti-social manner, which caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself: And

· this order is necessary to protect persons from further anti-social acts by him. And it is ordered that the defendant

[NAME]

is prohibited from

Until [further order]

Justice of the Peace

[By order of the clerk of the court]

NOTE: If, without reasonable excuse, the defendant does anything which he is prohibited from doing by this order, he shall be liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years or to a fine or to both.

190,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Simon Cordell Skeleton Argument (3).pdf

Appendix D

Summons form

Rule 4(2)

SCHEDULE 2 FORM

Summons on application for anti-social behaviour order (Crime and Disorder Act 1998, si)

Magistrates’ Court (Code)

Date:

To the defendant: [name]

Address:

You are hereby summoned to appear on [date] at before the magistrates’ court at

to answer an application for an anti-social behaviour order, which application is attached to this summons.

By or Justice of the Peace

order of the clerk of the court)

NOTE: Where the court is satisfied that this summons was served on you within what appears to the court to be a reasonable time before the hearing or adjourned hearing, it may issue a warrant for your arrest or proceed in your absence.

If an anti-social behaviour order is made against you and if, without reasonable excuse, you do anything you are prohibited from doing by such an order, you shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both.

191,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appendix E

Step-by-step process for anti-social behaviour orders and orders on conviction

Process for anti-social behaviour orders

192,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Step-by-step process fur anti-social behaviour orders and orders on conviction

Process for an order made on conviction in criminal proceedings (in the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court)

193,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Step-by-step process for anti-social behaviour orders (nut orders on conviction

67

194,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Appendix F

Public funding for defendants

Criminal public funding is available for any proceedings under sections 1 and 4 of the Crime and Disorder Act (CDA) 1998 relating to ASBOs, including interim orders, where they are made in the magistrates’ court or where an appeal is made in the Crown Court,

Advocacy assistance is available for an ASBO, an interim order under section ID of the CDA, variation or discharge of an ASBO, or an appeal against the making of an ASBO under section 4 of the CDA, in accordance with the Criminal Defence Service General Criminal Contract, Solicitors can self-grant advocacy assistance for these matters, There are no financial criteria for the grant of advocacy assistance. Advocacy assistance may not be provided where it appears unreasonable that approval should be granted in the particular circumstances of the case, or where the interests of justice test, set out in Schedule 3 of the Access to Justice Act 1999, is not met.

In applying this test, there is an additional factor of whether there is a real risk of imprisonment if an ASBO is made and subsequently breached.

A representation order may be sought on application to the Legal Services Commission in respect of these proceedings. Provision for representation is made under Regulation 3(2) (criminal proceedings for the purposes of section 12(2)(g) of the Access to Justice Act 1999) of the Criminal Defence Service (General)(No.2) Regulations 2001, and Regulation 6(3) of the same regulations.

An application to the Commission must be made on form CDS3.An application will be determined in accordance with the interests of justice criteria. The availability of advocacy assistance will be a relevant factor which the Legal Services Commission will take into account when considering the grant of rep rese n ration.

Where an application for a representation order is refused, the Legal Services Commission shall provide written reasons for the refusal and details of the appeal process. The applicant may make a renewed application in writing to the Funding Review Committee, which may grant or refuse the application.

Advocacy assistance is available for proceedings in the Crown Court, where an appeal is made under section 4 of the CDA. The merits test is slightly different from that on application for an interim or a full ASBO.

It is based only on the general reasonableness test. Advocacy assistance may not be granted if it appears unreasonable that approval should be granted in the particular circumstances of the case. The prospects and merits of an appeal should be taken into account as well as whether the individual has reasonable grounds for taking the proceedings. Representation is also available for an appeal against an order under section 4 of the CDA. An application should be made to the Legal Services Commission which will consider grant against the availability of advocacy assistance.

Any challenge against the ruling of the Crown Court to the High Court by way of case stated or by application for judicial review falls outside the scope of criminal funding. Legal representation would have to be applied for in accordance with the Funding Code procedures to the Legal Services Commission. This work is funded through the Community Legal Service although it falls within the scope of the General Criminal Contract.

Advocacy assistance is available for a breach of an interim order or full ASBO. Representation is also available for breach proceedings on application to the Commission as above.

195,

Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf

Further reading

Anti-social Behaviour: A guide to the role of Youth Offending Teams in dealing with anti-social behaviour published by the Youth Justice Board, the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers, which can be downloaded at

www.youth-justiceboard.gov.uk/Publications/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct= 212&eP-

The Guidance for the Courts by Lord Justice Thomas can be found at:

www.youth-justice-board.gov.uk/NR/ rdonlyres/398987C5-E79A-491E-B912-DF3D4D762293/0/ASBOGuidanceforjudiciaryHMCS.june052.pdf

Websites

www.together.gov.uk

www.respect.gov.uk

www.crimereduction.gov.uk

www.youth-justice-board.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -RE case 04-02-2016 21-21 

04/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 196

 

 

6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2

Asbo Mother -RE case 04-02-2016 21-21 

04/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 196

--

196

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 04/02/2016 09:21:19 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: case

This link is not working

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 04 February 2016 20:51

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: case

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01889/SN01889.pdf

Part of my submissions had been that the allegations were that D was involved in organising illegal raves, but the applicant hadn't adduced evidence of trespass which is a requirement for proving that an indoor rave (which all but one was) was illegal. The DJ ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality - all the needed to prove was D had acted in an anti-social manner. In my view this is a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus D being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality. D could JR/case state this decision but I think there is little merit in doing so because he would then lose his right to appeal to the Crown Court and even if he succeeded in the High/Division Court, they would merely remit it back to the lower court who would then probably go through the motions of considering proportionality before coming to the same conclusion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment February 2016 08-02-2016 16-56

08/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 197

 

7.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment February 2016 08-02-2016 16-56

08/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 197

--

197

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 08/02/2016 04:56:13 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Office appointment on 9th February 2016 from 4.30pm - 5.30pm

Dear Simon

I refer to tomorrow's meeting at which I will be dealing specifically with your amended and updated statement.

Can you please ensure that you have with you all items that you intend to exhibit to your updated statement so that these can be exhibited, copied and sent to the Police and properly indexed to the bundle. Please email across what you have in your witness statement so far as your text indicated that

You will also have to consider alternative witnesses who can confirm that you attended Dwayne's leaving event as the police are requiring Dwayne to attend to give live evidence. I will require statements / contact details from these potential witnesses by tomorrow evening.

Please ensure that you attend promptly by 4.30pm with just your witness statement and any supporting documentation that you wish to be exhibited.

Your mother was provided with a copy of the bundle that was forwarded to the CPS and the Court on your behalf. There were omissions to this bundle that I was waiting to be provided with. These will also now be forwarded.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

 

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2

Asbo FW Simon's updated statement 09-02-2016 15-59

09/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392

 

8.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2

Asbo FW Simon's updated statement 09-02-2016 15-59

09/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392

--

198,

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 February 2016 15:27

To: 'Josephine Ward'; 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: Simon's updated statement

Dear Josey

due to not getting replies to my emails since the new year asking if anything else was needed to be done by as and getting no reply I have not had time since yesterday to deal with getting a statement re Dwayne, but I think that is covered already as Jamie Duffy was there and he has already wrote a statement.

I told you before Christmas Dwayne was due to go away to complete his trip that he has to cut short due to my mum's death. I told you he is back packing so would be very hard to get hold of once he left which was a few days after you asked me to get the tickets to show when he was leaving and the hall details. and when you told me about Dwayne would need to attend, I told you that would be imposable as he was due to leave a few days after you asked me. I even called him in your office Josey so you cannot say you did not know this.

Yes, I should be able to get statement of other people and in your last email you did not say you needed these statements today in the daytime you said by tomorrow evening. Which is tonight.

I am sorry you now feel you have to rush things as they have not been done but that is not my fault or Simon's

Josey you know I have many health problems and I have only just had a huge amount of injections into my spine on the 17/01/2016 and I am not allowed to run around and do things for 6 to 8 weeks after having these done. I also got the flu really badly and have not been well for the last 2 weeks. but have still tried to get things due that was needed but getting no replies to my emails did not help.

Josey you have had Simon 65-page statement for months I think since Oct 2015 at the last meeting you allowed him to attend it was given to you. It is this statement he is updating again since we got the information from the cps in an email on the 04/02/2016.

Simon is trying to get things done so you do not have so much to do. I have done the same thing. Me and Simon from the start of this case have done all that was asked of us and much more,

We were asking for things to be done since this case started which was not and only started to be done when the appeal was put in.

If you feel the need to re-schedule the meeting which has happened many times before then please update us, but this meeting is to deal with Simon updated statement Josey which he has never had a chance to do.

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD [mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 09 February 2016 14:53

To: Lorraine Cordell; too smooth

Subject: Simon's updated statement

Lorraine / Simon

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 09/02/2016 03:58:43 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Simon's updated statement

Attachments: Edited part 5.pdf Edited part 5.doc

Here I give Josey the pdf file, but I will include word one in this email

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 09 February 2016 15:57

To: 'Josephine Ward'; 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: Simon's updated statement

Dear Josey

Please can you let me know if we should attend at 16:30 hours as I need to leave to pick Simon up to get him there on time.

Also please see attached draft copy

Regards

Lorraine

199,

I note that I have not received the updated statement from Simon, nor any additional statements from any witnesses re Dwayne's leaving party. I advised you previously that Dwayne was required to attend court, clearly, he cannot as he is travelling, hence the request for alternative witnesses to back up Simon's alibi.

If the updated statement is not received by 3.30pm then I will have to re-schedule the meeting for until such time as the updated statement is received.

Regards

Josephine

200,

This document is only for Simon Cordell Solicitors to see as Simon is not a Solicitor and needs help to address what sections need to be placed in his updated statement and which parts will be used for his barrister at the appeal. This is a draft copy of what can be included to make a new updated statement and notes which the barrister will need to see.

Witness statement in pursuit of Civil Proceedings Ci Act 1967, s;9; Mc Act 1980, ss.5A (3) and 5B.

Criminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1

Introduction:

· An ASBO order has been appealed against after the magistrates court, the decision had been made against Mr Simon Cordell, this was at Highbury Corner, Magistrates Court, on the 4th August 2015 in pursuant to s.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 this is to make him subject to an Anti-Social behaviour order in order, for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

· The respondent’s case is that Our Client that we represent, has been accused of being integrally involved in the organisation of illegal raves in Enfield on the dates listed below that are in question by the applicant.

12/01/2013

That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at Canary Wharf.

24/05/2013

That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in looking for venues, to set up an illegal rave.

25/05/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at Unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, White Hart Lane, N17.

07/06/2014

That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on progress way, Enfield.

20/06/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at 1 Falcon Park, Neasden Lane,

NW10.

19/07/2014

That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at the Carpet Right Showroom on the A10 Great Cambridge Road, Enfield.

24/07/2014

That Mr Simon Cordell had admitted to police officers that he was the organiser for illegal raves.

27/07/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on Millmarsh lane, Enfield.

09 - 10/08/2014

That Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organisation of and / or supplied

equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on

Millmarsh Lane, Enfield. The Defendant further actively sought to encourage a large group of people to breach the peace.

· Reference to Pages 2 / 3

1

201,

Edited part 5.pdf

The Defendant is prohibited from:

· Attending a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994.

· Being concerned in the organization of a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994.

· Knowingly using or supplying property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and public orders Act 1994.

· Entering or remaining in any disused or abandoned building.

· Entering or remaining on non-residential private property on an industrial estate between the hours of 10pm and 7am without written permission from the owner and / or leaseholder of the property; and

· Engaging in any licensable activity in unlicensed premises.

Definition of Industrial buildings:

Industrial - This category ranges from smaller properties, often called "Flex" or "R&D" properties, to larger office service or office warehouse properties to the very large "big box" industrial properties. An important, defining characteristic of industrial space is Clear Height. Clear height is the actual height, to the bottom of the steel girders in the interior of the building. This might be 14 - 16 feet for smaller properties, and 40+ feet for larger properties. We also consider the type and number of docks that the property has. These can be Grade Level, where the parking lot and the warehouse floor are on the same level, to semi - dock height at 24 inches, which is the height of a pickup truck or delivery truck, or a full - dock at 48 inches which is semi - truck height. Some buildings may even have a Rail Spur for train cars to load and unload.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial property

Definition of Commercial buildings:

A commercial building is a building that is used for commercial use. Types can include office buildings, warehouses, or retail (i.e. convenience stores, 'big box' stores, shopping malls, etc.). In urban locations, a commercial building often combines functions, such as an office on levels 2-10, with retail on floor 1. Local authorities commonly maintain strict regulations on commercial zoning and have the authority to designate any zoned area as such. A business must be located in a commercial area or area zoned at least partially for commerce.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial building

Under the above definitions of Industrial buildings and the Definition of Commercial buildings it is very clear Mr Simon Cordell has been limited with the conditions that have been imposed by the court and do not account for any person living a normal life or being able to live a normal life, with the conditions that have been set out in this ASBO order and without the conditions being defined clearly Mr Simon cannot do many things within the whole of the UK,

Due to the definition, anything that has a warehouse to store goods would be classed as an Industrial this would include all large shopping stores as they have a warehouse attached to the back of them where they sore goods for sale, also this would include hospitals, along with many other buildings.

So since 05/11/2014 Mr Cordell has stayed in his home and does not go out as he does not want to be in beach of this ASBO, His family are left to deal with making sure he has shopping and the things he needs because the way the conditions have not been defined he does not know what he can do and what he cannot do as this was never defined.

These conditions relating to the ASBO application that have been bound upon Mr S Cordell are for the whole of the UK for 5 years.

2

202,

Edited part 5.pdf

When the skeleton bundle was updated most recently on 05/02/2016 the applicant supplied a book, this book is created by members of the Home Office, based within the United Kingdom and this books nature is of such a guide to Anti - Social Behaviour Orders.

Please take note to page number (taking a strategic approach page 15) which clearly states:

“The more serious the behaviour, the greater the likelihood that the court will grant a geographically wide order. Orders that seek to operate in the whole of England and Wales will not be granted without evidence that that is the actual or potential geographical extent of the problem. Further detail about effective prohibitions is given in Chapter 7.”

To have that condition imposed of such a wide scale of areas, would be a breach of Mr Simon Cordell’s human rights, this is inclusive for any other person who might also be banned from the whole of the UK.

Mr Cordell has always lived in the London Borough of Enfield since his birth, his family also have lived in the same area all their life’s and so did Simon Nan and Granddad, Mr Cordell has never shown any intension of moving to a new area within the UK.

And it is the Application case Mr Simon Cordell has been accused of is contained within the Borough of North London Enfield namely but one accused incident.

The Judge when granting the conditions of the ASBO on Mr Simon Cordell did not address this in court and made the order for the whole of the UK for 5 years.

It was said in court by my Barrister, that if Mr Cordell ever does need to go to a petrol station along a motor way or on a named industrial estate as many petrol station in fact are and he was to do so between the hours of 22:00 hours and 07:00 hours he would in fact be in breach of this ASBO, the judge replied and said well in that circumstance of an incident, he will be arrested and have to prove in the court that he was going to get petrol.

Also, if he made a wrong turn when driving and turned into a non-residential private property or into a industrial estate, that he would be in breach of this ASBO. Together Simon Barrister and Simon Including his mother, tried to ask questions about the conditions that have been imposed upon himself, Simple everyday life moderately such as what if he needed to go and get milk from Tesco's or a shop and the judge said well he will be arrested, Simon can’t even go to a large moderately of shop such as Tesco and many more similar new establishments between the hours of 22:00 hours and 07:00 hours, without being in breach of this ASBO. This is also shown in the above in the definition of Industrial buildings, and also the definition of Commercial buildings.

If Mr Simon Cordell was to go out for a night, were music would be played as stated in the skeleton argument, that has been provided by the applicant on page number (5 module 20), Many young people do go out to listen to music when in private air and do not need Local Authority permission as stated by the applicant, in today’s modern society, as it is stated he would have to ask any owner to see there licensed to make sure when listen to music with less than 500 people, this should only be defined under section 63 of the crime and disorder Act, as in open Air or when Trespass has taken place.

Skeleton argument, that has been provided by the applicant on page number (5 module 18),

I have never been spoken to by the police or anyone else about my behaviour, before this ASBO was served on me. I feel very upset by the words in this section as I feel that the police are trying to say they have spoken to me about problems they have included in this ASBO which is not the case.

Skeleton argument, that has been provided by the applicant on page number (5 module 19),

I did not do the acts that the police have set out in this ASBO and I believe the police are well aware off this. We have said over and over in this case that the public order unit holds information to the real people who did what the police are saying I have done in this ASBO application.

No one wanted to define the conditions the applicant wanted to make this a life time ASBO and applied for the conditions on the day of trial but was denied by the Judge it was also said that after the 5 years, the applicant can apply to put a next 5 years in place because the judge would only allow the 5 years imposed and not the life time ASBO which covers the whole UK..

An Anti-Social Behaviour Order should be given as the final resort, before an ASBO is considered to be put in placed on any person. Other methods should have been tried to as before the court proceedings in any ASBO

3

203,

Edited part 5.pdf

application to aid in bringing about a solution depending on the offence that has been committed; this is especially in cases of unlicensed activities. These solutions should have included the possibility of mediation, warning letters and Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABC). An ABC is classed as a written agreement between any Known persistent offenders, to which Simon Cordell has never been arrested to any think of similar nature in fact the last time Mr Cordell was arrested, was in 2009. He has also never been spoken to by anyone about any concerns they had.

If illegal raves have not been proven which it was not the Judge said no illegality needed to be proven, then why do my conditions for the ASBO still define illegal raves?

Please see article from The World Wide Web at:

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01889/SN01889.pdf

What is stated in the PDF web linked above is typed below:

Under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, the police have the power to stop raves. Until January 2004, these were defined as unlicensed open-air gatherings of 100 or more people at which loud music is played during the night. New provisions introduced into the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, which came into effect in January 2004, reduced the number of people who constitute a rave from 100 to 20, and removed the requirement for the gathering to be in the open air. It also introduced an offence of attending another trespassory rave within 24 hours of a police direction, to stop people simply moving the rave to another place. There have been press reports of police in some areas holding back from using their powers for health and safety reasons, either because of the dangers of dispersing large crowds in the dark or because of other dangerous local conditions. However, there have also been reports of successful police action to control raves in particular areas. Gatherings for which an entertainment licence has been obtained are not counted as raves within the meaning of the legislation. However, there was some controversy about so-called licensed “raves” under provisions in the Licensing Act 2003 which came into force in November 2005. These allow people to get temporary event notices for gatherings of up to 499 people for events lasting up to four days. The licensed events could involve the sale of alcohol, and while the police have to review the application and object if they consider that crime and disorder would result, there is no mechanism for the general public to object. The Government is keeping this area of law under review. These provisions would not apply to the kind of illegal raves covered by the 1994 Act, which by definition are unlicensed.”

As far as I know all locations contained within this ASBO application were in a place of fixed residence and all occupiers / residents were living under section 144 Lasbo as stated governed under United Kingdom Law here:

LEGAL WARNING TAKE NOTICE

THAT we live in this property, it is our home and we intend to stay here.

THAT at all times there is at least one person in this property.

THAT any entry or attempt to enter into these premises without our permission is therefore a criminal offence as any one of us who is in physical possession is opposed to such entry without our permission.

THAT if you attempt to enter by violence or by threatening violence, we will prosecute you. You may receive a sentence of up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to Ł5,000.

THAT if you want to get us out you will have to issue a claim for possession in the County Court or in the High Court.

The Occupiers

N.B. Signing this Legal Warning is optional. It is equally valid whether or not it is signed.

Part of the Barrister submissions that represented Simon Cordell, had been that the allegations were that he was involved in the organizing of illegal raves, but the applicant hadn’t adduced evidence, of trespass which is a requirement for proving, that an indoor rave was illegal. The Deputy District Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality, - all the needed to prove was he had acted in an anti-social manner. In the view of the barrister this was a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus, Simon being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

4

204,

Edited part 5.pdf

It should be agreed with my barrister statement as when dealing with this case I was addressing the applicant case to prove that I had not been involved in organizing illegal raves, as this is what the application against him was.

The case was proven that Simon had acted in an in an anti-social manner, yet not one police officer who stood up to give evidence said Simon was rude to them or acted in an anti-social manner to them, also all witness statements have not given an ID of any person on the dates that are within the ASBO application. but if law states such facts how this can be correct. The case against Simon was that he had organized illegal raves, and this should have not been proven as trespass is present and all location refer to in private air.

The word rave cannot be used, unless tress pass or money laundering is present when on private land, governed within the constraints of the United Kingdom Laws.

An abatement Notice should have been severed as all dates contained within the ASBO application, are of a fixed private air of residence.

Under Section 80 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 The Local authority Council are able to serve an Abatement Notice. A noise abatement notice requires that the noise reduces or stops by prohibiting its occurrence or recurrence. It can also require a person to carry out works and/or take other steps to stop the noise nuisance, such as seizing the noise-making equipment. Breaches of the notice can incur a fine of up to Ł5,000. An abatement notice cannot always be served following an initial visit by an officer. Depending on the type of noise nuisance it may take several weeks; any occupiers will be advised by the officer dealing with their case of expected timeframes to resolve the problem. Below is a copy of the form that should have been served on any premises.

Statements made by police officers are allegation made by police of criminal activities such as section 5, 4, 4a, drugs, robbery, to which Mr Cordell was never arrested on the date’s within the ASBO application, nor has he been charged, neither has any member of the public put him or given an ID of Mr Cordell in a police witness statement or has any civil matters been brought before the courts, in regards to himself causing anti-social behaviour,

Convection at trial in a court room that is citing in its civil manner, should not be able to deal with a case as if it were a criminal case such as reference to criminal proceedings, this is un-justified in 2016,

MR Simon Cordell feels as if he is now left with not understanding, with what has been proven against him and what he needs to prove for his appeal. As the conditions he is prohibited from doing is all for illegal raves and illegal raves were not proven.

It is unjustified also that MR Simon Cordell’s name has been slandered in the metropolitan police website, stating that he was given an ASBO for organizing illegal raves, when the case for the ASBO was not proven for organizing illegal raves.

Mr Simon Cordell understands that it was proven, that he had acted in an Anti-social manner, to which if justice profiles, he intends to prove his innocence at his appeal on the 22nd February 2016.

Mr Simon Cordell’s address was put into the metropolitan police website stating that illegality had been proven in the case of illegal raves, which the prosecution rests their case upon. It has also been stated that Mr Cordell is well known for organizing illegal raves in Enfield and across London, to which he has never been arrested for any think of that nature or been found guilty off.

http:/Axmtentmstpohce.uk/News/Man-given-a-five-yearASBO/1400033211719/1257246745756

This has led him to having his life turned upside down. He has had his name put into all the local newspapers, stating that he has been found guilty for illegal raves when the judge clearly stated that no illegality had been proved.

1. http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/13595919.Man-given-ASBO-for-organising-illegal-raves

--

2. http://www.redhillandreigatelife.co.uk/news/13595919-Man-given-ASBO-for-organising-illegal-raves

--

3. http://www.parikiaki.com/2015/08/enfield-man-given-5yr-asbo

--

5

205,

Edited part 5.pdf

4. http://www.enfieldtodav.co.uk/article.cfm?id=1653&headline=No%20more%20raving%20partv%20organiscr%20slappcd%20with%20ASBQ&searchvear=2015

--

5. http://www.northlondontodav.co.uk/article.cfm?id=1653&headline=No%20more%20raving%20partv%20organiser%20slapped%20with%20ASBQ&searchvear=2015

--

6. http://www.barnettodav.co.uk/article.cfm?id=1653&headline=No%20more%20raving%20partv%20organiser%20slapped%20with%20ASBQ&searchvear=2015

--

7. http://www.haringevtodav.co.uk/article.cfm?id=1653&headline=No%20more%20raving%20partv%20organiser%20slapped%20with%20ASBQ&searchvear=2015

--

This has led Mr Simon Cordell health, to being affected in a negative manner. He was already ill before this case started due to other allegations made by members of the police, and what the police have done over many years, not only to Mr Simon Cordell but his whole family, there has been many complaints put into the police, due to the wav they treated and intimidate him and his family over many years, there is only so much a person can take and MR Simon Cordell has taken so much over the past 20 years from the police. He is not coping any longer and he thinks the police wanted this, they knew he had hopes with what he wanted to do with his life and the wav the police could hurt him was by taking his dreams away, of ever doing anything that I had dreamed of doing.

The police have known for years Mr Simon Cordell wanted to do work within his local community within the entertainment field and he started this some years back, He will state that he wanted to better himself and had spoken to the police many times about this as he is stopped by wav of being pulled over by the police, so much and when they ask what he is doing which they always do, I tell them what I want to do and mv plans for mv company, but now I have no chance of getting work within mv local community or making mv company work due to what the police have done as mv company is based on the entertainment business, and this ASBQ is the only wav the police knew they could stop me.

The respondent states they took significant effort that the conditions set out in this ASBQ would not have an effect of any legitimate business activities that I wished to undertake and would in no way would be inhibited by this order. That I could apply for a licence if needed and this order would have no effect on any legitimate business activities I wished to undertake.

Mv mother has tested this by way of making calls to local authorities within the UK to ask if an ASBQ under the conditions I am bound to would have an effect of a person applying to local authorities within the UK for a Alcohol and entertainment licences for an event and there reply to this was yes it would have effect on you obtaining any Alcohol and entertainment licences for any event due to the process that is taken when someone applies for any Alcohol and entertainment licences this would include applying for

·  Personal licence.

·  Premises licence.

· Club premises certificate.

· Temporary event notice.

· Minor variations.

So, this order will have a large effect on the business I have been setting up for years which the police are fully aware off.

Also, there was not any impact assessment done to how this would affect mv normal everyday life.

Simon will state that he was not in attendance to any organised illegal rave, on any of the said dates in question, that is of any incidents that are contained within the applicants Bundle, nor was he an organiser to any event on such dates; He will also induce his statement of facts, contained within this document that is in regards to the skeleton Argument for the respondent.

6

206,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell will state.

From since Simon Cordell was young, he has worked hard to achieve in becoming an entrepreneur, who just wanted to better himself. He states it has taken him many years to save and buy what was needed so that he could start his company. He had to start with the help of his family and help of many others to.

By 2010 he had started to put things in place to achieve his goals he felt that he needed to start the next steps to precede forward and started plans to build a website.

He ordered his domain name http://toosmooth.co.uk on the 22/07/2010. Him and his mother was going to try and build the website, but money was an issue, in building the type of website that was needed and wanted, as this would have cost around Ł40,000 and funds were low, the website took much longer than anticipated when planning to build, part of the reasons was due to Mr Simon Cordell’s mothers health and also partly because of the coding behind the website, as it was inclusive of 4 databases that was needed for the operations of the companies objectives. By 2012 the website was coming along and two other domains was purchased; http://toosmoothentertainment.co.uk and

http://toosmoothentertainment.com 22/05/2012, Too Smooth had started looking ahead to the summer of 2013 to start bridging out with contacts and doing some unpaid work for the local community, to get the company name known as a company to be trusted in the working publics domain, in turn help my local community and achieving some of the goals set. It was planned to order the company name just before the work started in 2013.

But this could not happen as the police arrested me on another accusation I was charge and this case lasted over a year, before Mr Simon Cordell was found not guilty by a judge, this was before the trial representing the ASBO application had started. One of the main problems was and still is, that had to be addressed was due to errors on Simon’s PNC record. He was remanded to prison for 2 days, until an application was put in for bail. His bail conditions for this case were.

The prosecution’s reason for opposing bail was:

Was the possibility of Commit further offences whilst on bail conditions, due to Failure to surrender being present on Simon Cordell’s criminal recorded and, on the police, national computer (PNC)

Judge’s decision

BAIL GRANTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

Surety Ł1000 from Ms Lorraine Cordell (To be surrendered to the nearest Police Station) - prior to release from Custody.

Residence @ 109 Burncroft Road, Enfield, EN3 7JQ Not to enter the London Borough of Southwark Surrender Passport to nearest Police Station Report daily to Edmonton Police between 1400 - 1600

Curfew 8pm - 6am (doorstep condition - the Defendant should show himself to any officer upon

Due to the accused charge errors were noticed, the errors noticed are contained within Simon Cordell’s Criminal recorded, this information is held on the police national computer, such as the case of Failure to surrender, which was held at City and London Court on the 03/03/2008, this was also meant to have been taken off all records, inclusive of the PNC, many years before this case in question had started, as it was noted to be in error in 2009, requests with proof that this needed to be removed was handed to the relevant departments and it was agreed that it would be removed as it was there in error. Mr Simon Cordell has never failed to surrender, so himself and his mother, contacted the court and asked for them to send the memorandum of conviction from the court, which Miss Cordell Simon’s Mother paid the fee of Ł5.00 to the court and they sent her it via email. Please see memorandum of conviction, as this was dismissed by the court. Yet on his PNC record, it has been marked that Simon Cordell has put a plea of guilty in on the 25/01/2008, this is in error and is not true as this case was dismissed by the court, “how can mistakes, be made like this and then not corrected when attention is made to it.”

7

207,

Edited part 5.pdf

Simon Cordell and his mother also noticed other errors that did not seem to be right with Enfield Magistrate's Court Cases, so again they contacted the court via email; they had to contact Highbury Corner Magistrate's Court, as now this is the main court within the area that they live in and asked for the records to be checked.

Included were all of the Enfield Magistrate's Court cases contained within the PNC to be checked, which did take some time for the people at the court to overview the records. The records at this time was still held at Enfield Magistrate's Court but have since been moved now to Highbury Corner Magistrate's Court, once they were ready the court was going to send them by method of post but my Simon Cordell and his mother asked if they could go and pick them up which they was told yes that it would be fine to do so.

Mr Simon Cordell’s mother attended alone to Enfield Magistrate's Court she spoke to a lady and the lady was very confused as there were a list of records that were not in the registry, The lady even showed Simon’s Mother miss Cordell one of the books that records are kept in. Miss Cordell asked could they have been lost by the court or removed in such terms audited, the lady was sure they could not have been lost or removed or audited, as the books are bound and you would see if pages had been taken out or edited.

The lady gave Mr Simon Cordell’s mother a copy of the records which had been checked, which 5 had a star before them, list here is the ones that were not in the court’s registry and the words not in registry.

Simon and his mother have tried to get these corrected and removed from his PNC record but is still having a great deal of trouble in doing so.

Miss Cordell asked for a printed headed letter from Magistrate's Court, by way of asking my acting solicitors to write the correspondence, showing that they had checked Simon’s records in turn showing evidence that there was some that was on the PNC in error that was not listed in the registry. This was asked because the printout provided by the courts was not accepted by the DJ to be good enough to prove validation of the article of facts to be a true statement, but the printout clearly shows it comes from a court email address. Mr Simon Cordell and his mother has sent many emails, made many phone calls and also had been down to Highbury Corner Magistrate's Court, trying to get a headed letter to confirm that his records were checked and proven to be incorrect, as within the ASBO application they are using his PNC record.

Miss Cordell has been dealing with a lady called Flo, who said she will contact Enfield Magistrate's Court, to see about getting the letter written, as they were the ones that checked the records. This has gone on for some time now, without any letter being written, in the end Miss Cordell Simon’s mother went back down to Enfield Magistrate's Court and spoke to Benedicta Objidja, who dealt with the records being checked, she could not understand why Miss Cordell was being told that the letter had to be done by Enfield Magistrate's Court. as they no longer do this sort of work, it is all done at Highbury Corner Magistrate's Court, so after leaving she went back down to Highbury Corner Magistrate's Court, where she spoke to John Forster, she explained what was going on and this now has been going on for way over a year, she was trying to get the records her sons PNC corrected, with a great deal of issues. What was needed and said after she just come from Enfield Magistrate's Court from speaking to Benedicta Objidja inclusive of what she had just been explained, was that any letter would need to be done by this court, which he agreed, he took some details and checked there emails and said they had Mr Simon Cordell’s & miss Cordell’s Simon’s mother emails on their system. He then took a copy of the paper work she had and said he would talk to Benedicta Objidja, but was also confused at how many records was in error, he said to her that if they are not in the court records then the cases was never in court and asked who she had spoken to, who was working in the police station. He could not understand why this had not been corrected; Errors like this should never happen on my sons PNC record. He also stated he would put his notes into a legal advisor to get a letter written.

• In Reference to Pages (2 / 3) of the Applicants Bundle

· = Mr Simon Cordell did not attend any premises on this date to rave, neither was he involved in the organization of a rave, nor did he supply any equipment for any rave at Canary Wharf.

8

208,

Edited part 5.pdf

12/01/2013 = this case was only added as a reference as to the limitation Act 1980. Which states a case must be applied 6 months prior from the date of the incident in question, to which it was not. Please read Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the 24/02.2015. He was in fact taken to The Royal London Hospital, after being attacked on this day. (EXHIBIT)

No members of the public mention Mr Simon Cordell as a person acting in an anti-social manner on this date, as well as police officer statement’s inclusive within the Applicants bundle.

Due to Mr Simon Cordell establishing his company he states he was meeting a lot of people in times of need, a lot of the people he was meeting are and was homeless, as he was looking at avenues to be able to help people.

There are no CAD's otherwise known as incident numbers in regard to this date contained within the applicants ASBO application.

• In Reference to Pages 2 / 3 contained within the applicant’s bundle.

07/04/2013 = In Steve Elsmore Statement dated 11/08/2014

07/04/2013 = Please read Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the 24/02.2015. He States He did not attended any premises on this date to rave, neither was he involved in the organization of any illegal rave, nor did he supplied equipment on said date.

Mr Simon Cordell will State that he was not rude to police, but he did feel like he could not even go out for the day with some of his friends, without getting stopped and searched by members of the police.

It is also noted that the caller was very clear that they saw a flat screen TV being put into Mr Cordell’s van, which is confusing to why when the police searched the van they found no TV, but did in fact find two of his off road motor bikes, which is not included in Steve Elsmore statement. The police did checks on Mr Simon Cordell’s Off Road Motor Bikes but this is also not stated, but should show up on the seizer notice, as Mr Simon Cordell did asked the police office to take careful note of the two of road motor bikes, as due to the high value of them.

Mr Cordell Will state that he did get a bit upset when the police said they were going to seize his van, as he did have insurance in place to be able to drive the van in question, but there was an error on the MID database. Miss Cordell had been trying to help her son resolve the issue concerning his insurance policy not showing on the mid data base alongside with members of their local police force and his insurance company KGM too, together they had tried to work out why Mr Simon Cordell was showing as uninsured. There was information noted as intelligence on the police National Computer stating this I had asked the police to check on their systems due to this, but they would not they just wanted to seize Mr Simon Cordell’s van without checking, so he knew he was being wrongfully accused at this point, as he had done nothing wrong and he did have insurance to be driving and had paid a lot of money for his insurance. He states he did not get upset in the manner that the police have said he did and that he does not mean to come across as rude to police. In this case he was just trying to explain the error on the system.

In addition, the prosecution offered no evidence in respect of the charges that were brought even though they were reliant on police witnesses. Mr Simon Cordell had been wrongfully arrested for not having insurance when he was insured to drive. He also did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour on this date in question.

There are no CAD’s for this date, but yet they was meant to be, a CAD referring to the pacific details that should be relating to a person stating, that they believed a burglary was in progress and of the 999 caller stating that they had seen a person who was putting a flat screen TV into Mr Simon Cordell’s van.

9

209,

Edited part 5.pdf

The error on the MID database would also cause Mr Simon Cordell a great deal of problems over the years to come. Within 11 months he had his vehicles seized 9 times, this was always when his insurance company was closed, that being on a day such as Sunday when the insurance companies are closed, he would also be pulled over when it was opened, in one case a police officer lied to his insurance company causing much problems, this has known been proven to be true that a police officer did in fact lie under oath to a Jude at the magistrates court.

Mr Simon Cordell will state he has always been pulled over by police while driving any vehicle and will (supply exhibit from 2004 of letter to the police) of him stating that he is in fear of the police, for continues police harassment, especially a great deal within the past few years, He will also state that sometimes the police would check his insurance documents, as he always carried them with him due to the errors, so that he could explain to the police the error on the MID and asked them to look at the police system to help aid in times when he was being pulled over by members of the police, So that he would always have information available for police about this issue, A far percentage of the police that did in fact pull Mr Simon Cordell over at road side, did check this information and let him go without a problem. But some police just did not care and seized his vehicles, which I then had to pay the costs to get them out of the police compound each time. Chariton and Perivale know of Mr Simon Cordell by the end of that year and each time he states that they would say not again. He states that he had tried everything to get this error corrected and had called everyone about this issue and the insurance company, he had tried to work out what was wrong, no one seemed to be able to work it out, including the police. Mr Simon Cordell states in Nov 2013. He was once again paying to take his vehicle out of the vehicle compound when one of the compound staff said this is just not correct, that you have to keep paying to take your vehicles out of the compound and that this was not right, when a person has that of a valid insurance policy in place, The gentleman working for the compound started to look at Mr Simon Cordell’s documents and the database printout Mr Simon Cordell had from his insurance company, all of a sudden the gentlemen noticed something strange, he asked Mr Simon Cordell to take a look at this, he pointed at the paperwork in front of them both and said I wonder if this is what is causing the problem, there was a space within Mr Simon Cordell’s vehicle registry number, so it was printed as CX52 JRZ and not CX52JRZ as soon as Mr Simon Cordell got back home from the compound, he called his insurance broker and explained to them what had just happened at the car compound and asked them to check the point of issue, to see if this is what was causing the error. It took them some time, but it seems it was due to my insurance being trade and the MID allowing the space to be put in and it showed a correct upload to the MID database that caused this problem.

But Mr Simon Cordell’s problems just did not stop there. He did not get summons from the court in respect of the ongoing court proceedings and was found guilty, in his absinth, for no insurance. This was due to not knowing he had a court date, this became another problem and he got a ban due to points this was inclusive a fine, email upon email was being sent to the courts but case Simon and his mother was have problems getting the issues of cause rectified and felt that as if of they were not getting dealt with correctly, nearly all of Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance that was paid for during the period of 2014 to 2015, he could not drive due to the errors.

In reference to the case were the police office had lied to Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance company, he had been trying to get a copy of the tape(s), of when the police office had been speaking to KGM my insurance company at the time of Mr Simon Cordell, being pulled over at road side, from the police officer(s) in charge of the case, themselves with subject access requests, to which they were not dealing with, so the case was called to court for trial and the police officer had lied to the judge, Mr Simon Cordell was again found guilty, and banned from driving and fined, he submitted an appeal and the judge accepted it so now the ban was not in force until the appeal date. The judge also helped by explaining that if Mr Simon Cordell’s insurance company did not hand over the data that he had been seeking to trying to get hold of by the date and time of the appeal, that he could apply to the crown court to summons the insurance company KGM to court. Mr Simon Cordell and his mother in fact did get the information before the appeal date and the recording of what the police officer said to my insurance at roadside. Mr Simon Cordell also had to get a barrister for the appeal date. Again, the police officer lied in court, my barrister let him, then my barrister played a little from the recording and stopped it and asked the police officer is that you. Which he replied yes, the recording was restarted which showed the

10

210,

Edited part 5.pdf

police officer had lied, I won my appeal, there is a complaint that has been put in which is still being dealt with about that case. But it took Mr Simon Cordell and his mother until 2015 to clear his name for the reasons of no insurance, so to be able to clear all the bans and points of his driving license, after himself and his mother sending hundreds of emails,

• In Reference to Pages 2 / 3 contained within the applicant Bundle.

· = Mr Simon Cordell was looking for venues to set up an illegal rave

21. = Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave neither was he involved in the organization of any illegal raves, nor did he supply equipment. This case was only added as a reference as the limitation Act 1980 which states that a case must be applied 6 months from the date of the incident, to which it was not. Please read my last statement dated the 24/02.2015.

It is alleged that Mr Simon Cordell was looking for venues in which illegal raves could be held, on 24th May 2013. Mr Simon Cordell will dispute this. He will state that he had been contacted by a friend called Joshua, who was living at 204 High Street Ponders End EN3 4EZ, also known as the Old Police Station at Ponders End, as he and some others were homeless, unless this was possible.

As Mr Simon Cordell was driving towards 204 High Street, he drove his car down the alleyway so that he could park the vehicle he was in, He parked between two well-known land marks, Which is where many people who do live in an around the surrounding areas, would be able to remember as the old ponders End police station and Kinder Garden Centre. He states he knows the area very well as this is where he has lived all of his life, so he knew about the car park at the back of the two well-known landmarks, as he states you cannot park on the highroad, because of the double yellow lines or other restrictions. He had parked there before; He states he believes and knows that the police saw his car as he began to take a right turn to be able to drive down to where he intended to stop. He knew the police had followed him, as he had seen them pay attention to himself as he had driven past. He does clearly remember that of himself lock his vehicle as the police approached him and now was standing by his side. He states that this is normal for him and over the years of his life he has become use to the police approaching him for numerous accusations, so that has also made him used to their presents, Mr Simon Cordell states that that this is so normal for him, so he got ready for the police procedures, as they said they wanted to search him and his car because the police believed that the car he was driving smelt strongly of cannabis, Mr Simon Cordell sates that he would always consented to this. He is sure of his statements of facts and that the police cannot dispute this, that of the police officers that had approached him and who had stopped him as he had just got out of my car, or how would they have said his car smelt strongly of cannabis, which is the reason that the police officers gave him the conditions of search and their consent form due to a search of himself and that of his vehicle that he was driving.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had not done anything wrong and nothing was found on his person or in his car.

Mr Simon Cordell will dispute making any comments about being able to attract people to illegal raves and illegal 3-day events, what reason would he have had to say this.

Mr Simon Cordell will state to the applicant that he was a visitor to the location of interest, due to a call from a friend who asked if Mr Simon Cordell could loan him some money for food. He will also include that he did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour on the 24th May 2013.

Mr Simon Cordell does not know what Joshua said to the police, as he was never with Joshua. Mr Simon Cordell does not know why Joshua would have said to the police that he was his lawyer, or if Joshua said this at all to police. Mr Simon Cordell has tried to get hold of Joshua to make a statement for this case, but due to him being homeless, it has been very hard. As far as he is aware the building was being occupied by people to live in, he states he does not know anything Joshua said to police about know any think about a rave. Mr Simon Cordell did not manage to visit him on this day.

11

211,

Edited part 5.pdf

At no point is Mr Simon Cordell being accused of acting in an anti-social manner on this date, or by any members of the public inclusive of members of the police, neither was he arrested.

There are no cads for this date.

• In Reference to Pages 2 / 3 - pages 98 to 100 created by Steve Hoodless yr contained within the applicant’s application bundle.

· = was involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, Whit Heart Lane, N17.

25/05/2014 = Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave neither was I involved in the organization of any raves, nor did he supply equipment for an illegal rave at unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, Whit Heart Lane, N17.

In respect of Mr Simon Cordell presence at Unit 5 St George’s Industrial Estate, White Hart Lane on 25th May 2014. He attended a commercial building that the occupiers were residing in, having displayed s144 LASPO notices and in turn treating the premises as their home. Nothing was said to Mr Simon Cordell about a rave by the occupiers. He will state that he was visiting friends and they were just sitting and chatting while having a laugh. He remembers taking about ways to better life for him and his friends as well as others.

There was no music being played or about to be set up. He was not involved in the organization of an illegal rave of any sort. That he did drive there in his van VRM CX52JRZ, and he does accept that he had 2 speaker boxes in the van; however, he did not have a full sound system and the speakers did not have any drivers in them. So he and others could not have used the speaker box’s to play sound, he did ask the police to note this down, and that he was only using the van as storage, this is why the police who were in attendance allowed him to leave, while talking to the current occupiers of the premises.

I did not on the date in question have what would constitute as a full sound system like what is now being pursued by the applicant as I know that it would have been seized by the police, I was not rude to the police, I allowed my van to be searched by members of the police and nothing was seized, and I went home I did not cause any anti-social behaviour on the 25th May 2014.

Since this ASBO application was served on Mr Simon Cordell, he has moved the speakers out of his van and they are still in the (open air), at his mother’s address and are in the back garden still to date, as if in the first day that of when he had taken them out of his van, with no drivers in them. Mr Simon Cordell states yes at the time it would have been better to keep them in his van due to the weather, but when he does intend to go for a drive that he does not feel safe any longer travelling with any sound equipment due to the ongoing ASBO application.

It is also noted that on page (98 of the main applicants bundle) that the report was created on the 26/05/2014 for criminal damage, the event date, is noted at: 25/05/2014, but was last updated on the 19/06/2014 why would there be a need to update this report, it was proven I did nothing on the CCTV.

Since this ASBO was served a lot of research has been done in regard to the allegations contained within the applicant’s case and it seems it is a well-known fact by police that the accused illegal raves in question are known to be setup on social media. And when doing a simple search at company house a director’s name other than the name Simon Cordell is present for the company name in question and no contact seems to have been made by police or local authority in regards to this issue even low a letter has been provided to the applicant by the true director of Every Decibel Matters, this letter is contained within the applicants bundle. Also, the fact that no noise abrasion order severed by any local governing authority has been shown as well as proof of trespass to be able to class the dates contained within the ASBO application as such of a name as an illegal rave. Also, it seems there was an event called

12

212,

Edited part 5.pdf

Chaotic Waves Gully posted in >>2100+ ATTENDING<< TONIGHT!!! ☆☆CHAOTIC WAVES//RIGHT WRONGUNS//BASSFACE SOUNDS//HOUSE OF HAVIK PRESENTS THE 1ST YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF CHAOTIC WAVES^^FT SKUNK-WORKS ARENA. This event was on social media. It seems this even got cancelled for what reason we have not been able to find out as the even page has been deleted.

It seems at the last min this event was changed to:

(Event page Chaotic Waves posted) A VERY CHAOTIC POPUP!

Also, this page has been deleted.

After the ASBO application and personal investigations in to what Mr Simon Cordell am being accused of, on the date in question, a fake profile account was created and has been given access to emails which does show a lot of what was said on the event page and where the location that was once put up for friends only in regards to Chaotic Waves Private party. I would like to again state I have nothing to do with this and I am sure the police was or should already be well aware of this as it was on a private Friends profile on social media, as it is well stated in the news the police are aware of any events r private parties that are being setup on social media. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has no affiliation to illegal raves on the dates in question or otherwise.

There are no cads for this date.

At no point of time did Mr Simon Cordell do what he has been accused of which is of acting in an anti-social manner on this date by any members of the public or of any member of the police on the 25/05/2014

· In Reference to Pages 2 / 3: AND ALL CADS RELATING TO THE 6TH 7TH 8TH JUNE 2014: HIPPEY FEST PROGRESS WAY WITH ALL CAD RELATING TO THE 6th 07th 8th JUNE 2Q14 in relation to the applicant’s bundle.

07/06/8th June 2014 = Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on Progress way, Enfield.

· Mr Simon Cordell will supply Supported Evidence from face book showing that he was not the organizer to any event on the 06/06/2014 07/06/2014 and the 08/06/2014. (Exhibit)

· Mr Simon Cordell will supply Supported Evidence from YouTube showing that he was not the organizer. (Exhibit)

· Witness statement Josie needs to email the gentlemen my mother has already spoken to him and his corresponding emails were sent to Josie email: The name of the gentlemen is Adrian Coombs Specialist Operations Superintendent Essex Police. (Exhibit)

· Mr Simon Cordell will supply Supported Evidence, from face book showing hippy fest profile pages, in turn proving that hippy fest started on the 6th and the 7th June 2014 when he was not present. There is also no CAD present for the 8th June 2014, which Mr Simon Cordell does (Request alongside with all other missing incident information relating to the 6th 7th 8th June 2014) Mr Simon Cordell believes that this information, does also contain other relevant intelligence that proves that Mr Simon Cordell, was not in fact involved in a rave in the occupied premises on the dates in question. (Exhibit)

13

213,

Edited part 5.pdf

· Neither did the police see Mr Simon Cordell At approximately at 02:03 hrs on Saturday the 7th June 2014 as A/PS Charles Miles 724ye page 32 states, but as a matter of fact did do so on the 8th June 2014 as A/ Insp Hamill 201566 states on page 32.

·  Supported Evidence of proof that the police did not in fact see Simon Cordell and his brother Tyrone Benjamin together, as police statements say (Exhibit) Off, Supporting Medical Evidence of proof that my brother could not have attended on the 7th or 8th of June 2014 as stated by office PC239YE in;

· CAD number 1047 7th June 2014 (page 175 under reason) which is linked to CAD numbers.

· CAD 1323 7th Jun 14; page 147 to 152

· CAD 1722 7th June14; page 152 to 154

· CAD 1816 7th June 14; pages 155 to 159

· CAD 2141 7th June 14; pages 160 to164

· CAD 2255 7th June 14; pages 165 to 169

· CAD 2271 7th June 14; pages 170 to 173

· CAD 1608 7th June 14; pages 184 to 186

Supported Evidence, supporting the fact that the CAD's supporting the applicant ASBO case in relation to progress way and other dates in question are time stamped wrong, this evidence does include.

· Standard Operational Guidelines - East of England. http://www.eastamb.nhs.uk/FOI%20Docs/Disclosure%20Log/Emergencv%20Qps/Julv%202013/F15152 h%20-%20attachment.pdf

· National Standards for Incident Recording (NSIR) Collection and recording of police; https://www.gov.uk/govemment/uploads/system/uploads/attachment data/file/116658/count-nsir11.pdf

· Understanding Control Command; http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts UC2.pdf

police Central Communications Command incident procedure; https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lkd4sarsfdMC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=police+Central+Communications+Command+incident+procedure&source=bl&ots=663ZhaKX9 &sig=Z7DgHlgJncwLNuam0g8 EBcCja8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif39iYsMbKAhWI8A4KHdnMAoQQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=police%20Central%20Communications%20Command%20incident%20procedure&f=false

Showing evidence that is in support of the truth, relating to that of incident numbers contained within the applicants bundle off facts, proving that the incident numbers are in error, with reference to earlier times than the previous time stamps on the previous incident number / CAD numbers, as listed below;

· CAD’s (2637 pages 191 to 195) to (2672 pages 196 to 198) on the 7th June 14; pages

· CAD’s (3005 pages 203 to 205) to (3037 pages 179 to 183) on the 7th June 14.

· CAD (10481 pages 233 to 237) to (10506 pages 238 to 241) on the 7th June 14.

Proving a high chance of the evidence being that of a manufactured and engineered or such marital to be fabricated and not true to there facts.

· Perverting the Course of Justice; http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/perverting-the-course-of-iustice.htm

Supported Evidence showing the fact that incident numbers / cad numbers are stamped with wrong locations and if it was not for simple mistakes of certain members working on the applicant’s behalf, not concealing pacific(s) information such as listed below. Mr Simon Cordell might not have been able to prove the truth to aid in his innocents in regard to the ongoing court proceedings.

· On the majority of cads / incident numbers, including (cad 2410 8th June 2014 Page number 273) the.

Call Tel, Call Name, Att Location, Map, Inc Location, Call Location are Blocked out. Preventing Mr Simon Cordell from being able to prove, that of the nature of the members of police, who are involved within the development of the ASBO application, too be lying about the true facts of the locations, stating that police was sure that all location blocked out were in relation to progress way. Please take note to a snip lit, of the court transcripts, in respect, of the ongoing ASBO proceedings at the magistrate’s court.

14

214,

Edited part 5.pdf

Statements of officers, who also admitted that the intelligence contained within the bundle has been copied from the PNC also that of the officers who reported the intelligence not being present at court. SNIPPLIT DATED 00/00/2015 (Exhibit of SNIPLIT relating to transcripts)

Supporting evidence of Police questioned under oath in relation to applicants ASBO on going application.

R v Cordell

Def

Mother of D in court + potentially giving evidence.

Met

Police - No objections.

Probably the case will go over till tomorrow.

6 Witness of facts police.

1 Officer in case.

To be 6 - 22; Case statements.

Def

Just gave info, possession of new info on face book, not in bundles before court, but should be. Shows info suggesting never organised but other people did, nothing to do with w/d.

DJ

Interim ASBO made case by been well (unreadable text)

DEF

This evidence shows that Rave on 6/6/? Was nothing to do with w/d.

Miss Cordell mother has carried out her own investigations as she was not happy with results of investigating officer / so/s.

It is a large bundle to get through this late.

If material can be viewed by DJ

(Possible metered.) Then DJ can decide on admissibility of the evidence.

DJ

Producing material, however relevant, 10 minutes before a trial is not acceptable.

Met Police 1st State

DJ

Has made application for ASBO ORDER.

Inspector Hamill is to lead.

Witness 1 - Inspector Hamill -R. O - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday.

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)

Met Police RE-XE

My understanding is the door staff @ gate presented D as the event organiser.

Referring to page number 184 Info re: caller reporting incident. (Please take Note here in regard to the applicant’s Skeleton bundle.)

DJ

Was (unreadable text) opp raised previously?

DEF

No

Witness 2 Pc Miles - RO - 11:45 AM EIC

Attended venue on the 7th alone - did look @ Intel before attending.

Did not speak to owners

Did not know D was with Tyrone Benjamin (Please Take note here.)

WINTNESS 3 - PC Skinner - Bundle Tabs 12 of 13 Lead Statement 1 Tab 13

On the 7th Duty officer (+) walked into Estate and saw a van but did not recognise van.

He saw D however who admitted he was the organiser of the rave (Statement 2 Tab 12)

Youths were committing shop lifting out of the petrol station I had to call for reserve intervention.

I arrested D and people dispersed and D was realised.

Rave did not take place.

No dought rave would have continued had he not arrested D.

DEF XEX

19TH July event @ Carpet right company building was occupied.

Saw speakers - Intel were loading equipment indoors.

15

215,

Edited part 5.pdf

Details of van taken but was not D.

Carpet right had a pad lock round metal barrier.

Other car park had a front entrance.

I was senior officer attending the venue.

Later on I instructed I sergeant to contact the owners.

I latter see the defendant getting out the van

I can’t remember that, I may have updated others in relation to D getting out of van. But I may or may not have updated the system.

On the 7th June D made admissions to me not aware of squatters (of the adjust Estate.)

Met XEX

(Reefer’s to a statement that is on page 76.)

Witness Pc Edgose - R.O 12:14pm EIC Read Statement 21

Incident of 24th July:

I was in a vehicle that stopped D’s Vehicle.

No threat to break defendant’s window (ok)

It was all about drug issues.

R V CORDELL

3

Witness VI - Pc King 12:28pm EIC Tab 15/16 Statement Page 41

Officer has only met D once before.

D has all ways been polite.

Has never had any problems with the defendant.

D was really eloquent of clearly knowing the how.

Witness Pc Ames - Acting sergeant - R.O -12:46 Pm EIC

DEF XEX

Event was outdoors.

Saw sound equipment substance speakers poss.

Approximately the size of witness box but could not remember really as he was distracted by people.

No further questions.

Witness - Pc Elsmore - R.O - 14:10 EIC Tab 6 - pg ?14?

DEF XEX

Council (unreadable text) curfews (unreadable text) that PNC info on statement adds no (unreadable text) probatory (unreadable text)

value of info re: Witness being “afraid of D” What he puts down to the way he worded, but he meant that people actually are afraid of possibly giving evidence in court.

R V CORDELL

4

Def

Counsel argues that officer’s statement is designed to cause on evidence reaction of this of no value and speculatory in nature.

DJ

How many calls from public did police receive?

Witness

In excess of 15 calls - how many to the same venue and no other address.

Doe’s does not know the number of callers that are in relation to each of these occasions.

On page 15 - Allegations re: Millmarsh Lane, evidence from officer not first-hand - relied on cads and another Intel.

Query Re: “3 massive nitrous tanks”

DJ

Where did you get such info officer.

Witness

From Page 65 - sergeant King - Crimit’s Re reports, other Intel but not from people at the venue.

COUNSEL

Officer you signed a statement of truth (unreadable text) to other witness statements.

DJ

We all know that on ASBO apps hearsay is allowed.

R V CORDELL

5

Counsel

Why did officer no and rely on Pc Kings Statements later than on the Crimit’s reported.

Officer no and involved in taking info from Pc King.

(Confesses he did it.)

He did not notice the discrepancy regarding official statements.

Have heard of Every Decibel Matters - They were advertising and I believe the D knows a member of the above company.

No evidence D is involved in running their operations.

No attempt has been made to speak to directors of company.

No reason to why you didn’t /contact the company.

I think from memory have met D once @ Edmonton police station.

(At Page 16 1st paragraph - not consistent to fact that he met him on the 7/6/2014)

All notes with cad number were listed from reports not officers’ own words - same applies from Cads that had not input.

Has not made attempts to contact owners of premises.

Officers unable to assist courts in relation to why statements were not signed on notebooks profiles.

Another example of doings put in statements to blacken Mr Cordell’s evidence in statement @ point 12, No convictions that of class A drugs unlike what’s written in

16

216,

Edited part 5.pdf

Statements - another example of untrue cut and paste.

DJ

1ll ignore because no convections of class A drugs or supplying is present on the criminal record.

Counsel

You cannot assist with witness reliability of info contained, can you?

Can Intel be wrongfully inaccurate? No Officer

On that particular re post, it appears to be right.

I did not speak to Parcel he is force @ seven boroughs.

I believe he was not included in the email, because Intel (unreadable text) Email sent to LDE only.

Searched (unreadable text) for info on Cordell’s convections.

Moving on to statement on Page 30

Does PO investigating unit have more info than it is letting on?

Officer

No

Are you aware that Miss Cordell has spoken to other officers Re: Rave?

This suggests that you do not want DS Tanner to be examined on these proceedings because she has information Re knowledge of raves and them not being connected to W/D.

Spoke to Pc Tanner but not written what - spoke to (unreadable text) this year You have no recorded that you emailed her but then spoken to her.

Emails have been deleted and no copies keep on record.

Met police

XEX OF Witness vii

Done oath seductions:

Nothing in the contents of this report is inaccurate to my knowledge.

DEF

Hopefully the 2 witnesses on behalf of D should be able to give evidence tomorrow.

Witness viii

Miss Cordell ATT - 16:05 - EIC

D (her son) lives separately from me but I have been trying to help him sort out inaccuracies with both his PNC and other police matters. Police is still popping around to his house - Simon tells me and also I physically get to his flat before police have left.

He is being harassed by police.

DJ

Are 6 officers not reliant - on witness statement - there for putting a line though RD?

DEF

Material deters with PNC that was included by Met - Therefore right to challenge. Plus PNC in evidence does not correct.

DJ

Very little weight will be given to PNC.

DJ

Miss Cordell Met XEX

(Bottom of Page 8) the leaving party for Dwayne Edwards.

I got there at 7:30PM and left about 9:30pm 6th - 8th June - D was also with Dwayne the days of Saturday and Sunday as well.

He was at my house for a 1 hour and half on Saturday and 1 hour on Sunday during the day. I agree I did not include it in my statement.

On Sunday it was around midday.

I was not with D from about 2AM on Sunday, no I was not.

Nor at 2AM on Saturday either.

On the 7th June I did see my son and so did all my family members that were at the party.

(At Page 14)

“Police did not have 101 books”

(2 and 3 paragraphs)

Accepts that was told to me by DS Chapman.

DS Tanner called me on 11th or 12th. I believe they have a lot more information.

I am aware of full (unreadable text) alleged involvement but not raves.

I do believe that met have a vendetta against my whole family including Tyrone - Harassment: pull them out for no reason, I would not say from every officer.

R V CORDELL 7

Miss Cordell continues

I am saying that there may be some truth, but allegations of my son organising raves are horrendous.

(Been scribbled out?)

About medical statements of info has not been contained re question: D had been stabbed and was in hospital (Been scribbled out?)

20th June couldn’t give evidence as to D were about but believe he had been arrested on the 19th 20th July does not witness him - did not give detailed route in statement because did not think it was relevant.

Problems with service of docs with police and would not take bundle because???? With police, He panics and rings me every time he is stopped.

I have so (unreadable text) and right down all encounters with police all low not in the bundle.

DEF XEX

I accept involvement of police - they interact with her son and family.

You said Met police have a lot of info of you said “accepted involvement but not raves “

I have involvement with police of lots of data practically with Simon, but not in regard to raves, Issues other than the raves.

I don’t accept he is involved in organisation of raves.

17

217,

Edited part 5.pdf

Continues Tomorrow.

R V CORDELL

2/2 DAYS

-1-

Witness XEX

So you are not yet Charity registered “Too Smooth”

Company were young entrepreneurs can advertise their Business.

Page 77

Retail brunches relating to music such as sound equipment and co involved in provision of sound equipment hire.

Never took profit money from company.

(Page 87)

Deposit of Ł700-.00 daily rate is Ł100.

It is my signature at the end of this (unreadable text) the figures have not been edited (Page 88)

All deposits are non-returnable under any circumstances on this mandatory if the equipment got confiscated, I did not make any profit, and I just did it to get to no people.

Non-profit - just a hobby

STATEMENT PAGE 2 - BOTTOM PAGE:

You state that I accept, and aim was to rent equipment.

Its being suggested to you that the business you was designed was to make a profit.

DJ

As you own entertainment equipment - Yes -

I was not renting out equipment - being it a lot suggested that primary aim was to make a profit.

Renting him out sound equipment. (No not at all.)

Are you aware that music is a licensed activity and beliefs need a licence to play music?

I need a licence for both premises Yes.

I would not check if lending equipment to a private party.

Too Smooth Is registered but not trading because of the ASBO including Interim Order, my reputation has been ruined.

Interim App on 18th 2014 so before then June 2014 (unreadable text) 4th September Were any business transaction conducted during the periods.

I sold Business transactions.

I have lent to councils but not for business transactions, as a friend only.

It’s incorrect that I was setting up raves.

Page 50 - bundle tab 9 - Inspector Hamill

I walked from Great Cambridge Rd towards them

Impossible for door staff to get me as, I was on the other side of the Road.

I was never on the premises.

Yes, it is incorrect Yes POs mistaken.

Page 38 - Tab 13 - Detective Skinner 2 events Page 75 - Tab 24

D denies knowing people alleged to have worked for him on the night - either Pc or person mentioned in statement is wrong.

Reason why you’re found in these raves is because you help organise them.

(Page 141)

Vehicle was owned by me but was sold and now brought back Statement (Page 3)

(Page 104)

I was not with Holly Field on that day.

(Page 99)

Accept I was there in the van inside the unit.

The report is wrong; I had 2 boxes in the van - No speakers - I was not in the premises.

Did not help organise Rave and sound equipment was not mine.

I have tried to hire equipment but organisation of event - Birthday party nothing to do with me.

Is Pc Chandlers report wrong as well? Yes 9 / 10 - August 2014 Bottom Page 7 (Statement)

Accept I attended venue - for Birthday dinner - I was invited 200 People turning up had nothing to do with me.

With social networking it is easy for someone to have 200 friends.

I had cylinders in my vehicle, requires legal authorisations, I have them on my car, for welding - I do welding continuously. I do it as a hobby.

I was not at the location for a large rave.

I do remember many people turning up.

I remember police being in attendance.

I would never shout @ crowd - to busy talking to the police.

Pc statements are wrong.

There’s a possibility that I did say to police that it was a private conference.

DJ

Do you no that 20 people is the maximum - Yes Def xx EX

Was Pc Edgoose out of car? - I know two of them come out of car and approached me.

24th May Incident - Do you remember speaking with Pc Jackson? Do not remember names.

Paragraph of T and C’S Re Falcon Park (Statement)

Deposit does go back unless damage or loss stopping due to breach of agreement.

Amount = No Fee.

18

218,

Edited part 5.pdf

NFO.

R v CORDELL

-3-

DEF

Additional witness is not here.

Because the statement can be read but contain less weight because witness is not here.

Witness 2 can be here in one half hours.

Half evidence.

Half (unreadable text)

13:30pm

DEF

NF Witness.

(unreadable text)

Closing subs.

Statutory test key:

Whether D has acted in an Anti-Social Manner: to that did cause Alarm or Distress.

Astonishing of the council to make out that the whole eleven officers were wrong.

D’s evidence is also not merit able and neither his witness statements.

D’s Mothers evidence - totally irrelevant - her evidence is based on conspiracy police have against her family.

7th June Witness Inspector Hamill and Sos. Miles and witness Cordell (D) Inspector Hamill (unreadable text) miles points to D being the organiser.

Disruption and concern Rave caused outlined by Cad Reports and officers’ statements.

19th July Inspector Skinner describes a rave and Cordell being organiser, another statement as far as D is concerned, which is totally wrong,

Crimit’s reports show D as organiser of large raves according to officer’s statements.

Test mode out of submissions above.

Consistent Patten of behaviour as by of D concerned.

· Test of (unreadable text) Nuisance (unreadable text) does not (unreadable text) delaminates (unreadable text) of fact, but from Cad Re: alarm distress etc. Shows this has happened.

The impact this has on police resources looking @ noise levels and potentially speculating out of control. - Disorder due to shutting events down.

· Pc Elsmore: Description levels other D was subject to order has reduced - only 3 - when D was active was significant more.

· The order is necessary, and attention drawn to carefully word interim order.

Def Closing subs

1) Test to be passed can the allegations be proved? Deceived that alleged it may be illegal, it does not need to cause Alarm or Distress.

Page 2 and 3

Hearsay from Steve Elsmore is a copy and paste job.

Pc Parcel does not correct to file evidence, of Crimit’s, which contained incorrect evidence that can’t be backed up, of D known for class A drugs and or supply - info is widely inaccurate.

Totality of evidence is hearsay as well as reports at Cannery Wharf.

No proof this was an illegal rave, as S.63 CJO 1994, No proof of Tress Pass - determination not proved to Criminal Legal Standards.

I did x Officer of @ no time did he indicate where info had come from.

24/05/2014

2nd Allegations - App relies on Hearsay again and (Crimit’s.) Pages 104 - 107 noted from evidence.

2nd Could hearsay from Josher Holyfield who allegedly confessed that was looking to set up raves (Crimit’s.) steward not her again.

Page 98-100 - hearsay - from a Pc again - all in 3rd person, no indication that Pc attended himself.

No evidence that it was illegal rave.

??Show determination in view of illegal rave and no proof has been submitted or covers witness as victim.

No allegations where app. Produced 1st hand evidence.

The particular (unreadable text) of allegations states illegal rave and no proof of required standards has been submitted, nothing adduced. It may be unlikely for presumption that given but it’s possible.

In XEX. App? del failed to Enfield Council who did not pursue.

Does it show the organiser or just someone getting involved in things he shouldn’t.

Hearsay be (unreadable text) grounds are not here.

No evidence police confirmed D to be organiser.

D spoke to police - he gives reasonable Intel calming he can’t keep his mouth shut.

A man was stating his someone else’s lawyer.

This is a rave said to have lasted 3 days, but evidence is weak.

Tyrone’s presence was untrue due to life threatening injuries - No competent evidence.

Police had Intel Re: Every Decibel Matters of with no further line of investigation.

Additional hearsay, only evidence of van of equipment of hired equipment for free.

19/07/2014

Carpet Right - Inspector Skinners evidence - indoor test of legality is proof of trespass and nothing adducted.

Mystery why no statement taken from owner of keys (unreadable text) And whether or not consultations had been given to access the premises.

R V CORDELL -5-

On another occasion: Mr Cordell gave explanations to his presents.

24/07/14

“D accepted he organised”, Pc Edgoose Page 50 - statement said he “did organise illegal raves” Admissions alleged from evidence, Entirely of conversations of others, not clear.

27/07/14

Same as Millmarsh Lane, hearsay evidence of number of Pc’s called and gave evidence.

Interesting that someone other than D (unreadable text) led a (unreadable text)

19

219,

Edited part 5.pdf

Evidence of people living and potentially others on the land treating it as home.

Further evidence inaccurate Shoplifters.

9/10 August

Evidence of Pc officers does not match up with allegations in application - on his duties odd their being squatters, also did not try to contact owner while on duty suggesting D there at private party - due to lack of suitable equipment, evidence D was attending a private party.

Councillor: (unreadable text)

The general credibility of the witness’s (unreadable text) errors because of the hearsay of Crimit’s of no prominence taken into account weight of statement.

Page 32 (unreadable text) day and event 2

Inconsistencies that are bios for officers to include evidence that favours Application by being unreadable.

Allegation of 15 - 10 boys (unreadable text) to talk un relative of conduct.

Fear of reprisals.

LTC when given evidence was to prove sound organisation possibly which D accepts.

If (unreadable text) D was polite on his case

Investigation not performed with measurements as it should have been.

Vendetta families highlighted.

Inconsistence’s between start of Crimit’s, complete absinth of follow up is simply worrying.

What other info is wrong that we have not been able to check?

DJ

Mr Justino (UN READABLE TEXT)

Test Not related to police resources.

Was ASBO serious and persistent?

Decrease in activity - “huge decrees since Interim ASBO “but no indication of trends: before - after and previous years.

Pc Elsmore couldn’t say why decrease in raves.

Correspondence of consultation - so far this relay wrongfully weak evidence.

Met on points of how

The statutory test in relation to rave into what is required.

DJ

Delivery of judgment @ 15:32pm

DJ

Is satisfied, so that she is sure, that the D did act during dates in such a manner.

ABSBO Granted

Order necessary for reasons:

Nature of the conduct of these parties’

Noise (UN READABLE TEXT) civil(s)

Police officers have to attend in large numbers.

Since interim order there has been a decrease in this type of activity.

Satisfied D has acted in as manner of such conduct that causes harassment alarm, distress.

Conduct (unreadable text) It is necessary to protect residents of Enfield, from anti-social acts from Simon Cordell.

DJ

Need to ensure probations are precise to award Asbo application DEF

D’s attendance at raves is not an issue and places unreasonable burden on him for attending parties when 20 people attended and what appears to be illegal then turns out to be legal, also places D in a difficult position if false steps are made to legality of parties ASBO must be prevelitive

DJ

D Can carry out legitimate and licensed business.

Point D “or local authority addition.

DJ “To a period of 5 years”

Propitiations are precise and plain Terms of Order D

to upset then left room but lawyer present.

Terms

Needs adding END

PAGE 274 of the Applicants Bundle; please take note to the blocked-out section, that of incident and location information relating to cad 2410 entered at 05:35 0n 8th June 14.

Page 275; please take note to the blocked-out section,

Now please take note to Page 276-chapter one line one reference to (A&J Cars)

Google maps image of A & j Cars also showing Crown Road opposite also known as the old man

building rented to Travis Perkins.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.649023,0.0539363.3a.75v.353.77h.87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spFsctdo0rnT0iIW6gsMHK0!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

20

220,

Edited part 5.pdf

(Enfield A&J Car’s North London.) To which if it was not for this one piece of truth not being left unblock any Jude would believe a police officer over any citizen, as the last magistrates district Judge did do so. please take a look at a copy of the court transcripts below. (Court Transcript)

• Page number 278 to 283 contained within the applicant’s bundle is also explicitly linked to:

cad number 2456: 07th Jun 14) and implicitly to:

CAD 2649: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 2989: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 989: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 3274: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 3754: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 5586: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 7983: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 8190: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 8528: 01 Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 6851: 02nd Jun 14

(Mr Simon Cordell was not present on this date; neither does any police or members of the public say that he was. This is in fact Crown Road, the week before the 6th 7th 8th of accused events at progress way.)

CAD 943: 07th 14 CAD 1012: 07th Jun 14 CAD 1047: 07th Jun 14

This 999 Caller who is a repeat victim caller, was talking about a event 10 mins up the Road opposite Southbury Train Station who lives at (93 Broadlands Avenue, Enfield)

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/93+Broadlands+Ave,+Enfield,+Greater+London+EN3+5AG/@5 1.6511736,-0.0548688.16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x48761fD8f37606db:0xabeca8d1453c46e8 This contaminates all the Cad’s and shows that the police officers are not sure were the people coming out of the train station were going to as the train station is a 2 min walk to Crown road.

This is not right because ATT Location and INC Location as well as caller location are blocked out on most cads making it impossible to see what other errors or incorrect truths are being made.

• Supporting evidence that 32 Crown RD (A&J Cars) Landmark was in fact being occupied under section 144 Lasso. Google earth image street view of front gate with section on https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6497295,0.05383533a15v104.32h81.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sazWzv HhHaW6zAbaVnkivA!2e0!7i 13312!8i6656

Supporting Evidence proving that 32 Crown RD was having events every weekend

(Exhibit)

21

221,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell will state that none of the incident numbers relating to the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 did he acting in an Anti-social manner, that was likely to cause harm, alarm or distress, to any person or fix a bow of residence.

List of CAD's and Information Relating To the 7th Contained Within the ASBO Application

· There are 93 incident numbers relating to the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 Mr Simon Cordell is being accused of as listed below.

· A list of Cad / incident numbers including supported relevant articles contained within the bundle are as listed below and that of any that is missing, any of the relevant documentation, so to be able to deafened the client Mr Simon Cordell, from all accusation creating the bases of an ASBO application. A list is indexed below and contained within this document. 1 of 93

CAD 7th June 1012 at 01:53 on 7th June 14,

ESSO STN pages 143 to 146.

FIRST PART ABOVE

Around 2:00am on the 8th Mr Simon Cordell states he was just arriving at progress way and was said to have been seen by police

On page 32 A/Insp Hamill 01566 states at 0200hrs on Sunday 8th June that he did in fact see Mr Simon Cordell for the first time, on the 3rd line from the last sentence.

CAD 1047 Name PC239YE Shinnick (pages 174 to 178) at 1;59 on 7th June 14, was a 999-call location, which was a police officer calling the Enfield Patrol Site, Call name is PC Shinnick, please allow a officer to call on duty.

Also A/ PS Charles Miles 724ye (page 31) explains that this date was the 7thth June 2014, Any person can tell by the cad 1047, to which A/Inspector Hamill 201566 states he had created, at the first point of contact, as he dispatched officers to the location of the incident, from this information provided we can tell that this was in fact the 8th June 2014 at 1:59, A/Insp Hamill then states, that the officers that he had sent, had reported back that Mr Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin were present, and goes on to state that officers were not allowed access into the occupied building, due to the demand during the shift and low policing numbers, but the cad incident number 1047 07th June 14 pages 174 to 184, states them officers in attendance who could not gain entry, somehow managed to see Mr Simon Cordell and his brother Tyrone Benjamin earlier in the day, to which would be impossible as only Mr Simon Cordell had arrived to visit a friend for the first time at the location and the matter of fact of Tyron Benjamin being in hospital.

POINTS PROVED

· A/Insp Hamill 01566 states at 0200hrs on Sunday the 8th June 2014 and Mr Simon Cordell did in fact arrive at this time.

· A/Insp Hamill 01566 Could not be sure of the fact of the person that he is stating was at the gate did in fact bring Mr Simon Cordell back to the gate, he does not state that she or he came back with Mr Cordell, who would have told A/ Insp Hamill that Mr Simon Cordell was in fact the person she had gone to collect and asked to assist in speaking to police as the event organiser, neither did he take any name(s) or personal details of the gate assistances. He also states that Mr Simon Cordell would not in fact speak to him, so if this was true then why would Mr Simon Cordell have approached him to speak to him as the event organiser and not speak, as for fact he was just arriving.

· No police officers did in fact see Mr Simon Cordell, on the 6th 7th Jun 14

· as the first time Mr Cordell see the police was around 2:00am Sunday the 8th Jun 2014.

· Police would have added cad files already by date that was miss any Intel relating to Mr Simon Cordell’s were about on the 8th Jun 14 or first point of contact, in relation to progress way this is

22

222,

Edited part 5.pdf

also inclusive of witness statements of any intelligence relating to Progress Way Cad 1012 7th June at 01:53 on 7th June 14. Pages 143 to 146.

· Mr Simon Cordell’s Brother could not have been present as for he was in hospital.

· Mr Simon Cordell did not talk to any police or council as he felt intimidated.

· Mr Cordell was not given any noise abating order from the local council as stated on page 34 by A/Insp Hamill 01566.

(On page 33) A Insp Hamill 201566 states that he see Mr Simon Cordell, at the gates but believed that Mr Simon Cordell was coming from inside the premises, due to the large number of people at the location and due to other reasons and believes of the inspectors own, Mr Simon Cordell states that he remembers clearly, that of the police approaching him, as he was walking towards the gates, when he was arriving from the Great Cambridge road, and that of the police asking him questions in regards to illegal raves. A Inspector Hamill states that he ask Mr Simon Cordell his name and that he gave him a reply, such as to the answer of “yes” verbally and then (A) Inspector Hamill states that he asked Mr Cordell the same question again but Mr Cordell would not reply, (chapter one of A Inspector Hamill statement page 33 5th line down;) he then states the 3rd time when Mr Simon Cordell was asked again, but this time by the council officers with inspector Hamill present his name, that he would not reply again, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not speak to anybody, he just listened to what was being said to him and complied when he was asked to walk back to where he had just parked his vehicle. The police officer is incorrect in saying that MR Cordell was the person that the gate assistant went and collected, as the event organiser, as Mr Simon Cordell was in fact approaching the occupied building and was visiting his friend. He did state this in his first statement dated (00/00/2015.) Mr Simon Cordell will State that, as he was approaching the ally way were tops tiles is before the entrance gate for progress way as stated by A/Insp Hamill 201566 on (page 33 2nd lines up from the last sentence.) Simon remembers it being dark and a lot of people being present in the ally way. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he saw, who he now knows to be A/ Insp Hamill for the first time, at around 2:00 am on the 8th June 2014 as he was arriving and had not seen a police officer on the date in question, till that point of time, when he had seen A Inspector Hamill talking too other people at the gate than himself as he was approaching, he does remember the police trying to speak to him and that he felt that the police was accusing him of being an organiser, to which he was not, so he choose not to say any think, without a solicitor being present. The Police and council let Mr Cordell go and he walked across the road to the petrol station, while waiting for his friend to turn up, which he had to give a set of keys back too.

· Cad 169 8th June 14 (is Missing Requested by Mr Simon Cordell)

· Cad 2291 07th June 14 (Is Missing Requested by Mr Simon Cordell) are no were to be found apart from on (page 174)

Crown Road == There was no Licensable events or private parties on the 1st 2nd apart from Crown Road council freedom of information act to be provided, from local council. (Exhibit)

· (Cad 3151 8th June 14 page 278) clearly states that the rave / private party was at crown road not progress way and that members of the public were using Southbury train station, to get to this location, which is across the road, grid reference; X (Easting) 534960 Y (Northing) 196240 and that under oath to the Dj A/Insp concealed the truth true facts of their fabricated and manufacture while engineered evidence, that they support contained within the applicants bundle. Please read court train scrip off A Inspector Hamill below; (This also proofs that all the cads are linked together and corrupt)

Witness 1 - Inspector Hamill -R. O - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday.

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

23

223,

Edited part 5.pdf

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)

· Cad 3319 8th June 14 page 283

Southbury train STN /Crown RD (cad 11822 8th June 14 page 302)

Southbury STN cad 2410 8th Jun 14 page 276. Also blocked out so no person can see, apart from the makers of the bundle themselves, when creating their application towards Mr Simon Cordell, What evidence there is to support this claim is the mistake of A and J cars Enfield not being blocked out, as listed above in this document. As the same as many of the other cad numbers relating to this ASBO case, to which if it was not for this error A and J cars, being not blocked out like the rest of cad 2410 8th Jun 14, Mr Simon Cordell would never of been able to prove this part of his innocents in the ASBO case being put towards himself.

· CAD 943 7th June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell.

· CAD 2649 1st June 2014 == MISSING Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date, neither was he being accused of in police statements off involvement. Requested by Mr Simon Cordell.

· CAD 2989 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of any involvement. Requested by Mr Simon Cordell.

· CAD 3274 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of involvement. Requested by Mr Simon Cordell.

· CAD 3754 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been

accused in police statements of involvement.

· CAD 5586 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of involvement.

· CAD 7983 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of involvement.

· CAD 8190 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of involvement.

· CAD 8528 1st June 2014 == MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell Crown Road Mr Simon Cordell was not even present on this date as well, neither has he been accused in police statements of involvement.

· CAD 6851 7th June 2014 MISSING & Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 1012 MISSING Crown Road Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 1380 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 1571 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2456 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2906 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 3326 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 4015 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 4809 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 8931 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 10844 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2525 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2757 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

24

224,

Edited part 5.pdf

· CAD 3436 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 4322 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 10311 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 3838 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 5571 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2291 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 2904 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 4598 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· CAD 10462 7th June 2014 MISSING Requested by Mr Simon Cordell

· 8th June 2014

CAD

930

8h

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1646

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2456

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2766

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2904

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

5644

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1081

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1667

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2608

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2796

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2942

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3179

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3350

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

5897

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

749

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1206

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1768

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2654

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2854

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2845

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2948

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3194

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3515

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1341

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

169

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

1631

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2764

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

2890

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3132

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3260

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

CAD

3946

8th

June

2014

MISSING

Requested

by

Mr

Simon

Cordell

· Only 36 have been provided, this is the list of incident numbers with cads below.

· CAD1047 7th June 2014 At 01:59 Police 999 officers on duty, was mistaken to believe, that Mr Simon Cordell was with Tyrone Benjamin his brother and that they had been seen together earlier in the day, before any police officers had arrived, to have been able to of seen them or any 999 call, (cad 1012) is the first police intelligence in relation to Progress way contained within the first applicants bundle and is time stamped at 01:53 dated 7th June 14.

· CAD 1323 7th June 2014 at 02:41 I had arrived by 01:50 on the 8th June and had walked out of the side alley leading up to the gate of progress way alongside tops tiles, with Inspector Hamill as stated in his statement (page 33) he states “we all moved to the bottom of progress way “I then Left in my car after waiting for my friend to give him his key back by 02:20 on the 8th June 2014.

25

225,

Edited part 5.pdf

CAD 1608 7th June 2014 at 03:34 I was not present at this time.

CAD 1722 7TH June 2014 at 03:58 I was not present at this time. (P154) wrong address.

CAD 1816 7th June 2014 at 04:15 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 2141 7th June 2014 at 05:50 I was not present at this time. P160 wrong address, Repeat caller.

CAD 2672 7th June 2014 at 08:16 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 10471 7th June 2014 at 22:45 I er.

CAD 2255 7th June 2014 at 06:24 I was not present at this time. P165 wrong address, Repeat caller

CAD 3005 7th June 2014 at 9:22 I was not present at this time.

CAD 5206 7th June 2014 at 13:57 I was not present at this            time.

CAD 10967 7th June 2014 at 23:25 I was not present at this time. P250 grid no wrong address, Repeat caller

CAD 2271 7th June 2014 at 06:27 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller

CAD 2601 7th June 2014 at 08:09 I was not present at this time. P187 wrong address, Repeat caller

CAD 2854 7th June 2014 at 08:56 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 3037 7th June 2014 at 9:20 I was not present at this time. P179 wrong address Repeat caller.

CAD 4323 7th June 2014 at 12:25 I was not present at this time.

CAD 10393 7th June 2014 at 22:38 I was not present at this time. P225 wrong address.

CAD 10506 7th June 2014 At 22:44 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 2637 7th June 2014 at 08:18 I was not present at this            time.

CAD 3252 7th June 2014 at 10:07 I was not present at this            time.

CAD 3986 7th June 2014 at 11:47 I was not present at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 8841 7th June 2014 at 20:07 I er.

CAD 10742 7th June 2014 at 23:01 I was not present at this time. P246 grid no: wrong address, Repeat caller.

8th June 2014

CAD 340 8th June 2014 at 00:29 I was not present at this time. This cad has also got no Att Location p260.

CAD 3151 8th June 2014 at 09:08 I was not present at this time. P278 grid no Crown Road: wrong address.

CAD 3319 8th June 2014 at 09:39 I was not present at this time. P283 grid no Crown Road: wrong address.

CAD 625 8th June 2014 at 00:54 I was not present  at this time.

CAD 47 8th June 2014 at 00:00 I was not present    at this time. Repeat caller.

CAD 793 8th June 2014 at 00:10 I was not present  at this time. This cad has also got no Att

Location p268.

CAD 2410 8th June 2014 at 05:03 I was not present at this time. This cad has also got no Att Location p273.

CAD numbers 10471 / 10481 / 10506 of the 7th June 2014 = Please take note every day the call centre starts at CAD 01 and goes up to the average of 10,742 to 15,000 callers per day. (We can tell this by the number of Cads incident numbers supplied, within this bundle and the supported evidence supplied such as (Exhibits 1, 2, 3)

On the average with 300 callers per hour as time stamped below.

If (CAD number / Incident Number 10481 7th June 14) is the 10,481 call of the 7th June 2014 time stamped 22:47

How can a CAD numbered (CAD 10506 7th June 14) externally inputted 25 calls later, have an earlier time stamp of the 7th June 2014 at 22:44 hours.

26

226,

Edited part 5.pdf

(CAD number 4323 7th June 2014 at 12:25) is 1 hour and 42 minutes from (CAD incident 4325 7th

June 14) and only had 33 people call when (CAD 4323 7th June 14) should have been on the average of 550 people calling the call centre, as proven in the minutes of the cads below:

All cads relating to the 2nd 1st 6th June are missing. (And are requested by Mr Simon Cordell)

Date

7th June 2014

Incident no 1012

number

01

Time

01:53

People 35

 

7th June 2014

1047

02

01:59

Mins 6

 

7th June 2014

1323

03

02:41

People 286

 

7th June 2014

1608

04

03:34

Mins 40

 

7th June 2014

1722

05

03:58

People 245

 

7th June 2014

1816

06

04:15

Mins 53

 

7th June 2014

2141

07

05:50

People 114

 

7th June 2014

2255

08

06:24

Mins 24

 

7th June 2014

2271

09

06:27

People 94

 

7th June 2014

2601

10

08:09

Mins 17

 

7th June 2014

2637: p187 to 190:

11 (Error)

08:18

People 325

 

7th June 2014

2672: p196 to 198:

12 (Error)

08:16

Mins 1h: 35 Mins

Incorrect

7th June 2014

2854

13

08:56

People 114

 

7th June 2014

3005: p203 to 205:

14 (Error)

09:22

Mins 34

 

7th June 2014

3037: p179 to 183:

15 (Error)

09:20

People 16

 

7th June 2014

3252

16

10:07

Mins 3

 

7th June 2014

3986

17

11:47

People 33

 

7th June 2014

4323

18

12:25

Mins 1h: 42 Mins

Incorrect

7th June 2014

4325

19

Missing

People 36

 

7th June 2014

5206

20

13:57

Mins 9

 

7th June 2014

8841

21

20:07

People 45

 

7th June 2014

10393

22

22:38

Mins 2

 

7th June 2014

10462

23

 

People 182

 

7th June 2014

10471

24

22:45

Mins 40

 

7th June 2014

10481: p233 to 237

: 25 (Error)

22:47

People 151

 

7th June 2014

10506: p238 to 241

: 26 (Error)

22:44

Mins 26 = Incorrect earlier time than

the previous incident number 7th June 2014 10742

27

23:01

People

 

7th June 2014

10844

28 Missing

Mins 17

 

7th June 2014

10967

29

23:25

People 102

 

END OF List of available cads for the 7th June 2014 exhausted.

Pages Numbers 143 to 146 Contained within the Applicants Bundle

No police sent to Location (check still)

Incident no / CAD.1012 7th June 2014 entered at 01:53 End at 02:03 by c723401 Police officer A/PS Charles Miles states on (page 31) that he see Mr Simon Cordell on Saturday the 7th June 2014 at 0203Hrs, when in fact this was on the 8th June at around 1:50 am Hrs as A/Insp Hamill stats on (page 32)

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Victim

Att Location: OPPOSITE Progress way Great Cambridge Road / The ESSO Petrol Station.

Inc Location: OPPOSITE Progress way

Call Location: (Blocked out) Please can this be explained

Criss: Not Crime (Why was this not Crime

Opening: Noise Repeat Caller: not sure

Has this happened before: = (Yes = No Date or Time)

Explicitly linked to: (CAD no. 943 June 2014 =Missing from file.)

27

227,

Edited part 5.pdf

Caller states: some kids have broken into a property and seem to be having a rave no violence just lots of kids.

Reference to Pages 147 to 151

No police sent to Location check This CAD is related to.

(P147 CAD 1323 07th Jun 14 at 02:41 P333)

(CAD 10481 07th June 14 at 22:47 p264)

(CAD 625 08th June 2014 at 00:54) Are all the same caller as 32 Crown Road were a party was happening on the 6th 7th 8th June as well as previous, weeks from back dated month’s from the 6th 7th 8th of June 2014 evidence provided from Enfield Local Council freedom of information Act. (Inclusive of Bundle)

(CAD 3319 08th June 2014 p 283 to 286) shows another occupied premises having party’s on Southbury road, including Progress Way and 32 Crown RD all on the same dates of the (8th June 2014 on page 284) which is address (318-328 Southbury rd.) Comments state; these sites have a fridge roof. A meeting, which was held at 129A (Southbury RD with members of the police and public from address 1 - 350 to 2 - 182 and 1 - 104 Southbury Rd , including address on page 285 which includes Lincoln Road)

(Incident no / CAD.1323) 07th June 2014 at 02:41 End at 02:36 by c700591 decision maker 528ye

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Victim

Att Location: Lincoln Road

Inc Location: Lincoln Road

Call Location: (Blocked OUT) Crown Road

Criss: (Blank) (Mr Simon Cordell asks why this is blank.)

Opening: Noise

Reference to Pages 147 to 151 Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 (p174 to 178)

Caller states:

Can hear load music, it has been going on for two hours.

There was similar problem’s a few months ago.

Possibly an illegal rave

Reference to Pages 152 to 154

No police sent to Location

Incident no / CAD.1722 07th June 2014 at 03:58 End at 04:11 by c717560

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Witness

Att Location: BLOCKED OUT = Wrong Location

Inc Location: BLOCKED OUT = Page 154 Incident location released =24 Orchared Terrance = (next to Ponders End train station.) Mr Simon Cordell asks why this is like this)

Call Location: (Blocked Out) Mr Simon Cordell asks why this is like this.

Criss: Not Crime (Mr Simon Cordell asks why this is like this.)

Opening: Suspicious Circumstances Repeat Caller: No Details

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 (Contaminated as equal as the rest of the incident numbers)

Caller states: Can here smashing glass from a factory Caller can see one long haired person u/k m or f with rucksack.

Reference to Pages 155 to 159

No police sent to Location check

Incident no / CAD.1816 07th June 2014 at 04:15 End at 04:28 by c720781

Rec by: Ordinary

28

228,

Edited part 5.pdf

Call Type: Third Party = (Mr Simon Cordell asks whether this should carry less weight in court) Att Location: Progress Way (How can this be possible, as the grid reference should not be in the same grid reference, if coming from a local house as this is an industrial estate.)

Inc Location: Progress Way Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime Opening: Noise

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 ===

Caller states:

Noise coming from a factory passed the Toyota garage off the A10 Has this happened before: =yes Repeat Caller: = Yes

· In Reference to Pages 160 to 164 Contained within the applicants bundle

No police sent to Location

Incident no / CAD.2141 07th June 2014 at 05:50 End at 06:18 by c720781

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Third party

Att Location: Hardy Way Enfield = (This Address is in Gordon Hill Bush Hill Park and is in the wrong Location)

Inc Location: Hardy Way Call Location: Blocked Out Criss: = Not Crime Opening: Noise

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 = (This cad would have to be contaminated as it is linked to Gordon Hill Bush Hill Park and is to far from Progress way.)

Caller states:

Rave behind his house.

Has any think like this happened before: = Yes =

Repeat caller: = Yes =

· Reference to Page 165 to 169 contained within the applicant’s case bundle.

No police sent to Location

Incident no / CAD.2255 07th June 2014 at 06:24 End at 06:31 by c722310

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Third Party =

Att Location: Leighton Road Bush Hill Park = Wrong Location = same as repeat caller for CAD 2141 7th Jun 14 (This cad would have to be contaminated as it is linked to Leighton Road Bush Hill Park and is to far from Progress way.)

Inc Location: Leighton Road Bush Hill Park

Call Location: (Blocked Out) (Why is this Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime (why not)

Opening: Noise Repeat caller: = Yes

Explicitly linked to: Cad no. 1047 June 2014 ===

Caller states: Caller states music for 45 mins, believes it is a rave.

(Last time this happened it was coming from the flats at Aylet Croft) This Person is not sure were the music was coming from them self. Believed it was Aylet Croft not Progress Way)

Has any think like this happened before: = yes =

How long ago: = Last summer

· Reference to Pages 170 to 173

No police sent to Location again

Incident no / CAD.2271 07th June 2014 at 06:27 End at 06:33 by c722280

Rec by: Emergency

29

229,

Edited part 5.pdf

Call Type: Third Party = (weight carried)

Att Location: Progress Way

Inc Location: Progress Way (location is the same as progress way)

Call Location: (Blocked Out) =

Criss: = Not Crime (why was it not Crime)

Opening: ASB Nuisance Repeat caller: = yes

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 =

Caller states:

There has been a rave going on all night

Has any think like this happened before: = Yes = Happened about a year ago.

· Reference to Pages 174 to 179

(Police sent to Location before 1:00 am on the 07th June 2014 and again checked at 3:05:53 07th June 2014 to check all is ok at Progress Way)

Incident no / CAD.1047 07th June 2014 at 01:59 End at 10:56 by c228199

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Name: PC 239YE Shinnick = this is a police officer.

Call Type: Witness Staff on Duty Att Location: Progress Way Inc Location: (Blocked Out)

Call Location: Enfield Patrol Centre = this is the Metropolitan police patrol centre Criss: = (Blanked Out)

Opening: Police Generated Source Activity

Explicitly linked to CAD no. 943, 07 June 2014 = (Missing)

· CAD no. 943 07 June 2014  = (Missing)

· CAD no. 1323, 07 June 2014 = we have This CAD pages147 to 151

· CAD no. 1380, 07 June 2014 = (Missing)

· CAD no. 1571, 07 June 2014 = (Missing)

· CAD no. 1608, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD pages 184 to 186

· CAD no. 1722, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD pages 152 to159

· CAD no. 1816, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD

· CAD no. 2141, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD pages 160 to164

· CAD no. 2255, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD pages 165 to 169

· CAD no. 2271, 07 June 2014 == we have This CAD pages 179 to173

· CAD no. 2291, 07 June 2014 == (Missing, no were to be found apart from on page 174.)

· Police Officer Caller states:

Rave at location organizers Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell have attended earlier there are about 200 people at the location all well natured and there is sufficient fire and safety equipment. Inspector Hamill made aware. Inspector Hamill states that he sees me coming out of the gates page 33, to which he Is mistaken as I was just arriving.

· Point 1:

Tyrone could not have been present due to his injures; he was involved in an ATR on his moped dated the 10th April 2014. He was air lifted to hospital. He had life changing injuries due to the accident.

· Point 2:

On the date of the 7th Mr Simon Cordell did not attended the premises of Progress Way and did do so on the 8th June 2014 but never went in, due to meeting police officers and people in attendance with the police, who Mr Simon Cordell now knows to be council officers, who he had meet as the police were talking to the occupiers of the premises at the front gates, as Mr Simon Cordell approached the occupied building as stated in witness statements.

· Point 3:

30

230,

Edited part 5.pdf

The police believed that Mr Simon Cordell came from inside the land, CAD 1047 page 174 to 179 notes a call made by a police officer about Mr Simon Cordell and Tyrone being in attendance and seen earlier when cad 1047 clearly states that this the police first point of contact and intelligence about the situation, so how can this be possible as for fact Mr Simon Cordell was first seen when he was arriving to meet a friend.

· Point 4

CAD 1047 states 01:59 07th June 2014 page 174 to 179 clearly states that police were not given entry to the premises also noted on (page 33) in police statements.

· Point 5

CAD 1047 state at 01:59 a call was made and states Police attended on the 7th so this would have been before Mr Cordell attended too progress way to give his friend his keys as he left them at Mr Cordell’s flat beforehand and needed them back, this is why Mr Simon Cordell’s friend had called him.

· Point 6

Police statements state (page 32) A / Inspector Hamill 201566 dated 06/08/2014 leading on to the 7th and the 8th of June 2014 was on duty early hours of the 6th going on to the 7th June 2014 and attended progress way. He was back on duty the 7th June 2014 and again attended at around 200 hours with two environment officers he believes he spoke to some body and asked them for an organizer then he Mr Simon Cordell and accused him of being an organiser to which A Insp Hamill admits that Mr Simon Cordell would not speak to any officers, so if Mr Cordell had come to speak to him because somebody had informed him that a police officer wanted to speak to him as in pretence as if he was the organizer then Mr Simon Cordell would have been sure to have spoken to him or it would be logical that he would have never approached him in the beginning, Mr Simon Cordell will explain that police are mistaken to take Mr Cordell as to of being the person to which someone had gone to get or he would have come back with that person.

In all the statements it seems the police have their days mixed up they say they me and Tyrone was seen by officers but have never given a name of an officer who was meant to have seen us. But the fact is they could not have seen Mr Cordell and Tyrone walking into the building as they were not there, and neither was Tyrone. It was even said at the trial by the applicant that it was not the 7th but early hours of the 8th which was the case I went on the 08th to give my friend his keys as he called me.)

Point 7

The party was advertised on face book, (Evidence) provided that the party started on the 6th June 2014 and this is also proved in (CAD 10967 at 23:35 on 07th June 2014. p250 to 254 on page 252 (Caller states that this happened last night)

Reference to Pages 179 to 183

No police sent to Location

Incident no / CAD.3037 07th June 2014 at 09:20 End at 09:42 by c724202

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Witness Att Location: Enfield Opening: Noise Nuisance Repeat caller: = Yes

Inc Location: Enfield Safe House (This location is too far for noise to be from Progress Way, The noise was in fact coming from a party that was on crown road which is much closer, This party was opposite Southbury train station Crown Road related to cads/ incident numbers:

· CAD: 32 08th June 2014

· CAD: 3319 08th June 2014 (south bury road / Crown RD Book 33) pages 283

· CAD 11822 08th June 2014 (south bury train station /Crown Rd) pages 302 to 304

· CAD 3151 08th June 2014 (south bury road / Crown RD pages 278 to 282)

· CAD 47 8th June 2014 (safe hall unit, grid 534380,195513 pages 255 to 259)

31

231,

Edited part 5.pdf

· CAD: 2410 08th June 2014 (A&J cars pages 273 to 277 on page 276)

· CAD: 5206 07TH JUNE 2014 (This has been blocked out of Book 19)

· CAD: 2456 = All the cads / incident numbers that are in the ASBO folder, when check are Explicitly linked to each other, police (CADS 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Crown Road as well as cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day Crown rd (CADS 340 8th June 14) (CAD 793 8th June 14) (CAD 2410 8th June 14) (CAD 3151 8th June 14) (CAD 3319 8th June 14).

· CAD 3037 07th June 2014 Enfield Safe Store grid ref 534375,198125 this is miles to far and is closer to Crown Road party. Local council freedom of information act (Exhibit)

· A & j cars CAD number (pages271 to 282) is related to crown rd.

Street name Tynemouth DR linked to CAD 2637

· CAD: 340 08th June blocked out book 28

· CAD: 793 08th June 2014 book 30

· CAD: 2410 08th June 2014 book 31

· CAD: 2601 07th June 2014 book 11 Ayley croft house party possible police or bailiff raid has happened before. This is gentlemen explained were he believes the sound is coming from and that is not of Progress Way.

· CAD: 1722 07th June 2014 Blocked out Linked to cad 1047 Opening: Noise Nuisance

Criss =

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 June 2014 ===

Caller states:

Many of the cads are missing from the 93 incident numbers I am being accused of to which I only have 36 CADs in regards to this ASBO application, including CADs relating to the 6th that are mentioned including the 7th and the 8th June and all the 1st and 2nd June including Any with the ATT Location and INC location marked as progress way or just simply Blocked out should have been provided so I can stand to my rights in a fair and speedy trial.

Reference to Pages 184 to 186

Book 10 No police sent to Location caller told police aware

Incident no / CAD.1608 07th June 2014 at 03:34 End at 03:37 by c721222

Rec by: Emergency

Call Type: Third Party

Repeat call: = no

Att Location: Great Cambridge Road / Progress Way Inc Location: Great Cambridge Road / Progress Way Call Location: BLOCKED OUT========

Criss: = BLANK

Opening: Suspicious Circumstances

Explicitly linked to: CAD no. 1047 / 8841 June 2014 === Both CADS are in the ASBO application. Caller states:

Caller states there is rave going on in a warehouse next to his.

Reference to Pages 187 to 190

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 2601 07th June 2014 at 08:09 End at 08:15 by c723097

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim

Opening: Rowdy or Inconsiderate behaviour

Att Location: Cambridge road/Ayley Croft Enfield grid ref 534219,195697 (Location is wrong for progress way)

Inc Location: Cambridge road/Ayley Croft Enfield grid ref 534219,195697 Location is wrong Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: (Blank)

32

232,

Edited part 5.pdf

Explicitly linked to: (CAD 2456 07th June 2014) and is (MISSING) and contaminated to Crown Road party on the same day as (Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cads 793 8th June 14) (Cads 2410 8th June 14) (Cads 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: =

Caller states:

At 08:30 Last night on the 6th June 2014 there was a lot of noise and it is till going on.

Has this happened before? No Caller States:

4 +5 cars are in and out causing a nuisance.

He thinks a raid is going on.

He can see a red Mini with trims on.

There is also a removal lorry.

List of Cads that are found to be related: Cad2456, Cad2637, Cad2255

· Reference to Pages 190 to 195

No police sent to Location checked: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 2637 07th June 2014 at 08:18 End at 08:26 by c722296

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Victim Opening: Noise

Att Location: Progress Way Enfield warehouse Inc Location: Progress Way Enfield warehouse Call Location: BLOCKED OUT========

Criss: = BLANK

Explicitly linked to (Cads2456 7th June 014), (Cad 303 7th June 2014) and (Cad 3037 7th June) is in

the ASBO Application related to (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) which is Missing and believed to be contaminated to a party that was on the day of 32 crown Road related to (Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14)( Cad 3151 8th June 14) ( Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = yes 7/6/2014 Caller states:

Rave is still going on.

Police State they are already aware.

· Reference to Pages 196 to 198

No police sent to Location checked:

Incident no / CAD: 2672 07th June 2014 at 08:16 End at 08:33 by c724203

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim

Opening: Burglary other than dwelling (Suspects on premises) same as Cad 3005 7th June 2014 (the time

stamp is in Error), police aware since the 6th June 2014

Att Location: Progress Way Enfield

Inc Location: Progress Way Enfield

Call Location: (Blanked out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: Explicitly linked to (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) is Missing and contaminated to Progress Way as well as CADs to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day crown Rd (Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Blank Caller states:

(Page 197) caller states reporting an illegal rave = Why burglary if caller states this.

· Reference to Pages 199 to 202

No police sent to Location check:

Incident no / CAD: 2854 07th June 2014 at 08:56 End at 08:33 by c724203

Rec by: Emergency

33

233,

Edited part 5.pdf

Call Type: Third Party Opening: Noise

Att Location: Progress Way Enfield Inc Location: Progress Way Enfield Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: Explicitly linked to (Cads 2456 07th June 2014) and are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day Crown Road (Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cads 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (CAD 3151 8th June 14) (CAD 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

Caller states illegal rave is still going on.

· Reference to Pages 203 to 205

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 3005 07th June 2014 at 09:22 End at 09.29 by c723097

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim

Opening: Burglary other than a Dwelling (Suspects on Premises) Same as (Cad 2672)

Att Location: Progress Way Enfield Inc Location: Progress Way Enfield Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) which is Missing and contaminated to Progress Way as well as Cads to 32 Crown Road party on the same day Crown road (Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

That a rave is happening and that there is drugs.

Music still ongoing

<> 

· Reference to Pages 206 to 209

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 3252 07th June 2014 at 10:07 End at 10:18 by c723258

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Third Party

Opening: Rowdy or Inconsiderate behaviour

Att Location: Progress Way Enfield

Inc Location: Progress Way Enfield

Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = No Caller states:

Members off the public are urinating and being, inconsiderate with there behaviour.

Caller believes they are taking drugs.

Caller states that the warehouse has been empty over one year. They put the block out side to say the premises are un-occupied.

Caller would like to stay anonymous.

· Reference to Pages 210 to 213

34

234,

Edited part 5.pdf

No police sent to Location checked: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 3986 07th June 2014 at 11:47 End at 11:52 by c718168

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Victim Opening: Noise Att Location: Progress Way Inc Location: Progress Way Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes 2 Years ago Caller states:

There is an illegal rave in a warehouse going on.

· Reference to Pages 214 to 217

No police sent to Location checked: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 4323 07th June 2014 at 12:25 End at 12:33 by c723094

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Victim

Opening: Noise

Att Location: Progress Way

Inc Locations: Progress Way

Call Location: BLOCKED OUT=

Criss: = BLANK

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = First time caller page 216 Caller states:

He claims there is an illegal rave at the rear of his house been going on since 02:00 this morning.

· Reference to Pages 218 to 220

No police sent to Location checked: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 5206 07th June 2014 at 13:57 End at 14:05 by c192061

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim

Opening: Rowdy or Inconsiderate behaviour Att Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown RD Inc Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown RD Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blank)

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = No Caller states:

There is loud music from rear of house.

· Reference to Pages 221 to 224

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 8841 07th June 2014 at 20:07 End at 20:12 by 079328 / L3144

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim

35

235,

Edited part 5.pdf

Opening: Noise Att Location: Progress way Inc Location: Progress way Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad1608, 2456 7th June 2014) = (Cad 2456 7th June 14) are MISSING (Cad1608) is ok.

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

Rave is happing people are climbing over his back garden.

Has this happened before: yes, no date and time?

· Reference to Pages 225 to 233

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 10393 07th June 2014 at 22:38 End at 22:57 by c723886

Rec by: Emergency

Call Type: Victim

Opening: Robbery Bladed Article

Att Location: Great Cambridge behind Top Tiles

Inc Location: Great Cambridge behind Top Tiles

Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = No Caller states:

This Gentleman went to an illegal rave and has been robbed by males with knife.

There is a mention of a carjacking but no information, as it has been blocked out.

No response all police cars unavailable.

Caller states:

2 x Black Males 1 x White Male

1 x Mixed Race Male = Mr Simon Cordell was not present at the time of 22:38 till 22:57 noted by police.

Knife was about 6 inches 2 x Black Males held his hand while others took his money = Ł22 pounds sterling.

Caller wants to stay anon Police went to scene.

· Reference to Pages 233 to 237

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Related to P147 (Cad1323 07th Jun 14) at 02:41 P333 (Cad 10481 07th June 14) at 22:47 p264 (Cad 625 08th June 14) at 00:54.

Incident no / CAD: 10481 07th June 2014 at 22:47 End at 22:51 by c722309

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Victim Opening: Noise

Att Location: (Blocked Out) but is Progress way, GRID REFFRENCE OF 534657, 195453 Inc Location: (Blocked Out) but is Progress way, GRID REFFRENCE OF 534657, 195453 Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

36

236,

Edited part 5.pdf

Repeat Caller: = Yes 07/06/2014 Caller states:

A rave is going on in a factory down the road, the music is very load.

· Reference to Pages 238 to 241

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 1056 07th June 2014 at 22:44 End at 22:51 by c720782

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Third Party Opening: Noise Att Location: Progress way Inc Location: Progress way Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

Caller states rave has been going on since last night and he can get no sleep.

Has this happened before: = Yes, No Date and Time

· Reference to Pages 242 to 245

No police sent to Location checked: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 10471 07th June 2014 at 22:44 End at 22:51 by C720782

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Witness Opening: Noise Att Location: Progress way Inc Location: Progress way Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes 07/06/2014 Caller states:

Noise started again at Progress Way

· Reference to Pages 246 to 249

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 10742 07th June 2014 at 23:01 End at 23:11 by C101091

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Third Party

Opening: Noise

Att Location: Lincoln RD Enfield

Inc Location: Lincoln RD Enfield

Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = yes, No Date and Time P 248 first quarter (Blocked Out)

Caller states:

37

237,

Edited part 5.pdf

Believes a warehouse has been making noise since last night.

The Local Council is aware.

THTS TS THE LAST 7TH OF JUNE 2014

Reference to Pages 250 to 254 No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / Cad:10967 07th June 2014 at 23:25 End at 23:38 by C717554

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Third Party Opening: Noise

Att Location: Great Cambridge RD Grid 535375,202125 = (the grid number takes you to Cheshunt miles to far.)

Inc Location: Cambridge RD Grid 535375,202125 ==the grid number takes you to Cheshunt miles to far Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes 6th June 2014 Page 252 (Blocked Out)

Caller states:

Caller says lots of cars turning up and can hear music.

50 people down the back.

PART 3

THIS IS THE FIRST 8th June 14

There are 37 CAD/ Incident numbers for the 8th June 2014, to which there is only 7 in the ASBO application and only Cad Number 47 represents Progress Way, the rest represent 32 Crown RD another premises being occupied under section 144 lazppo 10 minutes away from progress way.

By the statistics, the call centre receives on the 8th June 2014, 300 people call per hour. Cads 2410 and 3151 should equal 741 callers the same as Cads 793 to Cad 2410 Cad 3151 Caller is 3 HOURS: 25 Minutes, please can this be explained.

Date

Incident no

number

Time

 

 

8th June14

47

01

00:00

Progress Way

People 293

8th June14

340

02

00:29

Crown RD

Mins 29

8th June14

625

03

00:54

Crown RD

People 285

8th June14

793

04

01:10

Crown RD

Mins 24

8th June14

2410

05

05:35

Crown RD

People 168

8th June14

3151

06

09:08

Crown RD

Mins 16

8th June14

3319

07

09:39

Crown RD

People 1617

Mins 3hours:25mins People 168 Mins 03hours:33mins People 325

Mins 1h: 35mins (Bad) People 168 Mins 31

Reference to Pages 255 to 259

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / Cad: 47 /08th June 2014 at 00:00 End at 00:11 by C720796

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Third Party

38

238,

Edited part 5.pdf

Opening: Noise Att Location: Progress way Inc Location: Progress way Call Location: (Blocked Out Criss: = (Blocked Out)

Explicitly linked to (Cad. 169 8th June 2014) and (Cad 2456 June 2014) which is MISSING: = (Cad169 missing from every were)

Repeat Caller: = Yes 07/06/2014 Caller states:

Caller would like to report an illegal rave that is going on and has been for the past two hours.

· Reference to Pages 260 to 263

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / Cad 340 08th June 2014 at 00:29 End at 00:32 by C080128

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Third Party

Opening: Rowdy or inconsiderate Behaviour

Att Location: (Blocked Out) = No Grid

Inc Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road

Call Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = No Caller states:

Illegal rave is happening; this is not the problem people peeing in her garden.

· Reference to Pages 264 to 267      

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Related to P147 (Cad1323 07th Jun 14) at 02:41 P333 (Cad 10481 07th June 14) at 22:47 (p264 Cad 625)

Incident no / CAD: 625 08th June 2014 at 00:54 End at 01:11 by C060648

Rec by: Ordinarily Call Type: Victim Opening: Noise

Att Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road Inc Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road Call Locn: Lincoln rd to far wrong Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

Loud music has started up again from the estate.

· Reference to Pages 268 to 272

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / Cad: 793 08th June 2014 at 01:10 End at 01:30 by C722768

Rec by: Ordinary

Call Type: Third Party

Opening: Rowdy crowd

Att Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown RD

Inc Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown RD

39

239,

Edited part 5.pdf

Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes 07/06/14 Caller states:

Caller wishes to make a noise complaint it is keeping him up.

The same thing happened last night.

<> 

· Reference to Pages 273 to 277

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 2410 08th June 2014 at 05:03 End at 05:43 by C723395

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Witness Opening: Drugs

Att Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road Inc Location: (Blocked Out) = Crown Road Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = Not Crime

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Happened before: = No

Page 276 == A& J cars Enfield ===Crown Rd ==I would not have been able to prove my innocence in this case if it was not for A & J CARS being left in text, and no this is the same for many of the other Cads contained within the ASBO application.

Caller states:

Drugs are being openly sold all over the street, caller noticed on the way home.

· Reference to Pages 278 to 282

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 3151 08th June 2014 at 20:07 End at 20:12 by 079328 / L3144

Rec by: Ordinary Call Type: Third Party Opening: (Contact Record)

Att Location: South Bury RD / Crown Rd = Crown RD Inc Location: South Bury RD / Crown Rd = Crown RD Call Location: (Blocked Out)

Criss: = (Blocked Out)

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: = Yes Caller states:

Caller States Rave is still going, states she still cannot get any sleep, she has contacted environmental health, but they say they close at 03:00 hours.

Previous commands noted by police.

· Reference to Pages 283 To 286

No police sent to Location check: Bad

Incident no / CAD: 3319 08th June 2014 at 09:39 End at 20:12 by 079328 / L3144

Rec by: Emergency Call Type: Witness

40

240,

Edited part 5.pdf

Opening: Noise

Att Location: South Bury RD / Crown Rd = Crown RD Inc Location: South Bury RD / Crown Rd = Crown RD

Call Location: 93 BROADLANDS AVENUE, ENFIELD = Wrong location it relates to Crown RD Caller TEL: ==0208-443-4251 Name: MR Jennings Criss: = Blanked Out

Explicitly linked to: (Cad 2456 07th June 2014) are MISSING and contaminated to Progress Way as well as (Cads to 32 Crown Rd party on the same day as Crown road Cads 340 8th June 14) (Cad 793 8th June 14) (Cad 2410 8th June 14) (Cad 3151 8th June 14) (Cad 3319 8th June 14.)

Repeat Caller: =

Caller states:

END OF CADS FOR THE 8th June 2014

Reference to Pages 2 TO 3 also pages 77 to 94 5: = 20.06.14

Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and/ supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at 1 Falcon Park, Neasden Lane, NW10

(A)

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was at home; Address Burncroft avenue Enfield and did not cause any Anti-social behaviour. He will also State that he did attended a friend’s home address, who had hired equipment of himself and that he had hired the equipment in good faith, Mr Simon Cordell will also state that he attended the premises of (1 Falcon Park), this was due to police involvement, after he was contacted by his friend at the time of; 01:00am, Mr Simon Cordell will sate that he was travelling that day in his vehicle for 2 hours of the 5 hours 15 mins before arrival to (1 Falcon park and arrived at around 03:00, as Mr Simon Cordell was asked to collect his equipment. Mr Cordell will then State that he went home by 05:15 hours and was told by police to collect his equipment at a later date, to which he did do.

(B)

At no point is Mr Simon Cordell being accused of acting in an anti-social manner on the 20:06:14 within the ASBO application.

(C)

There are no Cad numbers in the ASBO application in regard to 1 Falcon park,

(D)

Mr Simon Cordell has never been arrested for any incident, relating to1 Falcon park, as he was not involved in the organization, neither did he attended on 20:06:14 to the event in question.

· Face Book (Evidence)

• Reference to Pages 2 TO 3

6: = 19.07.14

Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and/ supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at Carpet Right Show room on the A10 Great Cambridge Road Enfield.

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Reference to Pages 2 TO 3

7: = 24.07.14

Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty ware house on Mill Marsh Lane

41

241,

Edited part 5.pdf

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

· Reference to Pages 2 TO 3 8: = 24.07.14 Mill Marsh Lane

Mr Simon Cordell admitted to police officers that he organized illegal raves

22. Alma Road INSP Edgoose that he was the organiser of any rave or that he hired sound equipment for the use in raves.

23. Carpet Right INSP Skinner that he was the organiser of any rave on the 19th July 2014

24. Ponders end

25. Progress way INSP Skinner that he was the organiser of any rave on the 7th 8th June 2014

26. Mill Marsh Lane

· Reference to Pages 2 TO 3

9: = 10.08.14

Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty ware house on Mill Marsh Lane

Mr Simon Cordell further actively sought to encourage a large group of people to breach the peace.

3. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not encourage a large group of people to break the front line of the police.

4. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not organise any raves at mill marsh lane.

5. Mr Simon Cordell will state that Mill Marsh Lane does in fact contain warehouses that were being occupied under section 144. (Evidence Google screen shoots (Evidence of picture taken at the location)

6. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not have Nitrous oxide and was in fact carry Co2 Canisters)

7. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not carry any sound equipment as he was travelling in his car)

Cases and dates mentioned on other pages INFO REPORT

· Reference to Pages 107 to 139 7th April 2013

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had two off road bikes going out on a Sunday with friends off road in and was pulled over by police officers and wrongfully accused of no insurance and public order. He provided evidence in court and his innocence was proven. This happened at the same point of time, as the proceeding of the ASBO application.

INFO REPORT

· Reference to Pages 104 to 106

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he caused, No anti-social behaviour.

24th May 2013 at the Old police station INFO REPORT

· Reference to Pages 101 to 103 Created by Alan Brown

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he caused; No Anti-Social Behaviour on the 20th April 2014 at 420 Hyde Park INFO REPORT

· Reference to Pages 140 to 142 INFO REPORT

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he caused, No Anti-Social Behaviour at Wood Wharf

· Reference to Pages 5 of the ASBO application as this is the first in the bundle.

Point 1.

On the 13th of august 2014 the local authority and the police held a consultation meeting in regard to myself Mr Simon Cordell and reached a decision to be taken in this matter.

42

242,

Edited part 5.pdf

· Mr Simon Cordell will state that; An anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) is / was a civil order made in the United Kingdom against a person who has been shown, on the balance of evidence, to have engaged in anti-social behaviour and the order was, introduced by Tony Blair in 1998, within the protocol to create a successful ASBO application it states Voluntary solutions and other remedies should be considered by the applicant prior to the multi-agency cases conference regarding ASBO’S. Any of the following voluntary solutions and alternative remedies should be considered prior to an application for an ASBO being considered such as.

Mediation.

Verbal and written warnings from the relevant authorities including Police Support Packages.

Diversionary schemes and activities.

Rehabilitation.

Criminal investigation.

The above list is not exhausted to it limit.

· Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has never been given the opportunity neither has he been asked to attended this meeting or another prior to this as this would have been the opportunity to talk to him about a pre warning or other actions that could have been taken.

point 2.

· made on page 5 is the statement that there was no conflicting work in progress with the local authority with the name of Mr Simon Cordell, which in fact is a conflict with the aim of the ASBO application under the crime disorder act 1998.

Mr Simon Cordell will (Exhibit) evidence supporting the fact that he was working at Kemp hall, as a Voluntary Worker and that this is leased and owned while under Enfield local Authority Management, at all times.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was working and had the keys and alarm code to the building and was a member on the board while trying to help Debbie the main manager at the time and (Exhibit) of emails as well as texts from her on his phone and computer on dates off 00/00/2014 to 00/00/2014. 

· Reference to Pages 1 application Point 1.

It is alleged that the Mr Simon Cordell has acted on the dates between Jan 2013 to 10th august 2014 in Enfield in an anti-social manner likely to cause harm alarm or distress to one or more person not of the same household as himself.

Witness Statement of Steve Elsmore

Witness statement Steve Elsmore who is a police officer attached to the anti-social behaviour team, Community Safety unit.

It is to be relied upon by members of the applicant’s application under section 1(c) of the crime and disorder act 1998, as amended by the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.

· This ASBO application does not meet the criteria and key elements as listed below.

· This is a Stand-alone ASBO application in the Magistrates' Court against Mr Simon Cordell.

· He will State; at no point of time, did he take any part in any form of Anti-Social Behaviour that he did cause or was likely to cause, neither did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour that was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

· Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

· Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he encourage any other people to commit any offence that might have caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

43

243,

Edited part 5.pdf

· At no point have I committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

The PNC holds information in regard to:

Arrests:

Point 1 about Arrests:

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not hold or organize illegal raves and did not on the dates in question. There is no reason; he will also state that he should not be accused of doing so on dates in question in this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has been wrongfully arrested at (CARPET RIGHT) Great Cambridge Road dated 19th Jul 2014 and detained for a possible breach of the peace, that Police have stated (‘believed might happen’) which at no point was Mr Simon Cordell involved in and that he did not commit any form of Anti-Social Behaviour, on the 19 July 2014. He has never been charged and that he was just detained and released with no option of an interview.

A police office Inspector Hill Moore states ("he believed, that by arresting me that no further raves would happen.)

Mr Simon Cordell Will State that he was not involved in the hiring of equipment or organization of any said rave, neither was he on the freehold of the land nor did he attending a rave as he is being accused of.

CAD Incident number 10635 19th Jul 14 pages 291 to 301 on page 294 clearly states that 20 white males and females attended the occupied premises, it also states all the address of the people police officers spoke to on the land contained by police within the building and outer surrounding gates of carpet right.

· Case Progression Point 1 about case progression:

M Simon Cordell will also state that he did not hold or organize illegal raves and that he is of Mix Race British Nationality, so there would be no truth in information leading to case progression held on the police national computer re Mr Simon Cordell on the dates in question.

· Previous convictions

Point 1 about previous convections:

Mr Simon Cordell also reverses his rights of the rehabilitation Act and state time spent is of all convictions on his criminal recorded. And that he is sure of the fact that of being that he does not have any previous conventions, nor has he been charged with any similar natured offences with relevance to an ASBO application.

There are errors on his PNC record which he has been trying to rectify and there for does not agree with any records of his criminal record

· Vehicle ownership

Point 1 about Vehicle ownership:

Mr Simon Cordell inserts and instates his Rights of the Freedom of Movement. As expressed in article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it asserts that:

A citizen of a state in which that Citizen is present has the liberty to travel, reside in, and/or work in any part of the state where one pleases within the limits of respect for the liberty and rights of others. At no point has Mr Simon Cordell used his vehicles to organize a rave or attended an illegal rave knowingly. (Mr Simon Cordell challenges the hearsay statements compiled by Steve Elesmore)

"His statement aims to show supporting evidence of the course of behaviour of Mr Simon Cordell acting in an Anti-Social Manner).

Steve Elesmore: Provides statements of hearsay obtained by police and witness, been witnessed first-hand by officers, been witness by independent witness. Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

Witness 1 — Inspector Hamill —R. O — 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead

DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday. (This was in fact early Hours of the 8th around 1:00am.)

44

244,

Edited part 5.pdf

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)

Witness - Pc Elsmore - R.O - 14;10 EIC Tab 6 - pg. ?14?

DEF XEX

Council (unreadable text) curfews (unreadable text) that PNC info on statement adds no (unreadable text) plobatory (unreadable text) value of info re: Witness being “afraid of D” What he puts down to the way he worded, but he meant that people actually are afraid of possibly giving evidence in court.

R V CORDELL

4

DEF

Counsel argues that officer’s statement is designed to cause on evidence reaction of this of no value and speculatory in nature.

DJ

How many calls from public did police receive?

Witness

In excess of 15 calls - how many to the same venue and not other address.

Doe’s does not know the number of callers that are in relation to each of these occasions.

On page 15 - Allegations re: Millmarsh Lane, evidence from officer not first-hand - relied on cads and another Intel.

Query Re: “3 massive nitrous tanks”

DJ

Were did you get such info officer.

Witness

From Page 65 - sergeant King - Crimit’s Re reports, other Intel but not from people at the venue.

COUNSEL

Officer you signed a statement of truth (unreadable text) to other witness statements.

DJ

We all know that on ASBO apps hearsay is allowed.

R V CORDELL

5

Counsel

Why did officer no and rely on Pc Kings Statements later than on the Crimit’s reported.

Officer no and involved in taking info from Pc King.

(Confesses he did it.)

He did not notice the discrepancy regarding official statements.

Have heard of Every Decibel Matters - They were advertising and I believe the D knows a member of the above company.

No evidence D is involved in running there operations.

No attempt has been made to speak to directors of company.

No reason to why you didn’t /contact the company.

I think from memory have met D once @ Edmonton police station.

(At Page 16 1st paragraph - not consistent to fact that he met him on the 7/6/2014)

All notes with cad number were listed from reports not officers’ own words - same applies from Cads that had no input.

Has not made attempts to contact owners of premises.

Officers unable to assist courts in relation to why statements were not signed on notebooks profiles.

Another example of doings put in statements to blacken Mr Cordell’s evidence in statement @ point 12, No convictions that of class A drugs unlike what’s written in

Statements - another example of untrue cut and past.

DJ

Ill ignore because no convections of class A drugs or supplying is present on the criminal record.

Counsel

You cannot assist with witness reliability of info contained, can you?

Can Intel be wrongfully inaccurate? No Officer

On that particular re post, it appears to be right.

I did not speak to Parcell he is force @ seven boroughs.

I believe he was not included in the email, because Intel (unreadable text) Email sent to LDE only.

Searched (unreadable text) for info on Cordell’s convections.

Moving on to statement on Page 30

Does PO investigating unit have more info than it is letting on?

Officer

No

Are you aware that Miss Cordell has spoken to other officers Re: Rave?

This suggests that you do not want DS Tanner to be examined on these proceedings because she has information Re knowledge of raves and them not being connected to W/D.

Spoke to Pc Tanner but not written what - spoke to (unreadable text) this year You have no recorded that you emailed her but then spoken to her.

Emails have been deleted and no copies keep on record.

Mr Simon Cordell challenges all the witness statements by all officers.

Mr Simon Cordell challenges all the witness statements by all independent witness.

(Mr Simon Cordell challenges the hearsay statements compiled by Steve Elesmore)

"Independent witness to frightened due to reprisal."

45

245,

Edited part 5.pdf

At no point Cad relating to the independent witness statements provide any information relating to offences or civil matters that should lead to an ASBO application that, Mr Simon Cordell should be convicted off as he is innocent in regards to organizing Illegal Raves or acting in a Manner likely to Cause Alarm Harm or Distress."

Mr Simon Cordell requires each witness to be called individually to give evidence at court.

Mr Simon Cordell will challenge the statements made by Steve Elesmore "Simon Cordell Is known to the police to have 28 convections a copy is available of his criminal record"

Mr Cordell feels that this is misleading due to the errors in his criminal record as police are aware. Evidence will be provided as proof of my statement.

Mr Simon Cordell feels that the data from the PNC representing his Criminal Recorded is information not true to its facts and is misleading. Mr Simon Cordell has been checking with the courts and challenged the validity of the PNC record and has been going throw the process of have 5 cases rectified due to critical errors that have been added in error that have had a major effect on my life even in the ASBO application being put against him self.

BOOK 6

ILLEGAL RAVES:

"Deaths at raves: the most resent was young 15-year-old male who died at a rave at Croydon"

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is deeply concerned as well as upset for any life lost and he is heartfelt for all effected by this tragedy of a young life lost.

Mr Cordell would like it noted that he was on curfew and had been since June 2013 for a case he has already proved his innocents in.

In regard to the statement below Mr Simon Cordell feel that this is Slander of character and the two statements below should not be justified as (1) he is not a drug pusher or user. (2) he was on curfew and had been since June 2013 and have not done any think wrong to be punished so.

Mr Simon Cordell feels that the statement, (Simon Cordell is free to continue to organize such events, is un-justified.)

"Raves are known for drugs."

"Please take note Mr Simon Cordell states he has nothing to do with drugs, but he has used cannabis for personal use." (It was also said in the court transcripts that this was in error.)

"This type of illegal event cannot be tolerated, and action must be taken to disrupt these events, and if a court order is not made then Simon Cordell is free to continue to organize such events."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he feels that this is also Slander of his name and darkens his character and is not true as he was on curfew when Andrew Rio sadly passed away and had been since June 2013. Mr Simon Cordell did not put on events on the days in question and does not see how this has any reference towards an Anti-Social order being put towards himself self as he did not act in an Anti-Social Manner.

Mr Simon Cordell was wrongly put on curfew for an offence and was found not guilty, at the same time of all the ASBO application and does not have internet at his house address this can be checked with any internet provider and the IP attached to any profiles, his mental health has suffered due to this, as he spent nearly a year on curfew for something he had not done, and just before his curfew was lifted by the court, my Nan became very unwell this had a big effect on him mentality, and he needed some time out, to then be accused of the offence within the application being brought against himself.

In the early June 2014 the family found out that Mr Cordell Nan was terminal ill with cancer, of the liver, spine and ribs. Mr Cordell was spending a great deal of time with his Nan and family, but mentality his health was suffering. So when he was invited out by friends, he took their offers.

Mr Simon Cordell’s Nan passed away on the 30/08/2014.

It was just after this The police came to his address, he states at that point of time he felt a bit unstable, at this time due to what was going on with his life and that of his families and the loss of his Nan.

46

246,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Cordell will state that he had put everything that he had gained out of life into the development of his company to take his mind of what was going on around him and because of contentious police harassment that he had locked himself away in his flat. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had friends around his flat on this day of the 12/09/2014, who were trying to help him, the police knocked on his front door. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he saw the police as he looked into the keyhole of his front door without opening the front door, as he was not expecting any others that day to his home.

I called out to ask them what they wanted as due to the problems he has had with the police over many years.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was worried at why the police had come to his flat. The police stated on that day that they wanted to talk to him, Mr Simon Cordell took caution as to opening the front door, he opened it a little to see what the police wanted to say to him, knowing his friends was watching for his safety, they then forcefully tried to put some think in to his flat without showing any ID, to which Mr Cordell closed the door before the police could do so and then told them that he would not accept anything from them.

The police then spoke to each other as to what to do, then Mr Simon Cordell will then state that he heard, one of the officers say just leave it outside by his door, which they did and then left.

Mr Simon Cordell would not allow anyone to get what had been left out side of the front of his flat front door and called his mother and told her what had happened, he was very unstable at this time due to what happened and his friends were trying to claim him down.

Mr Simon Cordell mother picked up what is now understood to be the ASBO application bundle documents. When she picked them up and read what was inside, she was shocked to see the data that was in the file and took it to the police station and collected a lost and found receipt for it (Exhibit 0000). Till date 08/02/2016 that folder is still in the police property room. Mr Simon Cordell does believe that this is a beach of the data protection act, as what was within the files held people(s) personal data. The files before being taken to the police station were in fact copied by way of being scanned of all files that was in the bundle. A letter of complaint (Exhibit 0000) was handed to the police.

Mr Simon Cordell states he could not be 100% sure of knowing if any documents were missing by the time his mother had picked the documents up. And that he has never been re-served them to date 08/0/2016.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not openly admitted to officers that he runs raves and has even bragged about it to the police.

Mr Simon Cordell will challenge this statement not to be true to its article, What Mr Cordell will state is as for a matter of fact, all that he ever talks about when talking to any person, it is of a good natured law obeying positive and productive future, of his life and business.

Reports involving Simon Cordell: Millmarsh Lane: 10th August 2014

Ref: yert00376728. PS king

· Mr Simon Cordell will State that he had no part in any of the "Young people milling around trying to locate the rave." Or who.

· " Was found on the North footway just by Gregg’s factory."

"At no point did Mr Cordell have any think to do with, organizing any event (s) on the 10th August 2014 nor did he travel with this group of people and that he had no effect in their decisions made on 10th August 2014. Neither did he take part in any Anti-Social."

"Strip of concrete completely open air."

"To my understanding and my own vision Tents was present as well as the occupiers, occupying the free hold of the land and the bricked premises located on the land. People were occupying a building on the

47

247,

Edited part 5.pdf

land one of many attached to the freehold of the land and was being occupied under section 144 LASPO. Mr Simon Cordell will State that he lives in his flat and has done so for eleven years so have no need to live anywhere else unless staying at a friends place of residence.

Police State that "Simon Cordell was at the gate on police arrival."

Mr Cordell will state "At no point did he have any reason to stand on the gate acting as a occupier, organizer or suppler of equipment or was he involved in the organization of any event on the 10'h August 2014.

"Police statement claims that Mr Simon Cordell’s car contained three massive nitrous oxide tanks." "The vehicle index MA57 LDY Mr Simon Cordell States; he was driving and was in fact carrying empty CO2 cylinders and did have safety stickers for the carriage of gas cylinders, placed on the boot in clear view for all pubic to see, as this is the regulations when carrying cylinders. Mr Simon Cordell does do so in accordance of the law, known as The International Carnage of Dangerous Goods by road (ADR), implemented by the Carriage Regulations and had broken no laws nor had he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour.

"When queried by police it is said that Mr Simon Cordell had admitted that he had seen the news article about the dangerous effects nitrous oxide has and how the government would probably regulate it."

"Mr Simon Cordell does agree to the statement made about talking about Nitrous oxide and the confiscation being partly about a news article and the government actions toward regulating it, at no time. He will also state that he was not asked if the cylinder’s he was carry was in fact nitrous oxide, nor was he asked if they were full, because the answer would have been that he was getting them refilled with co2 for welding."

Page 3 of 3 of statement made by PS King

"Police state that Mr. Cordell was told police superintendent had gave authority to seize sound equipment"

"Mr Simon Cordell will State that at no point was any section or piece of paper served to him, nor was he told verbally of the statement above as he was not the occupier to the freehold of land neither an organizer to any event as listed, within the ASBO application or did he supply any equipment, this includes any form of Anti-Social Behaviour.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not pack any sound equipment away, as he did not have any to pack away, as for fact he was driving his car, a car Ford Focus which cannot carry a large Amplified Sound System, plus as stated by witness statement PS King "3 massive nitrous oxide tanks," This would not fit into his car Index MA57 LDY a Ford Sliver Focus"

"Police officers state that Mr. Cordell started to pack away his equipment"

"This is misleading as noted by police officer, Steve Elsmore in his said witness statement, that Mr Simon Cordell was driving car index MA57LDY, If This is true then how was Mr Simon Cordell, meant to pack away a large Amplified Sound System plus have 3 massive nitrous oxide tanks, all this would

not fit into his car."                

"Whilst stood waiting for him to leave"

"Mr Simon Cordell will challenge this statement and will state that he was in his car also that he had no sound system or any involvement in organizing said party including any form of Anti-Social Behaviour." "100 teenagers turned up / going to storm the rave."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that it is not right for him to be blamed for something that he took no action in organizing.

Also that he should not be accountable for other people’s decisions unless he had advised other people to have acted in such a manner, or have leaded other people, to conduct them self's in such a negative manner and at no point did he do so. Mr Cordell will state at no point did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour."

"Group throwing cones and general road furniture towards the police."

"Mr Simon Cordell is upset that this has happened, he also state that he was not the organizer neither did he supply any sound equipment, nor should he be accountable for other people's actions; and that he had no involvement in the organization of the event or supplying any equipment. At no time did Mr Simon Cordell act in an Anti-Social Manner.’’

"Again Simon's car was present."

48

248,

Edited part 5.pdf

"This proves that Mr Simon Cordell did not have any large Amplified Sound System, as his ford focus index MA57LDY cannot hold such equipment because of size. Mr Simon Cordell does in fact own a van and if he was to have been hiring out any of my sound equipment for said party would have done so within the legal constants of the law and in such instance would have been using his own van to carry his equipment in. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in the organization of said party and did not have any equipment to pack away"

"Simons Cordell's attitude is that he is a modern-day businessman and the actions of the group had nothing to do with him."

"Mr Simon Cordell does agree that he is and still up and coming am to be a modern-day businessman.

As the police are well aware due to the number of times he gets stopped and spoken to by police, in such times he feels that he is always asked what he has been up to in his life by the police and he would reply to police or anyone that had asked me, the same answerer because it had become a routine, when asked such questions. Mr Simon Cordell was in the process of setting up his business. He will state that he had not taken any part in the organizing or the hire of any equipment on Date 10th August 2014."

· On the 27th July 2014 Ref: yert00376227 pc chandler:

"Information had been received that a rave would be taken place."

"Mr Simon Cordell believes if sourced by way of an information request this could prove his innocents in the allegations presented in this police statements and believes that the public order unit at Scotland Yard does in fact hold the information to all dates in question contained within this ASBO application, which would prove Mr Simon Cordell was not the organizer,"

"Statement: Police drove down and found the rave."

"Mr Simon Cordell would like to see proof that this was a rave and the answer ‘(’has there been anyone charged with holding a rave on this date in question.”)

"Statement: of which people at said rave had the keys for."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not the occupier of the land and he did not have any keys to it."

· Ref: yert00376227 pc chandler:

"Police spoke to people inside.”

"At no point did any police speak to Mr Simon Cordell as he was not involved in any form of the organization of what he is being accused off such as an Illegal rave."

· Ref: yert00376227 pc chandler:

"There was a big stack of speakers which was being powered by a van belonging to Simon Cordell."

"Mr Simon Cordell van is a ford transit 2002 this cannot power any think above12v and a sound system is 240v, the size of Mr Simon Cordell generator is the size of a transit van and would have been noted down by a police officer due to this Mr Simon Cordell exhibit a picture his generator on his mobile trailer as (Exhibit 0000.)

Mr Simon Cordell did not hire any sound equipment, or have any involvement in the birthday party, he will state that he just knew someone, who was treating the premises as their home on the date in question and was living in the local squats in and around Enfield around the dates in the ASBO application, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was at the premises as a guest."

Ref: yert00376227 pc chandler:

"The rave accused of it being was a 20th birthday party for one of the occupiers. Not the person Mr Simon Cordell was there to visit."

The police talked to the persons whose birthday party it was. Mr Simon Cordell does not agree with being accused of organizing his birthday party or any form of Anti-Social Behaviour on this date in question, Mr Simon Cordell will state it was not his birthday and he did not hire out any equipment, nor was he involved in the organization of any rave."

Ref: yert00376227 pc chandler:

"Police State The rave was organized by Simon Cordell’’

49

249,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell will state that this said rave was not set up him. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has never been charged for the organization of this said rave and believes that if this had been a correct statement that he would have been arrested.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that if this was not his birthday or party, that he was just merely invited due to knowing someone who was living at the premises. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is not homeless and that he does in fact live in his own council flat. Mr Simon Cordell will state that this at no point did he in fact cause any actions that was likely to cause Alarm Harm or Distress.

"Police officers state that this was connected to another rave on Alma Road."

"Alma Road is a road just of Green Street, to which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he lives, with mostly private housing developed on it, there is a few long-term companies. And a few businesses and that he does not know of any rave or location along alma road that a Rave has ever taken place, or of any place people have lived as he keeps his private life to himself and only in exceptional circumstances over official governing body(s) of relevance towards them issues, that may be of concern contained within their departments. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has checked face book and applied to Enfield local council to be told no rave has happened on Alma Rd as well, asks please can you supply evidence supporting your claims ‘’ Connected to another rave on Alma RD ‘’.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in any said rave and has never been to a party on Alma Road.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does in fact drive down Alma Road a fair amount due to his Nan Once living just off there and living two roads away.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that that he does also travel down Alma Road to get from his flat and his mother’s address.

The only event on Alma Road involving the metropolitan police, that Mr Simon Cordell remembers was when he was pulled over on a Thursday, in his car index MA57 LDY which the case has been added to this ASBO application. Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point was he Anti-Social towards the police that pulled him, or he would have been arrested for a section 5 or of a similar offence and he surely would not have walked away, without even a ticket. He will state that he did in fact shake the police officers’ hands as he left.

Thursday 24th July 2014, At around 16.25 hours: Alma Road:

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was driving index MA57LDY as he stated down Alma Road, and this is a road that he travels down regally.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he uses this road to travel between his mother’s house and his own flat, as it is one of the only routes of access between both flat and house, and it is also the fastest route to take. Mr Simon Cordell will state that this Nan also lived just off Alma Road before her resent death.

On travelling from his mother’s house on Thursday 24th July 2014 from seeing his Nan and mother due to his Nan's illness he was going home to his flat and used Alma Road as a route to travel as he always does do so.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he noticed an unmarked police car, as it was indicating to take a right turn the opposite way from which he was travelling.

The reason he knew this to be an unmarked police car was because he knew the police officer who was driving from seeing him on active duty within the local area.

As he drove past it changed its indication to the way he had been heading, which was a left direction.

The unmarked police car continued to follow him in turn putting on the blue lights in their vehicle. he pulled over to the left had side of the road opposite the BMW repair centre along Alma Road, on the left-hand side of the pavement leading to the back entrance of Durant's park.

A male office got out of the passenger side and approached Mr Simon Cordell driver’s door, he un done his car window to a jar asking why he had been pulled over to which the police office replied he was not sure and said his college had instructed him to do so. He then went back to his police car and then reproached his car window with his college the driver of the undercover police car.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was asked again why he had been pulled over to the reply of the driver of the police car pulling out his police truncheon forcing me to get out my car or if he declined his window will be smashed.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he got out of his car as he did not have any think to hide, neither had he committed any traffic or criminal offence, nor was he wanted. The reason given to Mr Simon Cordell was for being stopped, then being accused of driving to close to the car in front of him. This car did not

50

250,

Edited part 5.pdf

stop nor was it pulled over by police. Mr Simon Cordell will then state that he was then accused of having drugs; He was searched and so was his vehicle and nothing was found.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was asked by police what he had been up to and that he told them that he was setting up his catalogue that he and his friend had been building. That is why Mr Simon Cordell’s website was well underway to being completed, and he was trying to establish positive effects within his business in today's society, within the business industry. This was a Thursday at 16:25.

Then once the police had checked every think that they had needed to, everybody parted and shock each other’s hands and went then, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he made his way home.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he cannot understand why the police officers have said that he was driving in this manner as this would have been classed as dangers driving, and he would have been punished accordingly. Mr Simon Cordell will state that there is no way that someone can drive 1’’ from the car in front of each other’s car’s bumpers; this would have been clearly in possible. If the males car in front had been stopped or went to the police stating that, Mr Simon Cordell had being do this action, would have be taken against Mr Simon Cordell for YR then surely the police would have taken the persons details in there 101 Book of reports PC EDGOOSE.

19th July 2014: Carpet right A10 great Cambridge road Enfield:

Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

On this day Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was travelling down the great Cambridge road heading home in his vehicle. When on the other side of the road he saw a man, he knows to be homeless detained by the police outside the gates of carpet right. He wanted to make sure he was ok so to do this he had to drive up the road to the traffic light next to the Odeon cinema and turn around, which he did do. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he noticed a car park a few premises before the carpet right named magnet open to the general public, so he parked there as he could see the police had blocked all accesses to the front of the carpet right car park, you cannot park outside any premises at this point of the A10 Great Cambridge Road.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he locked his vehicle and walk up the pavement towards his friends and the police officer detaining him outside carpet right front gates. On doing so, a police officer approached him and told him, that he was under arrest for breach of the peace, to which he was realized latter from police custody, without any charge or fine for any offence committed, neither was he served any official paper work.

· Keys to carpet right are in the premises

· Police surrounded front gates and building entrance

· police too details of all people present contained within the application and Mr Simon Cordell’s, name is not present amongst them.

· The 999 caller states it was all white males and females at first point of police intelligence.

· The Inspector contradicts himself by stating that Mr Simon Cordell was inside the gates of Carpet Right and then goes on top state otherwise.

Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"20 people inside premises."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not one of the 20 people inside the free hold of land and at no point of time was he the hired sound system contained on the premises. At no point did he have any

51

251,

Edited part 5.pdf

involvement in any matter, involving the activities or decisions of others, who were occupying carpet right. If he had been a charge would have been put towards himself."

(CAD 9840 19th July 14 pages 287 to 290 )

Incident no 9840 at 20:51 on 19th July 14 by 083891/L2843 Rec by: Ordinary Call type: Third Party

ATT Location: 198 Great Cambridge Enfield: Carpet Right Inc Location: = Blocked Out Call Location: Blocked Out Opening: Noise (Trespass)

Criss: Not Crime

Location Based Comments: Blocked Out Caller States:

· 20:56:06 He has attended the location to find a notice that persons are squatting in the building

· 22:12:53 274ye 10-20 squatters are inside. Police entered to make sure no sound equipment was inside.

· Pages 291 to 301 CAD 10635 19th July 14 End:

Incident no 10635 at 22:07 on 19th July 14 by c723688 Incident is Tagged 2 x Rec by: Ordinary Call type: Third Party

Inc Location: = Martinbridge Trading Estate, 240 Lincoln RD,

Call Location: Blocked Out Opening: Noise (Trespass) (Alcohol)

Criss: Not Crime

Location Based Comments: Blocked Out pages 292 and 293 Linked to: CADS11644 and 11822 19th Jul 14 Caller States:

About 20 pulling up on to an estate looks like to have an illegal rave

Caller States:

They have brought in alcohol and decks.

Caller States:

He can see them bringing in boxes and are definitely not there to work.

Caller States: (page 294 They are Males and Females all White People, So how can Mr Simon Cordell be getting accused of this as stated in the new skeleton bundle, Insp Skinner states that Mr Simon Cordell was the organiser of an illegal rave, in a premises on the 19th June 2014. page 95 Police state more units please and all people and cars contained on the land on carpet right present)

Has any think ever happened like this before: = Yes No date and time.

Caller States: page 295

There are a number of vehicles here Pages 295 and 296 including 297 of Copies of DVLA Records from the PNC, Including all the people’s names and addresses, from when checked inside carpet right and Mr Simon Cordell was not one of the people neither is any vehicle he was driving, at that present time in life.

CAD 11822 19th Jul 14 PAGES 302 TO 304 Ends: Incident number 11822 19th July 14

Rec by: Emergency Call type: Third Party ATT Location: Southbury BR STN Inc Location: = Southbury BR STN

Call Location: Southbury BR STN Opening: Noise (Noise Nuisance)

Criss: Blanked Out

Location Based Comments: Blocked Out

Linked to Cad10635 19th July 14) and (Cad11644 19th July 14)

52

252,

Edited part 5.pdf

Caller States:

Large group outside causing a disturbance outside the STN and there is at least 200 people blocking the Rd and pavement.

Caller States:

I do not know what they are doing but need to be moved on.

No More Cads Left for the 19th

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

'With sound equipment which they was about to set up."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not hire any sound equipment to this event nor did he organize it, police intelligence will show this, Val Tanner attached to public order unit Scotland yard.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was has since sourced information THAT SHE contacted and accused another person other than himself, of being the organizer and attended addresses leading to this date, Prior. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to call her to court under oath to prove his innocents in this case.

At no point did he go on the open-air land or the premises attached to that land and that the police had said occupiers /potential organizer in the said land including the sound system contained within.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that it has also come to his attention from sourced information, that the public order unit Scotland Yard has information to other dates that are included in within this ASBO application, which will prove further to the facts that he did in fact not commit the offences that he is being accused of within this ASBO application.

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

· "The main organizer was spoken to by police."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is not the main organizer on the 19th July 2014 as-Val-Tanner- attached to the public Order Unit Scotland Yard understands. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any equipment. (Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to summons Val-Tanner- attached to the public Order Unit Scotland Yard under oath to his trial) as he states that he knows she holds evidence of his innocents in regards to the ongoing of the current ASBO application.

Because this so-called event and the unit she works for holds information to the date of the 19th and other dates in this ASBO application, as this was explained by her to my mother on the telephone.

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"It is said that Mr Simon Cordell admitted to police that he was an organizing to the party and said he was expecting several hundred people."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that this is not correct as stated the keys were found on the premises and he never was on the premises, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was arrested outside on the pavement as shown in Inspector Douglas Skinner statement and that he could not have left the premises as said by Inspector Douglas Skinner the police had secured the premises before he had arrived."

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"As a result the people inside the venue all left."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he never went in the premises or venue at any time, He mealy stopped out of care off a fellow companion, to be detained by the metropolitan police wrongfully without charge or interview. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he feels this shows the way he has been treated over the years and discriminated by police. He states that the facts are the police had secured the premises, they had a sound system contained in the premises, and occupiers in the premises, one of these people was arrested then de arrested (Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has found this out since he has contacted the director at company house of every decibel matters, who has provided a statement as he was one of the people detained inside the premises, by the police to then latter be released.) Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was outside and was arrested for no reason."

53

253,

Edited part 5.pdf

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"Elliot Laidler accused of stating it was his first time he had worked for Cordell."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not know a Elliot Laidler, neither at no point was or has he worked for him, (Please show Mr Simon Cordell Evidence or an invoice that he was working for him), Mr Simon Cordell will state that his company was not running at this point it was still being setup, Mr Simon Cordell did help some charities out with their events in the process to help get his company established.

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"Clearly Mr. Cordell makes a living by organizing raves in Enfield."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has been establishing his company and have not hired any equipment on the 18th or 19th of July 2014 - Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not make a living from organizing illegal raves neither did he cause any Anti-social Behaviour on this date.''

· Ref: yert00376024 Inspector skinner

"Police state that it is possible that Cordell has obtained the key via Security Company or ex employers."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that this is not true as he never went on the land or in the premises or did, he hire out any equipment or organize this said event."

· Ref: yert00376024 inspector skinner P 5 of 5 6. Criss 1914855/14 CAD 11854

20th June 2014 PC Haworth

"Police discovered a rave being set up at 1 Falcon Park Neasden lane NW10."

PC Haworth.

"Seized from the Dee Jay again."

"MR Simon Cordell will state that he has never been a Dee Jay and does not know how to Dee Jay. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he received a call from a client/ friend asking if he could help him out with a sound system and van which was also asked for, to carry the sound system in. This was a pro bono hire which would lead to hire contracts under a hire agreement. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did take a deposit which was not returned due to a breach of his teams and conditions of agreement and due to his sound system being seized.

MR Simon Cordell will state that he received a phone call dated; 20/06/2014 around 00:00am from the client who told him that there had been some problems with police and was told the police were going to seize the hired sound equipment and hired van. He was very upset but agreed to attend, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he then left his home address, and it took him around 1 hour to get there as the roads were quiet.

Upon getting there Mr Simon Cordell will state that he saw a lot of police around the premises, to which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he started to speak to the police. Mr Cordell showed the police the invoice for the hire of his sound system. he was allowed access by police to the building to pack his sound system away. While in the building an inspector come and spoke to him and told him that he was going to seize the sound system and van. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he spoke to the inspector explaining and showing him the invoice, he also giving him a copy.

To which his sound system and van was till seized, to which he was later allowed to collect from the police station after they had done their enquiries, this was a few days later.

At no time was he charged, arrested or served any official paperwork from police,

· Progress Way Enfield EN1: 7th June 2014 Ref: yert00374531.Pc Shinnick

“Police officer PC Shinnick states he saw Mr Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin and they have set up a rave in the empty warehouse."

54

254,

Edited part 5.pdf

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that is not true as his Brother was taken to hospital in fear of his life as he had been in an ATR and could not walk and suffered many other damages to himself dated 10/04/2014, He still is having treatment at The Royal London Hospital 16/02/2015 and this will be ongoing, this is a life changing accident.

I did attend progress way but did not going inside. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was on his own at about 01:45 on the 8th June 2014, and police tried to speak to him outside the gate as he was trying to give his friend back a set of keys; he waited at the petrol station across the Road then went home.

Ref: yert00374531.Pc Shinnick

Unit 5 ST Georges Industrial Estate White Heart Lane N17: 25th May 2014

At 23:21 hours.

I am Up to here 00:59 09/02/2016

Ref: yrrt00323197 Pc Hoodlese

Contacted by security guard at the venue stating suspects were on the premises."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he spoke to his friend that he knew to have problems due to being homeless at the time and that he had been trying to help out by offering them work from the local council such as Ponders End Festival, Winch more Hill Festival, Lock To Lock and more. There were no profit events Mr Simon Cordell has provided proof of the events that they did engage in.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had also been letting friends stay at his flat and that he cooked them food and other living accessories such as trainers and cloths while giving them a place to sleep and wash. Mr Simon Cordell will state that his friend called him earlier in the day and explained to Mr Cordell that he was living at Unit 5 St. Georges Industrial Estate White Hart Lane N 17, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he went and meet him. That he did not hear any alarms, nor would he be on any CCTV cameras committing any offence on this date in question. That he did in fact arrive and had ordered food. He used his van to travel from his home to where his friend was staying. Due to storage space and the size of the speakers, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he could not remove the speaker boxes on his own because of the size and weight of each box and used his van as storage on some occasions.

On the 25th May 2014 the police checked the index CX52 JRZ and there were two speaker boxes with no speakers in them that Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had keep in the van. There were no amp’s decks or any other equipment to power or create a full sound system just 2 speakers that he keeps in there for storage. The police could see there was no way to run a sound system and allowed him to leave.’ Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is not sure if the people were still allowed to stay in their home by the police.

Approx. 20 young males and females ran out the rear of the premises."

"At no point was Mr Simon Cordell one of the males or females that run out of the building."

Ref: yrrt00323197 Pc Hoodlese

Approx. 20 people claiming to be squatters."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that At no point was he one of the 20 people occupying Unit 5 St. Georges Industrial Estate White Hart Lane N17, living under a section 144 Laspo treating and respecting it as their home, as for fact he was a guest and has his own home.

"Several males were still inside the premises calming to be squatters."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that as said people were occupying the building and that he went home.

55

255,

Edited part 5.pdf

Ref: yrrt00323197 Pc Hoodlese

"Police had footage of several suspects causing damage to the security cameras and door locks, Mr Simon Cordell will state that was not one of them people."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point will he be on any of the said camera evidence as he never committed the offences stated, he believes if he were on the security cameras then criminal charges would have been placed on him. At no Time have any charges be placed against him Mr Simon Cordell will state that as he was not one of the suspects causing any damage. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like the security cameras footage, shown in court to prove this.

"At the venue."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that this was a commercial building being occupied under section 144 Laspo. as far as he was aware and had been told by the occupiers they had been living there for weeks before this date, they had their belongings and bedding at the premises."

"On camera opening the venue upon opening the premises."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he will not be on camera, that he was invited into the premises by the occupiers that were living there."

Ref: yrrt00323197 Pc Hoodlese

PAGE 19 is MISSING FROM HERE NOTE

CONTINUE LAST PAGE STEVE 20

Ellesmere Street E14 PC Scott

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he remember that morning very well to be a Sunday as it was pre-arranged to meet a few friends at their house' Ellesere street E14, because he had planned to go out with friends on their off road scramblers for the day, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was looking forward to this day very much.

There were two other vans ready to go with bikes in them and the van he was driving index CX52 JRZ, which had two off Road scrambles in the back.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was approached by police and asked to prove insurance which he did by way of insurance certificate.

he was challenged at to the status of my insurance policy being real or up to date and that he had paid for it to be a valid insurance certificate. The reason the police officers were showing issues of concern was because Mr Cordell Insurance policy was not showing on the mid databases, to what he explained was no fault of his own, he explained that he had made many complaints trying to rectify the problem by way of email to his insurance company as well as the police and the MID database, he had done this by making many phone calls and sending many emails while asked the police to check there own system to verify this.

Having his vehicles seized had become a regular event since 2013 Proof attached on weekends he is mostly pulled over by police.

The reason being as the police MID Databases did not show his vehicles as being insured as well as it being a Sunday leading to all insurance companies being closed.

This has left Mr Simon Cordell have to pay the recovery cost as well as other expenses including the loss of day as well as the embarrassment that comes with being punished for some think that he knows he is paying a services for and knows that is not right in the begin.

His van was search for a TV before it was seized and was proved to be false allegations.

Informant had seen a group of male's loads a flat screen TV into rear of white ford index CX52 JRZ.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did a TV get put into his van."

"At 14:46 he was arrested for section 5 and no insurance."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is still having many issues with his insurance for this policy with KGM and all the seizer he suffered due to the error in the MID, he has provided proof of insurance, Letter of Indemnity from KGM for Policy Number MT3574694 of his innocents."

56

256,

Edited part 5.pdf

• 12th January 2013: Canary Wharf

"Supplying information to the vehicles involved in gaining entry and carrying equipment."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any sound equipment nor was he involved in the organization of this said event.

This night he was taken to hospital as he was stabbed in the head and his ear and stomach was cut." Medical records have been sent of for by Michael my solicitor in this case.

(BOOK SEVEN UPDATED PAGES 26 TO 30)

21/12/15

Statement of Simon Cordell Further to my statement Dated 00/00/00

In regard to Steve Elsmore Statement further to his statement Dated 11th August 2014 Amended on the 14/01/2015

In relation to wards an application for an Anti-Social Behaviour Order regarding the defendant Simon Cordell.

Point 1

PC Steve Elsmore States.

On the 5th November 2014 at Highbury Corner Magistrates, that I Simon Cordell made certain representations in regard to my company Too Smooth.

I Simon Cordell State;

I did explain that I was establishing my company and had become a valid member at Kemp Hall Community Centre there for committing myself to working for my local community centre, I did also say that I had been establishing my company brand and reputation, by way of provision of hire under a pro bono agreement with companies working on behalf of them self’s, in connection with Enfield Council as they were all licensed outdoor events within the borough of Enfield contained within the local parks and such land marks.

Point 2

Pc Steve Elsmore States.

That he has searched the police systems in reference to my statement made in court, “that I was in fact on curfew and had not been leaving my place of residence.

I Simon Cordell State.

I do agree that I did state that I had been of police curfew during dates 28/06/2013 to 21/05/2014 during court proceedings which I was found not guilty for on the 02/07/2014.

Throughout the Interim stage of the ASBO order held at the Magistrates Court, I do not understand how PC Steve Elsmore when checking the Metropolitan police databases could not find my statement to be true,

As on the date of 03/08/2015 at my trial the clerk of the court checked her computer system in front of the DJ and all else present in the trial proceedings and found my statements to be true. I had been on curfew from the 28/06/2013 until the 21/05/2014 along with other bail conditions.

Point 3

PC Steve Elsmore States.

That he had discussed entertainment licences with the police and Council Licensing Officers and they had informed PC Steve Elsmore, I would not need to apply for licensing if premises was already in place of licensing or that I can apply for A Ten Note if on outdoor land.

I Simon Cordell State.

I had been in negotiations with Lee Valley in regard to Premises and Licensing to hold an outdoor community event within my local borough which was going well until the court proceeding became too much inclusive of the conditions imposed upon myself.

57

257,

Edited part 5.pdf

With regard to Barley Land Farm, due to everything that was going on in 2013, 2014, I had to take a step back from the event I wanted to host at Barley Land Farm, this was going to be picked up after I proved I had not done anything wrong which was the case. Barley Land Farm I did want to host this in 2014 but knew this could not happen as the case I was on lasted over a year, before I was found not guilty. I was due to pick up contract with regard to hosting this for 2015. This was stopped due to this ASBO order and the ongoing court proceedings becoming the priority over all in my life.

I was made manager of club Juice Brimsdown Enfield and trusted with the keys and all operations of the company till the police made this impossible to manage due to being continuously being pulled over outside.

It was agreed for me to be the manager of the lunch of White Sands night club once known as the Beach club Brixton Hill, till the police publicly embarrassed me and shamed my name by arresting me out side at an arranged meeting with the owner, to which I proved my case at court, I had committed a lot of time towards the launch of this venue prior.

Point 3

PC Steve Elsmore States.

The Licensing officer had checked in Steve Elsmore presence that I Mr Cordell has never applied for licensing regarding entertainment.

I Simon Cordell State.

I had no reason at this time of my life to apply to the council as pickets Lock, Barlylands and all festivals, inclusive of Night clubs and community halls I was committing my personal time to while establishing my company and representing my brand, have or had licensing already in place, I have also listed a few more companies names I was working with and for below with correspondents.

Lock to Lock

Muswell Hill Festival is a fundraising community event for children with cerebral palsy and their families from across London.

Enfield Town Fire Works

Ponders End Festival

Durant’s Park Festival

HD Festival

At the same time I was constructing and in development of my website with help from my mother and friends, hosted at www.TooSmooth.co.uk

Point 4

PC Steve Elsmore States.

That he has spoken to Enfield Council with regards to myself Simon Cordell hiring Generators to them for events also that I had only hired out a human gyroscope to Enfield Scout for the local town fireworks display dated 2013.

I Simon Cordell State.

As listed above is the names of some events I was working within and for at the dates in question mainly before the interim stage and while other ongoing court proceeding progressed to which I was being accused of, to which I rightfully was found not guilty in my plea of innocence.

58

258,

Edited part 5.pdf

I had a curfew so could not stay with the equipment over night and as a company getting ready to start to trade I could not afford the higher of an experienced employee, so in turn I lost the contracts and faith in the justice system that was the main contribution towards the key elements need to cause myself to lose the contracts I and others had worked so hard to gain, due to the value of the products it was impossible to comet myself to a contract of hire any longer, at the same time the probationary conditions thought the interim stage imposed that represented the ASBO order made it once again even harder to continue forward than it already was.

Point 5

PC Steve Elsmore States.

A company House Check has been conducted under the name Too Smooth and Mr Cordell’s post code and there is nothing registered. I am also asked by Steve Elsmore to provide my company number.

I Simon Cordell State.

My company name was registered on the 10/03/2015 and this was shown to the court at trial.

I think there was a mistake in how I explained myself and due to this think you believe my company had been registered before this date.

However what I was trying to explain was my domains had been registered since 2010, and 2013.

The reason my company was not registered in 2013, which it was meant to be was due to the court case and the conditions of bail I was on.

I could not do the contracts I had in 2013 so my company was put on hold until after I was found not guilty at court on the 02/07/2014.

But then as soon as I had been found not guilty for that case, I then had to deal with this ASBO order. Point 6

PC Steve Elsmore States;

On Wednesday 10th 2014, in regard to obtaining Mr Simon Cordell’s role also inclusive of any more information that could be obtained relating to him at Kemp Hall Community Hall.

Diana Johnson hall manager was unavailable due to being sick, PC Elsmore spoke to assistant Hailey “Football Team Manager” who stated she was not sure of Mr Cordell role and had not seen him for about Two months in advance to the last meeting to which he had attended due to being ill.

I Simon Cordell State.

Regards Kemp hall, I Simon Cordell was given a Business card by a friend of a woman name as Luvinia De-Terville.

Her business card represented a company known as Dems event management who provides licensed outdoor and indoor events, so I called the number in hope of making good relations relating to professional business possibilities, a meeting was agreed and went well.

I was later contacted by Dems Management to help with the on goings of a charity event in aid of a charity called Bliss that helps premature babies, this event had been cancelled and was supposed to have taken place at another community hall other than Kemp Hall to which she had lost her deposit.

I arranged another meeting with her and asked her to bring all documents for the event so I could see if there was a way to rectify the problems, I took on the project to re-launch the event at a new location and Kemp Hall was chosen, a meeting was arranged at Kemp hall for 19th September 2014 with Diana hall manager and Dem, at the meeting I noticed the community halls absinth of articles of association and the down full in the maintenance of the hall, it was explained by Diana that she was having issues with managing the hall due to a lack of communication with committee members and local Authority and that the hall was absent of licensing and no constitution was in place neither funding, on taking a tour of the hall I took a list of problems I could fore see for holding an event for Dem’s and that could be rectified for Diana. I prioritised the list as I was going around here is some of the problems I listed.

No lights in girls/ woman’s toilets / this was winter, so it was dark early.

No Baby changing mat Girl’s toilet door no hinges.

Boys / Mans toilets no lights

59

259,

Edited part 5.pdf

Decor dull

Guttering outside Missing Front Car park needs cleaning Rear fence broken

No safer foods controls for regulated provision of food or sale of alcohol No fridge controls

Combustible papers in fridge’s no temperature controls

Electrical fuse board needs testing and cables 3 double plug sockets are burnt out Stage dangers and needs maintenance.

Dance stage in main hall need reconstructing No internet No telephone

No CCTV 8 cameras not working Kitchen facilities out of date

New 1 new PC missing a grant was issued by local authority for 8 new laptops

No sound Equipment

No TV facility

Pool table Broken

Tennis table broken

The list went on, I agreed to come back and help out where I could, and did do so at my own expense, I fixed most of the listed above over time and a lot more to which I still have all the notes of and information relating to the contract work. I have and provide evidence of Diana hall manager thanking me for my help and that she had not meet any one in 15 years that she could trust with the keys and management of the hall and because of this she had neglected time with her own family in the aid of keeping the hall running for the local children and community. This was because she trusted me with full management of the hall under her supervision. I can provide the information.

I also do not understand why PC Steven Elsmore would want to obtain more information as to my role at Kempe Hall and why he would speak to someone he does not know about me and any role I have at Kempe Hall. If the person who currently run Kempe hall was not there, he should have asked for a number to contract her on, not gone about speaking about me to someone else he did not know what role they had in Kempe hall.

Point 7

PC Steve Elsmore States.

On Sunday 23/11/2014 police stopped the following two males who were seen walking around an industrial estate Stockings Water Lane Enfield at 01:10 hours.

Both males seem to be under the influence of drugs.

On page 28 the CRIMINT reference states the other male, this has been blacked out, it also states that this person was living with myself Simon Cordell.

I Simon Cordell State.

On the 22/11/2014 I had been at my home address with a friend named Josh who was homeless when my mobile phone rang a person claiming to be a police officer spoke to myself he called me unexpectedly it was around 23:45 hours to 00:20 hours I got the call.

This person said they had been at my flat earlier but could not get the entrance code to my front door, they had returned to the police station to call me and get the door code, to which I thought and knew to be out of place I asked for the police officers badge number to which the person speaking would not give it to me, making me not believe this was a police officer I was in fact speaking to I would not give the door code out, on putting the phone down I called the police and asked if it was them asking me for my entrance code to which the reply was no.

This worried me even more because I live in a communal building that does not have an intercom system or CCTV. You must know the door entry code to the main entrance, and you can get to my front door.

60

260,

Edited part 5.pdf

This made me and my friend scared and could not understand how someone had got my number and called and wanted the main door code.

I called my mother who told me and Josh to come to her house, my mother had been cooking something to eat so I turned everything off and left my flat with Josh.

We walked along Green Street, towards Brimsdown train station going towards the river lee.

I had called my sister and she agreed to pick us up in a cab at Ponders End train station as it was raining very badly.

As we was walking the police pulled us over they said they were the police care team and asked us what we were doing, I told the police what had happened about the call and was told it was them that had called me for the door code.

They said that they had been at my flat early and could not get in, so had gone back to the police station to get my number to call me to get my door code.

I asked why they wanted my door code and why they wanted to see me, they would not tell me.

We both got searched by the police and then let go, me and my friend Josh was not under the influence of drugs, and the police never found anything on us when they searched us both. They asked Josh why a boy from East London was in North London and he told them to see his friend.

I called my mother again and was really upset as the police was not leaving me alone, I had done nothing wrong and never went out of my flat anymore, but the police kept coming to my flat when they wanted.

When we got to Ponders End my sister was waiting in a cab, which we got into and went to my mother’s home, my sister then left in the cab to go home.

My mother was really upset and made a call to the police at 02:04 to find out what was going on and why the police kept turning up at my flat CAD 1129:23/11/2014.

She was told that I called the police, she asked me and Josh if we had called the police which me and Josh replied no to, I told her I had only called the police after the police had called me. She carried on talking to the police on the phone.

Calls that were made on the 23/11/2014 by my mother to police due to what happened on the 23/11/2014.

02:04 lasted 12:00 13:57 lasted 07:00 14:52 lasted 04:00

Please see print out of my mum’s phone bill with times and date of the 23/11/2014 CAD numbers 1129:23/11/2014. and the email that was sent to my solicitor by my mother.

Point 8

Pc Steve Elsmore States.

On Friday 19th September 2014 at approximately 14:15 AT Kemp Hall I Simon Cordell State;

This date Friday 19th September 2014, I was at Kemp Hall with Luvinia De-Terville we were due to have a meeting with Diana hall manager in regard to the higher of the hall for the charity Bliss.

Yes, I agree the police did come to Kemp Hall while I and Luvinia De-Terville were there in the meeting with Diana hall manager about hiring the hall for the bliss charity.

I did speak to them as they spoke to me; I told them why we were there about hiring the hall for the bliss charity the police could also see we were in a meeting. They seemed interested about the charity, and I went on to say about my goals for my company and showed the police a project I was working on, on my laptop, the police did ask some things which I told them.

I do not see how the police was utterly bemused I was not the only person who was talking and mostly it was the manageress talking to the police, as the police was there to speak to her and our meeting had run over and we were waiting for the police to leave to carry on talking to the hall manageress.

61

261,

Edited part 5.pdf

I did not tell the police I had 3 lockups, the police know where I keep my equipment and that is not in lockups.

I do not understand why PC Steve Elsmore has gone on in his statement to say about GMG members nor do I understand why gang members have been included in his statement. Nor do I understand why he has included in his statement about issues with Kempe Hall.

I had done nothing wrong and had nothing at this time to do with Kempe Hall I was there about hiring the hall for a charity event run by Dems.

I also do not understand why the police when got the opportunity did they start to ask the manageress tactfully how long she had known me, they knew already the reason I was at the hall and that was for a meeting about hiring the hall for a charity event.

Shortly after this date the police started to publicly make a bad example of me and started to harass me by pulling me over as I was attending the hall one method was to strip searching me in there van in the front car park in front of all the children and other community members that I was there trying to help which is not mentioned and there are no Cad’s relating to within the ASBO application, the police also attended the hall more than the twice mentioned by Steve Elsmore and the once I mention when I was publicly embraced by the police in relation to questions regarding myself, I gave up and walked away as I did with the night clubs, as the police were set out to destroy all myself and every one had worked so hard to gain.

PC Steven Elsmore Updated statement dated the 26/06/2015

PC Steven Elsmore again says about Kempe hall page 30B as said above I stopped going to Kempe Hall around Dec 2014 due to what the police was doing, but was still getting emails from them I believe they did not take my email out of the email list. The police are aware of this as I have had more calls that the police have been there asking about me. PC Steven Elsmore states that Kempe Hall was taken back into possession of the council due to the way in which it was being run.

This is not correct it was taken back due to accounting not being completed on time that Enfield council was asking for. Please see email dated 21/01/2015 from Monica.Kaur@enfieldhomes.org Also please see email dated 17/02/2015 from Monica.Kaur@enfieldhomes.org and Simon.James@enfieldhomes.org

Also please see Letter dated 25th February 2015 From Simon James.

So by 18th March 2015 Kempe Hall was already back in Enfield Councils possession when the police did a search of the grounds and found a firearm. And I had not been at Kempe Hall since Dec 2014.

Book 8

Witness Statement

Made By A/PS Charles Miles 724YE

Dated :02/8/2014

Accusations Dated: 7th June 2014

Time 02:03 hours Progress Way EN1

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE "On SATURDAY the 7th JUNE 2014 I was on duty in full uniform, working as YE3N section Supervisor.

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE "At 0203Hrs approximately I attended a disused warehouse at Progress Way EN1, where an illegal rave was being held. I attended with Inspector Hamill VEIN and representatives from the Environmental Health Office at Enfield Council, approaching the gates and asking to 'speak with the organizer."

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE "There I spoke with a man who I recognized as Simon Cordell, from previous illegal rave events on Enfield Borough. I would describe him as a light skinned black male, AA35 and at the time he was wearing a white long-sleeved T shirt and Grey bottoms, he is

62

262,

Edited part 5.pdf

approximately f509 tall and of medium build. He refused to provide his details to the council representatives in order that a noise abatement order could be served, however he was provided with a copy. Approximately 10 minutes later we left the scene having risk assessed the incident."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was attending an occupied building that was being lived in under section 144 LASPO around the time of the 8th June 2014 as a visitor. And not on the 7th June 2014.

His intentions were to drop keys to a friend which had been left at his flat.

When he approached progress way a man, he now no to be a police officer from the statements provided, approached him while he was walking down a public foot path leading to the occupied building. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was accused of being an organizer to which he gave no replay and decided at this point to cross the road and call his friend to come out side to give him his keys back, to which he had, came to visit.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he then left and headed home and at no point did he except any paper work of any person(s) nor did he give his name or personal details to anybody for his personal details to be on any official headed piece of paper, to which in the statement he is being accused of being presented to him.

It is also noted that in A/Insp Hamill 201566 statement that he did not note that a copy of the paperwork had not been handed to anyone. Which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is sure he would have noted in his statement. As from his statement he was the main person dealing with this matter.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to ask for any noise abatement order made on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014"

It is also noted that police statement was written on the 02/08/2014, 26 days after therefore Mr Simon Cordell is asking for a copy of the 101 book.

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE " states that he returned to the venue approximately two hours later, he again asked to speak with the organiser however none came forward, he asked the two men on the door, who appeared to be party goers to let him in to have a look around. He walked around and there was extremely loud drum and bass music playing, with approximately 100 people dancing. Party goers observed him in Police uniform and ran away into the large open area, presumably because of drug misuse matters - there was significant evidence to suggest illegal drugs were being used such as discarded self-seal bags, and empty canisters consistent with 'laughing gas' use."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "As officers where not permitted access into the venue it is unknown to the extent of drug and alcohol abuse which may or may not have taken place within."

A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE "At approximately 06:30Hrs we received a call to nearby Woodgrange Gardens, to reports of a male assaulted. Following an initial investigation this individual matched the description of a male earlier observed on the warehouse roof. It appeared that he had fallen off of the roof and into some bushes and his injuries were consistent with a fall from height. He was heavily under the influence of alcohol and quite probably illegal drugs. He went to North Middlesex Hospital with the London Ambulance Service."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "At 05:04hrs CAD 2290 8th June police were called to a male assaulted in the street. Officers and LAS have attended the location  of WoodGrange Avenue, where the male had injuries of suspected broken wrists and a bloody mouth, he initially stated that he had been attacked from behind but on investigation it transpired that this male had been one of the people seen on the roof earlier and had fallen whilst getting down."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that it was only ever noted by PS 92YE that 1 male was seen on the roof, but if the call came 05:04hrs CAD 2290 how is it his statement it says a call came in at 06:30Hrs this is 1 hour and 26 mins after the first call was made and A/Insp Hamill 201566 had sent officers to the location.

Witness statement

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did notice when approaching the building a Section 144 Laspo notice was in place, in turn meaning occupiers were occupying the free hold of the land sleeping in the commercial building and treating it as their home.” Himself,

Mr Simon Cordell will state; Please take note "Nobody could have spoken to him or his brother Tyrone Benjamin, or see Tyrone as his brother Tyrone Benjamin was involved in an ATR involving, a vehicle LRO9BMV he was knocked of his moped on the 10th April 2014 the injuries his brother occurred has changed his life for ever. On the 07/06/2014 Mr Simon Cordell’s brother Tyrone Benjamin could not walk; he was Air lifted to The Royal London Hospital. Mr Simon Cordell will disagree strongly that his

63

263,

Edited part 5.pdf

brother was at this event dated 06th 07th 08th June 2014 or any case in question presented within this ASBO application, nor did he attend. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he arrived at progress way about 01:45am on the 8th but on his own and on arrival police spoke to him outside the front gates and he then left and went home.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that allegations of misleading information is being held under his and his brothers name on the police national Computer, and he has been trying to get this rectified, He has provided his brothers medical notes as proof of this as well as stated many other facts and provided a copy of the Police National Computer and the errors that have tarnished his life agreed by the courts.

He would also like to make it noted that the police already have on their system the people they were prettying while he was on curfew for some of the cases within this ASBO application and that the police had contacted other people leading up to dates of the incident numbers but not Mr Simon Cordell in relation to illegal raves. The public order team has confirmed on the phone to his mother and Essex police have too.

It has taken months to gather this information relating to the dates within this ASBO application so that Mr Simon Cordell can clear his name.

Book 9

Witness Statement A/Inspector Hamill 201566 Friday 6th June 2014

It is noted that your statement was written on the 06/08/2014 this is 62 days after the fact, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is therefore asking for a copy of your 101 books."

At no point did Mr Simon Cordell take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

And at no point in time did he encourage any other people to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point has he committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 On Friday 6th June 2014 when on duty in full uniform working as the Duty Officer for the Borough of Enfield. Was working between the hours of 2200hrs to 0700hrs.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "During the early hours of the 7th June I was made aware of a potential Rave that was in progress in a discussed Industrial Building on Progress Way."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "I have had a CAD created reference 1047I 7June dispatched officers to the location to access numbers, crowd dynamics and gather information around times the event is likely to

run until and also to make contact or identify the potential organiser. Officers have reported back that Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell where at location and to be the believed the event organisers, there were approximately 200 people in attendance, the event was covered by security officers who had stated that they were volunteers and not licensed through SIA. Officers have spoken with staff to confirm that all fire escapes where clear, that there were sufficient fire extinguishers in place and that there were first aid kits available."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that this incorrect and not to be true as his brother had medical injuries stopping him from being mobile or transported. Evidence will be supplied.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not in attendance to attained any rave in fact he was dropping keys to a friend as they had been left at his address when he was there last."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Police Officers have reported back: The police sent by inspector Hamill reported back to him and said they had spoken to Security officers at the gate of progress way, who stated that they were volunteers not security as believed by police offices. "Who made this statement?"

If they were believed by police officers to be security, but had said they were volunteers, what makes the police sure beyond reasonable doubt that the people in question presented to be security acting as volunteers could have in fact off been the organisers. As Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not the organiser neither did he hire any sound equipment, nor did he take part in any form of organization on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 or act in an Anti-Social Manner. In the new skeleton argument the inspector

64

264,

Edited part 5.pdf

clearly states that he now trusts the security guards when officers state that they believed they were security but said they were volunteers and looked like party goers.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Police Officers have reported back: Staff was forthcoming with information but refused to allow offices inside the venue."

"As stated they never believed the information provide by said staff at the gates of progress way to be true, as it was believed the security was to be presenting them self's as volunteers, so why would any information provided to officers can be classed and stated as forthcoming be classed as to be true, if not believed to be true by the person writing the statement in the beginning, as said by police officers, the people at the gate also refused to allow police officers inside the venue."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Due to call demand during the shift and low policing numbers it was inappropriate to enter the premises to seize the equipment and close the event, but he deployed officers to conduct regular visits to the venue, where number at their peak where 500 but reported to be quiet and peaceful."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in any event or Anti-Social Behaviour on the 6th 7th 8th June2014, he only went to drop some keys off to a friend that he had a call from due to him leaving his keys at his address the last time he was there and his friend needed them back."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Local authority noise team were contacted reference T548832. The event was expected to run until 0700hrs on Saturday 7th June, with plans for the event to continue again later in the evening on the 7th June. During the course of the shift we received a total of calls from local residence complaining about the noise of the rave."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "On Saturday 7th June 2014 I was again on duty in full uniform working as the Borough's Duty Officer for the hours of 2200hrs to 0700hrs, as with the previous evening I was made aware again of a Rave at an empty Warehouse of Progress Way. As with the previous evening, I have posted officers to make regular visits to the venue to access numbers, crowd dynamics and general intelligence around the event.

During the course of the number numbers at the event were around 300.

At 02:00hrs I have attended the venue with A/PS Miles and two environmental officers.

The entrance to the venue was located off progress way, down the side off "Tops Tiles". The warehouse was at the bottom of this side road behind a metal gate, the gate padlock had been removed and security officers were opening the gate to allow access. As Insp Hamill and A/PS Miles and the EO have approached the gate they have closed the gate preventing us access."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that for Inspector Hamill: To be able to state the gate padlock had been removed.” By this statement made Inspector Hamill was this close to pay this much attention to such an object as a pad lock on the gate, he then states a security officer was opening the gate to allow access. Followed by them have closed the gate, with so many people walking in and out of such numbers of 300 people in attendance Mr Simon Cordell will state that he believes the inspector see Mr Simon Cordell and took his own believes.

A/Ins p Hamill 201566 "I have introduced myself and asked to speak with the event organisers, to which a member of staff has disappeared into the venue and returned with a male who I would describe as light skinned black male, Approximate age of 35, wearing a white long sleeved t-shirt, grey bottoms. I recognized this male as Simon Cordell.

Inspector Hamill introduced himself and asked if we could speak at the bottom of the' road where the noise levels would allow us to talk. We have all moved to the bottom of Progress Way where I have introduced myself and explained the purpose of the visit and asked "It's Simon isn't it?" to which he has replied "Yes" I have then further asked "Simon Cordell" to which he has indicted that it was but not verbally confirmed the answer. I have introduced the two EO's the Simon who have explained the purpose of their visit and the fact that they were going to severe a noise abatement order, they have produced the paperwork and asked the male for his name to which he has refused to provide his details,

It was explained that without the name of a person from the venue the EO's are unable to serve the

65

265,

Edited part 5.pdf

paperwork. As we have been unable to progress this line of action, I have made the request to Simon Cordell to turn the music down."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that Inspector Hamill: States he approached the gate and spoke to security, but the police are not sure if they are security, the day before the people called themselves as volunteers. The case is the police did not know who they were they could have been security/volunteers or organisers. The police only believed Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell could have been the organisers, which is not the case.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that Inspector Hamill: Asked to speak to an organiser and has said that a member of said staff disappeared into the occupied building. For a male Inspector Hamill recognised to be Simon Cordell to approach him. This could not have been the case as; Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not in the building and that he was walking up to the building when he was approach by Inspector Hamill and others.

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does remember this day 08th June 2014 a friend who had stayed at his who had forgotten to take his set of keys with him, when he left his flat prior to the 06th and 07th 8th June 2014.

He will state that his friend had contacted him and told him that he needs his keys back and wanted him to meet him at progress way where he had been residing and asked Mr Simon Cordell to drop the keys to him.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was given a post code and had never been to this location before. That he travelled by car and parked outside a company that he remembers to be tops tiles, as he approached he could hear music, after finding the address given to him he had to walk down a side ally leading to the front gates to be seen by a man he now know to be Inspector Hamill from the statement provided he asked him his name to which mr Simon Cordell will state that he gave no reply to his question.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as he see the police leave the people on the gate he was already chatting to him and asked Mr Simon Cordell to follow him to the road side which he did, at no time did Mr Simon Cordell talk to any police officers or any other person(s) as he felt he had not done any think wrong and new how the police was with him and he just did not want any problems.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was the police officer was with other people, who Mr Simon Cordell now know to be environmental officers due to the statements. he remembers feeling like he was being accused of being an organiser by the way in which the police officer was talking to him.

This is the reason he did not want to talk to the police as he knew how they was with him from over many years of being harassed by the police.

UP TO HERE SO FAR 03:58 09/02/2016

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he just wanted to leave so he decided at this point to cross the road to the local petrol station and call his friend to come outside to give him his keys back.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no time did he speak to police and give any details and did not take any paper work from anyone, the police did not follow him across the road to the petrol station where he called his friend to come and get his keys.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did notice sound coming from said occupied building and at this point in time he would like everyone to make a note that he did not hire any sound equipment or any other form of equipment or neither was he involved in the organisation of any events on dates of the 6th 7th or the 8th June 2014.

He then gave his friend their keys and headed home, at no point did Mr Simon Cordell except any paper work of any person nor did he give his name or personal details to any other body, for his personal details to be on any official piece of paper.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to ask for said paperwork Noise abatement order"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill: Asked "It's Simon isn't it?" to which he replied, "yes he then further asked "Simon Cordell" to which he has indicated that it was but not verbally confirmed the answer."

Iam up to here now 11:12 09/02/16

66

266,

Edited part 5.pdf

"As stated above at no point did Mr Cordell speak to any police office to give his name and does not understand how he could have done so in a none verbally manner as he did not shake his head or shake the police offices hand to indicate this to be true. Police states that MR Simon Cordell replied yes than states but would not verbally confirm the answer"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill: To which Mr Simon Cordell refused to provide his details." "He further verifies I did not in fact speak to him"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill: It was explained that without the name of a person from the venue the EO's are unable to serve the paperwork. As we have been unable to progress this line of action."

The police see me walking up to the front gates from pc Shinick statements time stamped 01:59 7th June 14 but this was on the 8th June 2014 and knows that Mr Simon Cordell was in attendance with Inspector Hamill at 02:00 hours on the 8Th June 2014 and that Mr Simon Cordell walked back to where his car was parked on the Great Cambridge Road Enfield, if Mr Simon Cordell had walked into the building it would have been in there notes. The police also understand that this party had been going on since the 6th June 2014.

And know that Mr Simon Cordell did not speak to any one as said in police witness statement, so how could he have accepted any form of paperwork as no one knew his details.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill states: I have made the request to Simon Cordell to turn the music down."

"I had left the grounds and waited in the petrol station for my friend to come out of progress way to me next to the petrol station and get his keys, then left and went home."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill states: During the course of the 8th of June 2014 we had approximately 40 calls complaining about the noise."

"I would like to make note that I only attended on the 08th for about 30 mins max and left to go home. The Cads that have been provided are contaminated with cads such as 1046 progress way and 32 crown Rd, the same as CAD 2456 both the 6th 7th 8th June 2014, and are the main two cads representing the opening to all the CAD numbers Linked.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill states: During the course of the shift police had contact with several groups that had been attending at the Rave all of which were extremely intoxicated and their behaviour had clearly been using drugs which they all confirm they had used but on police contact did not have any drugs on them."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he travel with any of the said people, nor did he invite them to any place or attended to supply any equipment or source of entertainment for them or any drinks or drugs."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill states: as officers were not permitted access into the venue it is unknown the extent of drugs and alcohol abuse which may or may not have taken place within."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that police say that no officers were allowed in the building yet police officer A/PS Charles Miles 724YE says people allowed him to enter but you have not been told nothing about this, in your reports from the police officers."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "Inspector Hamill states: A call from CAD 2410 of the 8th June received at 05:35hrs stated that drugs were openly being sold."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not go into the occupied building neither does he sell drugs or advise or in courage any other person to do so"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "At 03:10hrs on the 8th June PS 92YE noticed a male from the roof of the adjourning building to the venue. The venue backs onto that of the police parade site which did mean as officers entre and left the premises they had a full and unobstructed view of the rear of the rave premises, officers have attended the venue, however the male had already come down of the roof. Staff where given advice as to ensuring that people do not get onto the roof again."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had no involvement in this said event on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 and does not feel that he should be held responsible."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 "As noted the police arrived at 03:10hrs to deal with the matter of a person on a nearby roof of the occupied building located in progress way, however the male had already come down from the roof.

"Staff occupying another building was notified.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time, would he have been notified as he was not in attendance on the 6th 7th June 2014."

67

267,

Edited part 5.pdf

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states" at 05:04hrs CAD 2290 8th June 2014 police were called to a male assaulted in the street. Officers and LAS have attended the location of wood Grange Avenue, were the male had injuries of suspected broken wrist and a bloody mouth, he initially stated that he had been attacked from behind but on investigation it transpired that this male had been one of the people seen on the roof earlier and had fallen whilst getting down."

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he finds a time laps in the statements made by police PS 92YE attended at 03:10hrs and noted the boy had come down from a roof in Wood Grange Avenue the rear of Progress Way and then Police spoke to staff at progress way.

But CAD number 2290 8th June at 05:04 states the same boy is in wood Grange Avenue again and made a 999 call making a claim of assault 01:54 mins after and is believed to be the man fallen of the roof at 03:10 who was seen getting down safely and police state that they can see the roof top clearly from there police service centre.

It is also noted A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE "statement at approximately 06:30Hrs we received a call to nearby Woodgrange Gardens, to reports of a male assaulted. Following an initial investigation this individual matched the description of a male earlier observed on the warehouse roof. It appeared that he had fallen off of the roof and into some bushes and his injuries were consistent with a fall from height. He was heavily under the influence of alcohol and quite probably illegal drugs. He went to North Middlesex Hospital with the London Ambulance Service."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that these times do not match up as in A/Insp Hamill 201566 statement he says he sent someone to the attack at 05:04 CAD 2290 and in A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE statement he said the call did not happen until 06:30Hrs.

Was it 5 or 6 hundred hours or at 1 hundred hours and if it was at 100 hours why did police leave him to go and speak to people at the gate of progress way, if his injuries were so server he had to go to the hospital at 5 0r 6 hundred hours?

Mr Simon Cordell will state that the police already have on their systems, the person’s name they were in contact with leading up to this. The public Order Unit at Scotland Yard would hold the information. And also the police in Essex would have information.

It has taken Mr Cordell and his mother months to gather information in regard to the dates in this ASBO application, and he feels that the police already hold the information that he is being accused off. This has come at a time when he was very unstable in his health due to the police actions toward himself over many years, and also the loss of his Nan’s life which no one should have had to deal with in the manner she passed away, when Mr Simon Cordell should have been taking time with his family and trying to deal with his own health, while dealing with his brothers health, and personal family problems.

BOOK 10

WITNESS STATEMENT Book 8

Statement taken by PC Donald Mc mikan Dated 14 August 2014.

In regard to dates: 6th 7th 8th June 2014

This statement refers to an illegal rave which took place between 6th June and 8th June 2014 on the industrial Estate near Woodgrange Avenue.

On Thursday 14th August 2014, 1 spoke with a resident who lives in Woodgrange Avenue, Enfield. The resident is an elderly female and both she and her husband are retired.

She has stated that on Saturday 7th June 2014, she contacted Police regarding a rave that was happening on the industrial estate close to her home address. Her reason for contacting Police was because the music noise was horrendously loud, and this was disturbing their peace and had been going on for some time. She states that both her and her husband were extremely distressed about this whole incident because something similar had happened in the past.

She states that lots of youths had been jumping over fences and she was very concerned and frightened about this and feared that something would happen to them or one of their neighbours. ‘This made them both extremely anxious, nervous and made them worry.

This lady is worried that an incident like this could happen again. She did not want to provide Police with a direct statement as she is frightened that the organizers could trace where they live and make their lives even more of a misery.

68

268,

Edited part 5.pdf

She is extremely concerned that something like this may happen again in the future. I Simon Cordell State:

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

He will state that he did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point of time did he encourage any other people to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

At no point has Mr Simon Cordell committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

BOOK 11

WITNESS STATEMENT

Book 9

Statement made by: PC Donald Mc Millen 759YE Police officer Dated:14 August 2014

Referring from phone caller taken.6th 7th 8th June 2014

Regards Unit 6 Progress way

Victim off statement is to remain anonymous

This statement refers to an illegal Rave which took place 6th 7th 8th June 2014. On Thursday 14th August 2014 police spoke to a resident in Woodgrange Avenue N9 who wished not to be named and remain anonymous.

The resident stated that the rave/Party at Progress Way started on the Friday 6th of June and ended on the Sunday 8th June 2014.

He stated that he and his wife had contacted the Police numerous times regarding the level of noise. This was so loud that he and his wife had to go and sleep in a different part of the house.

He mentioned that an Ambulance had to attend an incident that happened in the street, apparently someone had fallen off a roof and the ambulance could not gain access. The ambulance men had to attend on foot.

He states that he had discussions with local neighbours during that weekend, who stated that youths had been climbing over fences, and causing damage to the fences.

He stated that this whole incident caused both him and his wife a great deal of distress over this particular weekend.

I Simon Cordell State:

At no point did I take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

I did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

At no time did I encourage any other persons to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point of time did he committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

BOOK 12

Doglas Skinner Duty officer

Statement made dated 15/08/2014

States, On Saturday 19th July 2014 he was on active duty as a officer for Enfield borough.

At 2210hrs

Doglas Skinner made his first statement 29 days after the 7th June and has made additions to his statements 3 months 4 days after. In total 4 month 5 days ===70 days after said incident.

Doglas Skinner states: 20 people pulling into an estate, the information thought was the 20 people were tried to set up a rave.

69

269,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point of time, was he one of the 20 people talked about.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not take part in organising any event on the 19th 20th July 2014 or supply equipment and did not attend the occupied premises to rave. In fact he was pulled over as he sees a friend being detained outside carpet right and at this time he had been helping with food and washing clothes for homeless people.

The CAD number of the call that came in referred to in his statement to 20 people pulling into an estate, the caller states 20 males and females are all white people and the address are listed in the CAD, with names and DVLA records of vehicles.

Doglas Skinner states: The crowd was by an empty building called carpet right and had gained entry to the rear premises.

If the building had not been occupied under section 144 LASPO the 20 people seen and contained in the premises would have been arrested for trespassing or burglary and was not in fact arrested. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was arrested outside the old carpet right and had taking no part in any activity that happened in the premises, of the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town En1Luj. "Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point was he one of the people or vans referred to on the land of carpet right or was he attending a rave, neither was he acting in an Anti-Social Manner."

Doglas Skinner states: Sent officers to the scene to stop anyone else gaining entry to the premises. "

This was the 1st set of officers sent to the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town En1 lUJ

Doglas Skinner: Made his way to the scene.

"2nd set of officers who attended the scene was Doglas Skinner Duty officer."

Doglas Skinner states: There was a metal gate across the entry to the car park, but this had a thick chain and a padlock around it so that it could not be opened.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time had he been to this location before the date in question and he did not put any lock chain or padlock on any gate and at no point of time did he instruct any person to do so.

Doglas Skinner states: He walked around to the rear of the premises where there were several vehicles and about 15 persons.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time was he one of the 15 people or vehicles being mentioned in this Doglas Skinner statement"

Doglas Skinner states: I saw a large black box which had sound speakers and sound system inside them. "Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he hire any sound equipment to anybody on the 19th 8 2014 neither did take part in any event organized on the 19th 8 2014.”

Doglas Skinner states: I received a call from our control room stating they believed up to 100 people were going to arrive at south bury road train station to attended a rave at this location. As a result to this intelligence I believed that the premises were going to be used for a rave.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state please take note to the statement above being paragraph one dated 15/8/2014 of witness statement by Doglas Skinner now please take note to witness statement Doglas Skinner dated 15/8/2014 paragraph three,

Dugles skinner I explained to him, him referring to Mr Simon Cordell that police were expecting 100 plus people to turn up at Southbury road were the rave was happening" While speaking out side Carpet right.

“Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to know the CAD number and to receive the transcripts of the call made of intelligence of 100 people attending.’’

Doglas Skinner states: I saw a male I knew to be Simon Cordell who came out of the building.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he go on the land or in the premises related to Carpet Right. As stated by Doglus skinner the police had contained all occupiers and sound system and vehicles on the land and in the premises, as well as having police officers at the front gates stopping people gaining entry to the premises otherwise mentioned in statements as the old carpet right along the al0.

“take note to the statement above being in paragraph two dated 15/8/2014 of witness statement by Doglas Skinner now please take note to witness statement Doglas Skinner dated 15/8/2014 paragraph

70

270,

Edited part 5.pdf

three, " Outside carpet Right I spoke to Cordell " This is right I did speak to Inspector Doglus outside the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town EN1 1 UJ.

Doglas Skinner: He admitted that he was just organising a party for some friends and that was all.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he organize this party as he felt that he was being accused of doing and at no point would he have said that he did do so, as he had just stopped to help a friend who he see getting detained by the police and at no point from his arrival was any person permitted by police to go on the land.

Doglas Skinner states: I explained to him I was holding him responsible, Him referring to Simon Cordell.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point time should get held responsible for any offence that he has not committed.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in organising or hiring any equipment on the 19th 8 2014.

He will state that he approached carpet right when the police had it contained, stopping access to any Person’s other than police officers gaining entry.

He was not one of the 20 people being accused of looking for venues in paragraph one dated 15/8/2014 in witness statement made by Doglas Skinner as his name would have been noted in police books as everyone else's on the land should have been.

He was not any of the accused people on the land or in the building as Doglas Skinner approached the rear of carpet right.

Doglas Skinner states: Simon Cordell was arrested and detained.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he continued to try and state his point that he had nothing to do with the event.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he believes that it was unjustified that he had been detained and only himself not even the sound system on the land. As stated in the statement provided police officers had people detained in the land and building. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he approached carpet right after the problem had been contained by 2nd set of officers.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he Police offices as well as his closer friends who he sees being detained Named Nash Tate who is willing to come to court, see him walking down the foot to his aid of friends at Carpet Right. After he parked his vehicle in the car park, which belongs to a company called magnet three company's down from carpet right premises.

Mr Simon Cordell will

state that he was on a pubic foot path, as he approached the officer and his friends, who were being detained and that he never had any sound system or equipment and at no point was he involved in the supply of equipment or organisation of any event 19th July 2014. The premises were contained by the police stopping entry in and out as stated in the statements at no point did he attempted or did Mr Simon Cordell agree to take part in any event on the 19th June 2014.

· BOOK 13 missing

· BOOK 14

Statement of Jason Ames Police office 206011 Statement made 15/08/2014 Referring to date 09 August 2014 Millmarsh Lane

Officer Jason Ames States: on the 9th August 2014 he was driving a marked police car in the company of A/INSP King at 2221 hours.

Officer Jason Ames States: they were informed of CAD 9717 which relates to intelligence received that states there was likely to be an illegal open-air rave.

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he attending the occupied premises to which he had been to before to visit a friend, who were living and residing on the premises at Millmarsh lane in an occupied building

71

271,

Edited part 5.pdf

and out back tents, who are an occupation, which is a collective of people. He Understands that they had been treating the premises as their home since 16/05/2014, on the 15/02/2015 Mr Simon Cordell will state that he remembers this day clearly as he had been invited to a friend’s private birthday party who live on the private self-contained land in question along Millmarsh Lane.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he requests to see all information in regard to CAD 9717 as he believes this may contain evidence of his innocents in the events in question.

Officer Jason Aims States: The intelligence received started that there was likely to be an open-Air rave. Mill Mars Lane is 20,000 Square feet self-contained land with 4 large commercial premises within. I have provided evidence supporting this and this location is in fact in (Private Air) as well as in (Open Air) and was being lived in as accepted by police Under section 144 LASPO or Trespass would have taken place.

‘’Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he cause Anti-Social Behaviour on this date’’

I did not organize or take part in an illegal open-air rave, that was likely to take place, as stated by way of being accused in Officer Jason Aim’s statements. The occupiers who was living on the land were treating the premises as their home and was in private Air. The occupiers were living in accordance to the law, living in tents and the occupied attached building on the land.

The term open air rave was used by Jason aims, on stead of on land in open air while attached to (Private Air) as defined by section 63 CDA, to which is a mistake as it was in private air on land.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not arrested for any criminal offence or neither did any person take civil action against himself as he did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour.

Officer Jason Ames States the key elements are present for a rave, he accused occupiers.

It could not be possible to create an illegal rave especially with no power supply being present.

Officer Jason Ames States: The intelligence received stated that there was likely to be an illegal open-air rave.

“Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he organize or take part in an illegal open-air rave that was likely to take place, as stated by way of being accused in Officer Jason Ames Statements. The occupiers living on the land were treating it as their home to his knowledge from doing research in effect to this case the land and therefore the buildings on the land are private, counselled and contained by way of security gates from the general public. Occupiers were living under section 144 Laspo and treating the premises as their home.

The closest/house to the occupied site is 1 mile/away.

Officer Jason Ames States: He attended Millmarsh Lane at 2232 hours.

Officer Jason Ames States: He could see small pockets of young people walking east along Millmarsh lane. " Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time was he one of the people in question or did he organize the accused rave of being. He was invited to a birthday party as noted in the statement within this application made by Aaron King Dated 15/08/2014 Of the officer stating it was a birthday party, which as stated by Mr Simon Cordell "He was invited to"

On the 9th august 2014 Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not encouraged or neither did he invite other people or take part in actions that may have led to an open-air rave in the region of Millmarsh Lane. Or does he no the people referred to.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he take part in any organisation or

supplying of equipment towards any rave on the 09/08/2014.

Officer Jason Ames States: We worked out these youths were making their way to an open-air rave. Mr Simon Cordell will state that this was a private birthday party to which he was invited and never believed to be an illegal rave until police notified him that the key elements were believed to be in place and stopped the private birthday party to which he had been invited to, this was on private land contained by security gates to the premises.

Officer Jason Ames States: This area appeared to be the ground on which a building used to stand. “There was an occupied building at the rear of the land. The land in question is a forecourt to the occupied building."

Officer Jason Ames States: It was fenced off and the front gates were chained shut with a motorcycle chain and padlock.

Officer Jason Ames States: He could hear music coming from the venue.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that no sound could be played as there was no power, “The land was fenced off and the front, gates were chained shut with a motorcycle chain and padlock as in police statement

72

272,

Edited part 5.pdf

made by Aaron King dated 15/08/2014 referring to the 9th August 2014 " I explained to Mr Cordell that he needed to come on the site to see what was going on for all he knew he could be damaging it or steeling from it. Mr Simon Cordell state at this time the occupiers of the land was present and had been from the start of police arrival and he was a guest as explained on the 9th August 2014. Aaron King states: Eventually after promising he would not remove anyone squatting/ occupying the land that were treating it as their home under a section 144 Laspo. Aaron King and PC Ames could come in if they also treated it as the occupiers of the land do, as their private home of residence, as noted in statements provided there was no power or generator present to the self-contained private Land and premises. Any amplified music on the 9th June was coming from the next-door premises in fact from a car.

Officer Jason Ames States: I could see small numbers inside and a couple of tents.

Officer Jason Ames States: We exited our vehicle and approached the gates in order to speak with the organizer.

Officer Jason Ames States: Manning the gate was a mixed-race man I know to be Simon Cordell.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he remembers this day very clearly and what happened. It was a Saturday and he had been looking forward to this day as he was visiting a friend of his, at where he was living, Mr Cordell latter found out it was one of his friend birthday and they were having a get together of friends and family. As he attend the premises in question on the 9th august it was about 8pm. he stayed and had some birthday cake and dinner, until the point of police arrival when in fact he was sitting in a car Index MA57LDY 200 yards from the gates within the self-contained land, he remembers this because as he arrived because he had been invited the gates were unlocked as his vehicle and himself gained access as a visitor, by the occupiers of the land.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as stated he had been invited to attend a friend’s birthday party not a illegal rave by a man who lived at Millmarsh Lane.

Officer Jason Ames States: I was aware of a lot of intelligence on our indices that suggests Cordell is known to be the organizer of most of the raves that have been happening in the Enfield area.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has never been arrested and charged and feels that this is slander of definition of character, and for such here say to be admissible as court evidence or reference of character is criminal and unjustified, no weight should be taken.

Officer Jason Ames States: We asked if we could come into the venue and speak to him. Cordell refused initially starting that there was no rave.

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was just a visitor and had no right without consent of the occupiers to unlock the gate, at no point did he have the key to the gate, To which the occupiers use to unlock the gates to allow access for the police to come in.

Officer Jason Ames States: He stated that it was a private "conference."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did say he had also gone to have a conference with his friends in regard to get the empty co2 gas cylinders he was carrying to be re filled as well as to attend to see his friends.

Officer Jason Ames States: He stated that there have been a few people camping on the land as they had no were to go. The people were in fact the occupiers of the land and building on the premises, who were at the gate on police arrival.

Officer Jason Ames States: He stated that they are having a few friends over for a private party.

Officer Jason Ames States: After persuasion Cordell allowed A/Insp King to gain entry to survey the area.

Officer Jason Ames States: Inside he could see around 20-30 people milling around, 2 small tents, a large set of speakers and sound system and a supply of bottled water. AT no point did I take part or organise a birthday party or a illegal rave or bring any equipment leading to a large sound system on said premises as it would not fit in my car Index MA57LDY a ford focus as mentioned in police statement for me to be driving on the 9th June 2014.

Officer Jason Ames States: Cordell was informed that the rave was going to be closed down and despite a slight resistance to this by him trying to quote legislation to us he agreed to pack up and leave. Yes when asked to leave by police.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did get into index Ma57Ldy and go home to his flat 109 Burncroft avenue Enfield to be he lives and reside every night.

Officer Jason Ames States: Cordell was informed that the rave was going to be closed down and despite a slight resistance to this by him trying to quote legislation to us he agreed to pack up and leave. "At no point would he go against police directions”

73

273,

Edited part 5.pdf

Officer Jason Ames States: He was reluctant but co-operated at this stage.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point would he go against police directions”

Officer Jason Ames States: The venue had more or less emptied, but the organisers were still packing their equipment away.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he have any equipment in fact by this time he had left to go home but got detained by way of a police road block at the top of Millmarsh avenue soon to be realized with other members of the public.

Officer Jason Ames States: Approximately 100 people arrived in Millmarsh Lane at the same time.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as stated at no point of time did he take part in organising any event on the 9th June 2014 he did in fact travel alone to attend a friends birthday party not an illegal rave as he is being accused of and at the point mentioned did he meet any of the people in question out of the 100 people or advise them to attend.

Officer Jason Ames States: This appeared odd to me that so many people turned up all at once.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as stated above he was just attending a friend’s birthday party not a illegal rave as suspected of it being.

Officer Jason Ames States: The crowd appeared to be angry at the fact that police had interrupted their evening and were shouting and advancing at officers.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did go to Millmarsh lane driving index MA57LDY in a silver ford focus on his own to attend a friends Birthday party. He has been to Millmarsh Lane before the date in question. His reason for this is he had been invited to do so at any time. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had been invited to a birthday party at no point was he attending an illegal rave, neither at any point did he take part in the organisation of this birthday party or supply any equipment and that he was present only as a civil citizen up holding the UK Law.

Officer Jason Ames States: One of the groups shouted let’s just storm it."

Officer Jason Ames States: Cordell appeared to have realized that this crowd was in attendance and half emerged from the venue and appeared to be encouraging the crowd to act up and try to false their way into the site.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point would he knowingly encourage such behaviour as to in danger others, as this is not who he is, so the believe that he appeared to take actions, such as stated that he would in fact in danger life's of others would not be true to it statement' of facts.

Officer Jason Ames States: Officer Jason Ames States: there were also reports of missiles being thrown at officers.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as stated above he travelled alone and was in attendance as a visitor of a friends birthday party and no point of time on the 9 /8/2014 did he take part in the hiring of any equipment or organisation of an open air rave as stated, or did he have any influence or encourage any others to any events that occurred on the 9th June 2014

74

274,

Edited part 5.pdf

Officer Jason Ames States: A male and a female that was present did not back down and leave, they were arrested by officers.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not know who the people are that officer Jason Ames refers to as the male and female, who got arrested neither did he have any involvement in the events leading to their arrest.

Officer Jason Ames States:

The events from the 9th June 2014 have a negative impact on Enfield Borough and a strain on police forces across London’s 33 boroughs.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did I cause any Anti-social behaviour. BOOK 15

Statement of (A) Aaron King,

Police officer PS 91YE,

Statement made 15/08/14,

Referring to 9th August 2014 Mill Marsh Lane

Officer ( Aaron King States: On Saturday 9th August 2014 I was on duty in full uniform posted as Acting Inspector. Shortly before 2230hrs I was informed via our GPC that Intel had been received via social media that there was going to be a large illegal rave somewhere in the region of Millmarsh Lane, Enfield, EN3. I was advised that this was being advertised on Face book by "Every Decibel Matters" who run unlicensed events.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he understands that the information received by police via social media, was that there was going to be a large illegal rave, this was said to be some were in the region of Mill Marsh Lane, Enfield En3. This intelligence was past to police Intel Unit public order team, who had been in contact with the director of Every Decibel matters, prior to the information being pasted on to AAaron King, police had attended a location and had spoken to members of the public in regards to the private birthday party to which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not present, it then got stopped and moved to the location to where he was at to no arrangement of his own. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is not a director to this company; neither was he working for the company name every Decibel Matters on this date.

75

275,

Edited part 5.pdf

Officer AAaron King States: At this time I was in company with Ps Ames 123YE and we made our way to the location. On route, I informed the control room of what was potentially occurring and accepted the offer; from some units to attend the location to assist me. On arrival in Millmarsh" Lane it was obvious that something was about to happen. There were a number, of groups of teenagers who were milling around clearly looking for something.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not one of the people in question; neither did he take part in any Anti-social behaviour, organising or should he be accountable for other people’s actions.

Officer AAaron King States: After a brief search I noticed two metal gates next to the Greggs Factory which suddenly closed as we passed them. We stopped and I got out and approached the gates. Although dark, street lighting was on and I could see a male was using a chain and lock to secure the gates.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not the person locking the gate and he did not have a key as he was not an occupier of the land and that he was just a visitor. Who was sitting in his car Ma57ldy parked next to the gates as the police arrived.

He could hear music coming from further inside.

There was no power source and the music was coming from a car related to the same land in another warehouse owned by the same landlord as the land connected to this incident being rented out.

Officer AAaron King States: Stood by the gate I immediately noticed an IC3 male who I know to be Simon CORDELL. I recognised Mr. Cordell as I have previously spoken to him recently at illegal raves where I have seen him setting up sound equipment and subsequently taking it away.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has nether been arrested or charged for illegal raves.

Officer AAaron King States: when confronted by Police...I explained to Mr. Cordell why we were there, but he immediately denied it was a rave. Mr. Cordell stated first it was a private conference but then said it was a birthday party.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was there to have a conference with a friend who lived at the premises at the same time another occupier of the land agreed to have a friend’s private birthday party at the location, to no involvement of his own.

Officer AAaron King States: When asked about permission to be there he stated friends were squatting on the land and they had said he could stay.

76

276,

Edited part 5.pdf

This is true.

Officer AAaron King States: I explained to Mr. Cordell that I needed to come onto the site to see what was going on as for all I knew he could be damaging it or stealing from it. Eventually after promising I would not remove anyone squatting and only myself and Pc Ames would come in, Mr. Cordell agreed that we could come in.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did get involved and speak to the police as they knew him by name and had already chosen to involve him.

Officer AAaron King States: Near to the gate was a silver Ford Focus index MA57LDY which I knew was Mr. Cordell's, -The boot was open, and I noticed it contained three large thin industrial gas bottles. From experience I knew this was likely to contain nitrous oxide which is currently used on the rave scene as a legal high. As we passed the car Mr. Cordell quickly lowered the boot. I queried Mr. Cordell about the gas and pointed out that it was on the news earlier how Nitrous oxide was dangerous and Mr. Cordell stated that the Government would probably ban it soon like everything else.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does remember talking to the police in regard to Nitrous Oxide but at no point did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour or was he breaking the Law.

Officer Aaron King States: Mr Cordell was polite and showed us around the site which appeared to be a large concreted area that was completely open to the air.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that this location was being occupied under section 144 and also has self-contained warehouse on it, evidence supplied in case bundles this is not open to air land.

Officer Aaron King States: There was a large sound system to the rear which was amplified though I could not see any power source.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he this proves the fact that music could not have been made by anyone spoken to by police.

Officer AAaron King States: There was a number of people wearing yellow hi-vis jackets who Mr. Cordell stated were first aiders and there was a pallet of water near to the sound system as well as a couple of tents closer to the gates.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that a female who had just past her first aid test, who is a occupier of the land was present, wearing a yellow hi vest jacket as it was cold and a

77

277,

Edited part 5.pdf

load of yellow hi - vest jackets had been donated and he does remember everybody

present talking about her doing so. "

Up to here so far 09/02/2016 13:32

Officer AAaron King States: I could see no obvious Toilet facilities nor shelter from what had been forecast as a stormy night. Inside the venue mostly just stood around in small groups were about 30 people, mostly teenagers.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that no police officers walked into the part of the building being occupied were there was running water and toilets.

Officer AAaron King States: Mr Cordell stated he was an entrepreneur and was awaiting licenses from the council so that he would soon be legitimate.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was and still does intended to create a festival if this ASBO case stops darkening his name.

Officer AAaron King States: When I explained all the "ingredients" for a rave were present Mr. Cordell began to try and argue his point that it was not a rave and that it was a private party. I spoke at length with Mr. Cordell explaining the legal situation and how by definition this was a rave and that ultimately there were too few people present at the time to stop police and so on this occasion I could act and close the rave. Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour neither did he organize or hire any equipment or was he attending a rave on the 9th June 2014 in regards to the allegations presented within the ASBO application, he did attended a friends birthday dinner party as a guest.

Officer AAaron King States: Whilst on an industrial estate it was my opinion that such was the proximity to local housing and my knowledge of the volume music is played and the duration it is played for, often throughout the weekend that a rave would constitute serious disruption.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that Google Earth shows the closest house to Mill Marsh Lane the premises in question, to be one mile from the closest house. (Exhibit)

Officer AAaron King States: Mr. Cordell was clearly not happy but did not want his equipment seized so agreed to start packing up the sound equipment.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that as noted by officers and officer AAaron King he was present in a ford focus and with three empty welding cylinders, so he could not have been carrying any sound equipment as this would not have fitted into his vehicle.

78

278,

Edited part 5.pdf

Officer AAaron King States: Whilst talking with Mr. Cordell there were small groups of teenagers arriving at the site and entering via a break in the fence, (the gates still being shut at this time). I got Ps Ames to get units to us to prevent further people trespassing on the land and to discourage people from attending the location and exited the venue to a wait.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he should not be accountable for other people’s actions that he took no part in. For people to further be trespassing someone would have had to be arrested for trespass in the beginning, who is this person.

Officer AAaron King States: Mr. Cordell's exit with the sound equipment. Whilst waiting I radioed for the on-call Superintendent so I could get the various Rave legislation approved so that I could seize the sound equipment and enforce a rave cordon on Millmarsh Lane to prevent people entering.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that Inspector AAaron has been told this third party and he knows that he has stated the true facts in his statements of truth, that Mr Simon Cordell was present in a car and would not able to carry such large sound equipment.

Officer AAaron King States: Whilst stood by the venue a number of people began leaving, most were laughing but the odd one was blaming police for stopping the event. Suddenly there was a huge number of mainly teenagers walking towards me from the direction of Mollison Avenue. Apparently, this group had all arrived together from the nearby railway station. Straight away some of this group headed straight towards us saying they were going to storm the place. I had been joined by a few team officers and we advised them that the rave had been closed down and they would not be allowed to enter. There was some verbal confrontation but the large group which was up to 100 strong moved off round the corner with some overheard saying they would break in round the corner.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he take part in anyone else’s Anti-Social Behaviour and he did not cause Anti-social Behaviour.

Officer AAaron King States: As they began to move off Mr. Cordell stood by the break in the fence and shouted words to the effect of, "Come on, there is more of you".

And he quickly went up to Mr Cordell and told him to stop or he would arrest him to prevent a breach of the peace. At this Mr Cordell went back and stayed away.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time would he say this, and he would never in danger another person’s life in such a manner. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would never encourage activities that would lead to incitement of a riot, and as there

79

279,

Edited part 5.pdf

was more than 12 people present he know if this statement was true, he would have been arrested under offences contrary to section’s 5, 4A, 4, of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 and or section 91.

Officer AAaron King States: The large group did indeed try to get into adjoining premises that they thought led to the rave venue hut were stopped by officers and moved off back into Millmarsh lane, although one officer Pc Wale was injured- during a struggle. T requested the attendance of as many units as possible including dogs and TSG as the group were becoming more hostile towards officers despite there being no music now and being informed of the closure. A short while later officers I had positioned at the junction radioed that there was now an even bigger crowd advancing on them. I arrived at the junction to see a very large number of people, now up to 200 walking with purpose towards officers stood in the road. Suddenly objects began to get thrown from the crowd towards police. I saw traffic cones, cone lights, bottles and stones begin to land near Officers so that they had to quickly move out of the way. I again heard phrases similar to "storm them". Fearing imminent violence I drew and extended my baton as did my colleagues. I could hear shouts of "get back" but the crowd continued to throw items, some of which were landing on cars that had been temporarily stopped due to the group. We had been joined by two dog units who took the lead in dispersing the crowd. At this point there were two arrests to my left and along with the dogs this seemed to make the crowd withdraw. I told my officers and the dogs not to follow the crowd as they were now by the train station with nowhere to go as the barriers were down. There was a tense standoff for some time, but the group eventually got onto trains and left the area.

Officer AAaron King says I could hear shouts.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not the person shouting or causing any Anti-Social Behaviour neither did he take part in the organisation of the private birthday party.

Officer AAaron King States: I was informed by another unit that Mr Cordell had also left with his equipment.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that this proves police were told third party, but already new Mr Simon Cordell was in his car that was full because he was carrying cylinder bottles in accordance to the law of The CARRIDGE OF DANGRESS GOODS CDG. Officer AAaron King States: I tasked arriving TSG with local reassurance patrols but shortly after they started, I was advised that most of the group were wandering around

80

280,

Edited part 5.pdf

near to Ponders End. I tasked TSG with following this group and was informed by their Inspector that their unmarked unit had overheard talk that the' rave was now going to be South West of the original location.

I WAS NOT INVOVLED IN THE ORGANISATION OF ILLEGALE RAVES NEITHER WAS I ARRESTED AND GIVEN THE RIGHT TO DEFFANED MY SELF.

I was aware that TSG subsequently saw Simon Cordell by the Crown lane Industrial Estate where he has held a rave before and had stopped the group from forcibly breaking into this location.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that this is two occupied building of 6 within a 2 mile radius, that were all being occupied in Enfield, within the same Local Borough that he has lived in a resided in since his Birth, and he does not think that it is right for police to say who he can and can’t have as friends or as associates.

Officer AAaron King States: Finally after close to three hours later, the group dispersed, and I was informed that social media was indicating the rave would now be Epping Forest.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not go to Epping forest on this date.

Officer AAaron King States The whole incident took a vast number of resources to police and there were two arrests for drugs possession and two for drunk and disorderly behaviour. One officer was injured with a deep cut to his elbow requiring first aid by the Police FME and emergency calls whilst answered were subject to delay.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is sorry to hear that any police officers had been hurt and understand the offenders faced criminal prosecution for the offences they had caused.

BOOK 16

81

281,

Edited part 5.pdf

· Statement of Aaron King Dated 07/09/2014

Further to his statement Dated 15/08/2014 Regarding Saturday 9th August 2014

AAaron King state's: Further to his statement Dated 15/08/2014 Regarding An illegal rave on Saturday 9th August 2014

The version of events declared in the statement of Aaron King Dated 07/09/2014 and 15/08/14 are both in correct and misleading to each other as pointed out;

Aaron King states: I could see a male was using a chain to lock and secure the gates.

" Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point was he this person, as there was no reason for me to have a key as he was just a visitor."

"As Aaron king states I could see a male was using a chain and lock to secure the gates he then states, while stood at the gates I immediately noticed an ic3 male who I no to be Simon Cordell,

Mr Simon Cordell will state that to which is true as he was sitting in the car index MA57LDY parked close to the gates, when approached from the street, As noted by AAaron king Near to the gate was a silver Ford Focus index MA57LDY, which he knew was Mr Cordell's. This statement was made 15/08/2014 seven days after the occurrence of accused events referred to on the 9th August 2014 then another statement was made to amendments of this statement dated 07/09/2014 stating they know it was Mr Simon Cordell locking the gate a mix ic3 male who they no to be himself, which is a contradiction of events that have been noted on two different dates by the same police officer leading to events within his and there witness statements, that Mr Simon Cordell is being accused in that should not justified towards an Asbo application and should not have no effect on himself by way off effecting his civil liberty's human rights or acting as a bad marker in his name of reference, to which he feel punished for and now in turn has affected his life.

AAaron King state's: I have been asked to clarify the role that Mr Simon Cordell had during the incident.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not see how any person can preserve his role off being an organizer, as he was only being helpful and polite and curites, in his friend’s place of residence towards the police, while being a invited visitor. It was his friend’s birthday and he had been invited for dinner. At no point did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, nor did he organize or hire any equipment and he was not in attending to a rave on the 9th June 2014.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did attend a friend’s birthday dinner party as a guest.

Aaron King states: as a male quickly locked the gates upon apparently seeing my marked police vehicle. This male was Mr. Cordell

“Mr Simon Cordell will state that he could not have locked the gates as he was only a guest and at no point in time had the keys to the lock on the gates.

Aaron King states: It was initially Mr. Cordell who said he could not entre and it was him who was very much in charge of deciding if police were going to be let in.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was asked by police if he would let them in to which he explained he was not the occupier and never had any keys. At this point in time one of the occupiers went off to get the keys and let the police in.

BOOK 17

WITNESS STATEMENT

82

282,

Edited part 5.pdf

Statement of PC Donald Mc Millan 759YE Dated: 19th August 2014 Police officer Unit 6 Progress Way

Referring to 6th 7th 8th June 2014

This statement refers to an illegal rave which took place between 6th June and 8th June 2014 on the industrial Estate near Woodgrange Avenue.

On Thursday 14th August 2014, police spoke with a resident who lives in Woodgrange Avenue, Enfield. The resident is an elderly female and both she and her husband are retired.

She has stated that on Saturday 7th June 2014, she contacted Police regarding a rave that was happening on the industrial estate close to her home address. Her reason for contacting Police was because the music noise was horrendously loud, and this was disturbing their peace and had been going on for some time. She states that both her and her husband were extremely distressed about this whole incident because something similar had happened in the past.

She states that lots of youths had been jumping over fences and she was very concerned and frightened about this and feared that something would happen to them or one of their neighbours. This made them both extremely anxious, nervous and made them worry.

This lady is worried that an incident like this could happen again. She did not want to provide Police with a direct statement as she is frightened that the organizers could trace where they live and make their lives even more of a misery. She is extremely concerned that something like this may happen again in the future.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point in time did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

And he did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

At no time did he encourage any other persons to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time has he committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this Asbo application.

He will state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th / 8th June 2014

BOOK 18

-WITNESS STATEMENT Statements of Jhon Andrews Police Officer Dated: 19/08/2014

Reference to 6th 7th 8th June 2014

Refers to an illegal Rave which took place between 6th June and 8th June 2014. On Thursday 14th August 2014, I spoke to a resident in WOODGRANGE AVENUE N9, who wished not to be named and remain anonymous.

The resident stated that the rave/Party at Progress Way started on the Friday 6th of June and ended on the Sunday 8th June 2014.

He stated that he and his wife had contacted the Police numerous times regarding the level of noise. This was so loud that he and his wife had to go and sleep in a different part of the house.

83

283,

Edited part 5.pdf

He mentioned that an Ambulance had to attend an incident that happened in the street, apparently someone had fallen off a roof and the ambulance could not gain access. The ambulance men had to attend on foot.

He states that he had discussions with local neighbours during that weekend, who stated that youths had been climbing over fences, and causing damage to the fences. He stated that this whole incident caused both him and his wife a great deal of distress over this particular weekend

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point in time did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no time did he encourage any other persons to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point in time has he committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this Asbo application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

· BOOK 19

I am a resident living at Wood Grange Gardens and have lived at this address for 28 years. I am retired and live with my wife, who suffers from diccasion? As a result of the rave that took place at the warehouse, my wife and I have suffered as a result of my wife’s conditions, As the noise is so bad that even low my house is double glassed the noise penetrates though the wall. On the last occasion we had people spilling out from the rave onto the Rd and they are very noisy. This is a lonely area but things change when the party is on.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no time did he encourage any other persons to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point has he been convicted or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

· BOOK 20 Statement off: Eric Baker Police Officer 219382 Dated 19/08/2014

He is a police officer in London Borough of Enfield and has been tasked to contact residents of the Borough who had called police to inform them of an illegal rave that took place over Friday 7th June 2014 and Saturday 8th June 2014, in a warehouse in Progress Way Enfield

84

284,

Edited part 5.pdf

On Tuesday 19th August 2014 I contacted the caller of the CAD 10471/07June 2014 by telephone, who was happy to give an impact statement regarding how illegal rave affected her and her husband over the above dates mentioned.

The caller wishes to remain anonymous. I will refer to her as complainant "A" The original notes taken from the below statement are present in my pocketbook serial 370/14, page 1.

Complainant "a" said it was a warm evening and we had to keep the windows shut because of the noise. The next day we could not even go out into the garden because of the noise. It kept me and my husband up all night and made us very anxious the next day. The illegal rave totally ruined our weakened" This concluded what complainant 'A" said regarding this matter.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour and he did not organize or hire any equipment or was he attending a rave on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014th.

· BOOK 21

· Statement: pc Edgoose

· Dated: 31st August 2014

Alma Rd

Referring to: Thursday 24th July 2014

Officer Pc Edgoose States: On THURSDAY 24th JULY 2014 I was on duty in plain clothes as operator of an unmarked police vehicle in company with APS 212YE MARTIN, PC 151YE ROBERTSON, and PC 229YE O'NEILL. At around 1625 hours on Alma Road EN3 we had cause to stop a silver Ford Focus VRM MA57LDY due to the manner of its driving. The driver was a male I know to be Simon CORDELL dob21/01/1981.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has no disputes with reference to statement made by pc Edgoose above, apart from the manner to which MR Simon Cordell is being accused of driving.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: I know him as I have dealt with on a number of previous occasions. He was initially hostile about having been stopped, but once he had calmed down, he engaged in conversation with us.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point was he acting in an Anti-Social Manner

Officer Pc Edgoose States: He stated that he is staying out of trouble now, and he does not get involved in any of the things he used to.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has not caused any offence since he was much younger; and that he just gets accused and harassed by members of the metropolitan police a lot.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: He stated that he has 4 brand new speakers at home which are suitable for use at raves, but he does not use them and has offered to lend them to any "youngsters" to use.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had been on curfew for one year for a case he proved his innocents in and had been working hard in his Local community trying to make a positive effect towards his self and other that he could help, so he had been spending his time building his company and would not link himself to illegal raves,

85

285,

Edited part 5.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did say he had been getting his equipment ready and proposals for picket’s lock and barley lands ready and had been in contact with both venues. Mr Simon Cordell will state that had also been working at his local community hall as well as Muswell Hill festival ponders end festival lock to lock festival and Enfield town festival and would have been talking about such on goings only and had been working with the youngsters from Kemp Hall Community Hall.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: He went on to say that they are not interested though as these days they just want to steal everything.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that the people he meets appreciated the work he was doing for them so he does not see why this would be said.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: He said he gets inundated with requests to run raves all the time, but he doesn't get involved now. He claims to have 20,000 followers on one social media site, and 70,000 on another. He said he could organize a rave and get 20,000 people at it with no problems whatsoever.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that the word Rave has been used and he does not see how this relates to the conversation on the day or his activities as he was talking about the hard work he had been committing himself to, constrictive legal work and for the term Rave to be used without the key elements is an injustice, which if true would have led to criminal convection, as the term illegal rave is of an illegal formality and his PNC Criminal Record and his other recollection of events in his life state otherwise. Mr Simon Cordell will state that did not cause any Anti-social behaviour on this date in question.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: He gets requests from anarchist type groups to run raves for them.

Ile went on to say that he had been asked by Occupy London, Black Block and other anarchist type groups to run a rave at Notting Hill Carnival for them so that they could cause carnage and mayhem, but he had refused.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he disputes that he would say this as he knows that he is not black neither is he white. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is mixed race of British Nationality and that he has neither heard of a group called Black Block, neither would he promote verbally of such a group the same as he would not verbally promote such anarchist type groups such as the kkk because he has been created by both.

Officer Pc Edgoose States: Whilst on public order duty at Notting Hill Carnival I saw Mr. CORDELL walking through the area I was deployed around TAV1STOCK ROAD. He was pushing a wheelie bin, and he was approached by members of a group of around 10 - 20 people who had been waiting at a junction near our location. This group had been playing drum and bass music and had told officers they were heading to an event but were awaiting the location. It was somewhere between 2200 - 2300 hours when I had seen the group, and Mr. Cordell.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour or Alarm harm or distress on the date in question.

• BOOK 22

Statement: Pc 577ye

Dated: 12th September 2014

86

286,

Edited part 5.pdf

109 Burncroft Avenue

Referring to: Friday 12th September 2014

On Friday 12th September 2014 I attended the address of Simon Cordell in Burncroft Avenue EN3 with A/PS 556YE PETRUCCI, PCSO NASSEER and PCSO TILLEY.

I knocked on Simon Cordell's front door at 1230 hours and he opened the door and asked what we wanted; I asked him if he was Simon Cordell, to which he replied, "Yeah." I stated to him that I was here to issue him with a summons to attend Highbury Corner Magistrates Court on 6th October 2014 at 1:30pm. Mr. Cordell stated, "What is this for?" I informed him that it was for an ASBO; I showed him the summons and the folder and as I went to hand him the folder and the summons Cordell stated, "I am not accepting that, I'm not having that." Cordell then placed the folder on the floor, outside his door, in the hallway. I stated to him that he does not have to accept it and that I have already informed him of the date, time and where to go. Mr. Cordell then shut the door before I could hand him the summons, so I posted it through his letter box. Mr. Cordell was also told to inform his solicitor of this.

Mr. Cordell was a light skinned, mixed race male, with short black hair and was of medium build.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that on this date he caused not Anti-Social Behaviour that might lead to Harm Alarm or Distress to any other person.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he disputes the fact that he was served the Anti-Social Folder Paper Bundle as it was not handed to him self at no point of time.

Copt of Complaint Sent)

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this down for Simon Cordell to a incident that happen 12/09/2014 around the Time off around 12:00pm Of concern to all of many factors such as British Standards relevant to good business practice.

Human Rights, Laws protecting our community governed by the United Kingdom well as many other relevant factors. as of date prior explained in this chapter what happened leading up to events today at address. 109 Burncroft Avenue EN3 7JQ on the 12/09/2014

Mr. Simon Cordell was at home making plans for positive future development in regards to his company and future proposals as well as relevant documents and data, To the surprise of a knock on his front door, this was a surprise because he has no intercom and was expecting no visitors.

So with this all explained he was couscous to open the door as he approached the door with caution of un-expected visitors he looked into the keyhole on his front door,

He could see it was the police through his keyhole. He asked them without opening the door what was wanted of him, they said they needed to talk to him. At this point Mr. Simon Cordell opened his door a little to see what the police wanted to talk to him about, once the door was opened a little they then said to him that they wanted to serve some documents on him at which point Mr. Simon Cordell replied he was not willing to accept anything and closed the door.

Upon closing his close he told the police he was not being rude but he was not willing to accept receipt of any documents due to him having learning difficulties as noted on the police national police system and other governing services, which he then heard the lady police officer say through the closed door I was again looking through the keyhole watching what the police officers was doing I heard the " Lady police office say what should we do to the man police officer said just put it on the floor in front of

87

287,

Edited part 5.pdf

the door and he took some letters from the lady police officer and posted them into my letter box"

The Man police officer posted 4 pages of papers in Mr. Simon Cordell letter box and the lady police officer put a large blue file on Mr. Simon Cordell front door step outside.

My son then called me and told me what had happened but due to a death in the family I was unable to attend his address until today the 13/09/2014 when I got to Mr. Simon Cordell address I saw the blue folder that the police had left at his front door which was in plan view of anyone. It had been opened and left opened so anyone could have looked into it.

I was shocked to see that inside the document there was full details of Mr. Simon Cordell and also other people names under the data protection act the police should have never left this folder outside Mr. Simon Cordell address which would give anyone access to it.

I am going to the police station to hand this back to them as it was never served on Mr. Simon Cordell and he will not accept it from the police. I am not sure if any papers are missing from the folder Cl. I said it 'was opened on the floor when got there.

I believe that the police when Mr. Simon Cordell did not accept the documents they should have took them back with them and arranged for signed delivery or tried to again serve them on Mr. Simon Cordell as the file is far too big to put into a letter box. This is also a complaint due to the data protection issues that the police could have avoided by not leaving the folder on a doorstep that anyone had access to. The folder would have never fitted in a letter box and I do not feel that the police putting 4 bits of paper in a letter box is serving anyone the full paper work which should have been done and not just left it on the door step for anyone to see and read and take data out of it if they so wished, this is a beach of the data protection act.

PNC PAGES 52 TO 62

UP TO HERE all police BOOKs are done THEN 13 THAT ARE MISSING BECAUSE OF MY COMPUTER YOU HAVE.

BOOK 13

Doglas Skinner made his first statement 29 days after the 7th June. and has made additions to his statements 3 months 4 days after. In total 4 month 5 days ==70 days after.

Take note to the three misleading facts Mr Simon Cordell has highlighted facts that he believes are of key relevance to his innocents in the ASBO application presented made by Doglas

Doglas Skinner:

Dated 09/09/2014 Addition to 15th /08/2014 Referring to 07th /June /2014

Doglas Skinner:

Has been asked to clarify how I know that Simon Cordell is an organizer of raves.

“Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not know a Doglas Skinner, I do not know a Doglas Skinner.”

88

288,

Edited part 5.pdf

And do not see how he can clarify that he is the organizer of illegal raves because this is not true, and at no point was he setting up a rave on 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

Doglas Skinner:

I have known of Simon Cordell for over 20 years.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he does not no a Doglas Skinner as stated:

Doglas Skinner will state he:

Was tasked to speak to the organizer to see how long it would be carrying on for.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that on the 6th June Inspector Hamill sent officers to the expected to be rave in the occupied building under section 144 Laspo, to see how long it would be carrying on for, to which police reported back that they spoke to organisers on the gate who were acting as security as well stating to be just volunteers police state who were quite forth coming with information. The police officer also state they see my younger brother and myself present, which at no point can be true for both me myself Simon Cordell and my brother Tyrone Benjamin on the 7th June 14,

On the 6th June me and a friend was in my flat 109 Burncroft Avenue. Around the time of the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 my brother Tyrone Benjamin was in a critical state of injury due to a road ATR on his motorcycle medical injury and could not have attended progress way, evidence has been requesting by my solicitor.

Inspector Hamill states that at no point did the police gain entry to the occupied building neither did he himself or any other officers dated the 6th 7th June 2014.

On the 7th June Inspector Charles 724ye states he and Inspector Hamill attended Progress way at 10:03pm to which stating in their statement presented within this ASBO application was in fact June 8th June 2014,

"while waiting for a female to get the organizer that Inspector Hamill and A/PS Charles were already talking to on the gate acting as security or volunteers as well, while waiting they noticed Mr Simon Cordell approaching progress way and asked him to walk back to the street the way he had just come from. Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he speak to any officers on the 7th June 2014, and on the 8th June 2014 no female asks him to speak to police as a organizer or supplier of sound equipment. Mr Simon Cordell will state that that he never attended a rave or caused any Anti-social behaviour.

Doglas Skinner:

I waked to the location referring to premises in progress way and see a white van.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he drive into the occupied land under a section 144 Laspo, otherwise referred to as progress way on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 and he does not understand how anybody can state otherwise, as this would not be true or correct.

Doglas Skinner: Inside this van was a male I no to be Cordell.

"If taken that Cordell is referred to myself as Simon Cordell, I did not talk to any police on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 as stated in inspector Hamill statement made on the 06/08/2014 referring to the 7th June 2014."

Doglas Skinner: As I got closer to the van he got out and walked over towards me.

"Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not get out of his van on the 7th 8th June 2014 and was not approach by pc Doglas Skinner Leading towards the premises in question on the 7th 8th June 2014 in progress way and does remember police officers and councillors officers walking towards him out side the gate as he was approaching and asked by police to walk the way leading back to where he had just come from back to the al0 great Cambridge road."

89

289,

Doglas Skinner: On the 7th It was not Mr Simon Cordell as stated who shock his hand and said hello and talked to him about how he remembered him as a youngest over twenty years ago as he had already left.

Doglas Skinner:

END OF ALL POLICE AND PUBLIC WITNESS STATEMENTS

90

290,

Edited part 5.doc

This document is only for Simon Cordell Solicitors to see as Simon is not a Solicitor and needs help to address what sections need to be placed in his updated statement and which parts will be used for his barrister at the appeal. This is a draft copy of what can be included to make a new updated statement and notes which the barrister will need to see.

Witness statement in pursuit of Civil Proceedings Ci Act 1967, s;9; Mc Act 1980, ss.5A(3) and 5B;

Criminal Procedure Rules 2005, Rule 27.1

Introduction:

· An ASBO order has been appealed against after the magistrates court, the decision had been made against Mr Simon Cordell, this was at Highbury Corner, Magistrates Court, on the 4th August 2015 in pursuant to s.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 this is to make him subject to an Anti-Social behaviour order in order, for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

· The respondent’s case is that Our Client that we represent, has been accused of being integrally involved in the organisation of illegal raves in Enfield on the dates listed below that are in question by the applicant.

12/01/2013 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at Canary Wharf.

24/05/2013 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in looking for venues, to set up an illegal rave.

25/05/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at Unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, White Hart Lane, N17.

07/06/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on progress way, Enfield.

20/06/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at 1 Falcon Park, Neasden Lane,

NW10.

19/07/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at the Carpet Right Showroom on the A10 Great Cambridge Road, Enfield.

24/07/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had admitted to police officers that he was the organiser for illegal raves.

27/07/2014 That Mr Simon Cordell had been involved in the organisation of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on Millmarsh lane, Enfield.

09 -      That Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organisation of and / or supplied

10/08/2014 equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on

1

291,

All the Same! Repeat of same document!

292,293,294,295,296,297,298,299,300,301,302,303,304,305,306,307,308,309,310,311,312,313,314,315,316,317,318,319,320,321,322,323,324,325,326,327,328,329,330,331,332,333,334,335,336,337,338,339,340,341,342,343,344,345,346,347,348,349,350,351,352,353,354,355,356,357,358,359,360,361,362,363,364,365,366,367,368,369,370,371,372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382,383,384,385,386,387,388,389,390,391,392,

 

 

 

 

9.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2

Asbo RE Simon's updated statement 09-02-2016 17-07

09/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 393,394,395

 

9.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2

Asbo RE Simon's updated statement 09-02-2016 17-07

09/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 393,394,395

--

393,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 09/02/2016 05:07:12 PM

Josephine Ward

josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

JOSEPHINE WARD

josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Rewired

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: Simon's updated statement

Dear Josey

The statement we have been asking you to request from Superintendent Coombes since Sep 2015 will help this case Josey, I cannot understand how you can say it will not. Simon was not in Essex which will show in Superintendent Coombes statement. it will show that Superintendent Coombes contacted the met police and spoke to a Superintendent and give them all the information and told the MET to keep a close eye on this event as it could happen within the METs bounders. It will say Superintendent Coombes asked for an officer name that would be on duty in the met police that weekend in case of problems.

It will show that Superintendent Coombes made many phone calls to the organisers of the rave way before the day that the event was due to take place to try and get them to stop. None of this will come back to Simon. And it will also show more information than this so how can this not help.

Just the met police knowing about this event and getting the person name who spoke to Superintendent Coombes will mean a great deal as this will clearly show the MET police was warned about this event before it even started. so, in turn the MET police would have known where is was moved to.

Please tell me how this will not help?

Josey the public order unit no full well who was the organisers of most of the dates within this ASBO application. is it right they got information on their system showing who was the real organisers which is not Simon, yet a case is put in Simon name.

Josey people can have friends it does not mean they know what people are doing does it.

Josey the case for illegal raves has not been proven at the trial already and can never be proven as there is no trespass to the applications case. The team raves cannot be used in a legal team read Simon 90-page document and you will see the law there in it.

Why do you think in the new Skeleton Argument the word illegal has been taken out within the whole document and the word rave has only been used? But they cannot use this team in the application as said above the team raves cannot be used in a legal team.

So now what is the case Simon acted in an anti-social manner, well clearly this is the case that was proven at trial but I cannot understand why and no one else can even the councils I have spoken to do not know how this was proven, as not one police officer stood up at trial and said Simon acted in a rude or anti-social manner towards them, they said he spoke to them and done what they asked of him. The witness statements not one of them can give an ID of Simon so how do they know it was Simon that has acted in an anti-social manner?

Josey to prove this case the burden has to be of high standard, and it is not, or they would have been able to prove illegality at trial which could not be proven.

Josey there was a reason the application was done in the way it was they could not prove outright Simon acted in a way to prove he:

· That the offender has acted, at any time since XXXXXX in an anti-social manner, that is to say in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself, and

· An order under this section is necessary to protect persons in any place in England and Wales from further anti-social acts by him.

The reason being Simon did not act in an anti-social manner to any person and this is proven in their own application. AS said above Simon was not rude to anyone even the police he spoke to them so this is not acting, in an anti-social manner that is to say in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself.

But if he was the organisers of these illegal raves then he would be the person that was overall reasonable for any person that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

They cannot prove Simon was the organisers of these illegal raves.

Once you have had time to look after Simon document tonight can you please supply bullets of all points you feel he has issues.

Would it also please be possible to ask the court for more time in order to get the document in as Simon does not want to run out of time in order to get this all addressed and all documents in and the list of witness that will need to be called that was due in yesterday to the court.

394,

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD

mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 09 February 2016 15:59

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Simon's updated statement

Lorraine

I am sorry that you have not been well.

As the updated statement is not yet completed by Simon please indicate when this statement will be ready. This is not a rushed request as you seem to suggest, you were aware of this from before Christmas break so please do not blame me.

The information that you are asking me to request from does not assist Simon's case and if anything will lead to an inference that he is involved with the organisers of the rave. If Simon insists on this being requested, then I will of course request this, but it does not help Simon. I have not delayed any information from being included in the bundles. It is for Simon to provide this information in a timely manner. Simon's appeal is based on the definition of whether the events cited in the respondent's application were raves by definition. Legal aid funding does not remunerate me for sitting through meeting after meeting. This is why I asked for Simon's statement in advance of the meeting so the meeting would be constructive.

Your perception of the strengths and weaknesses in the case differ from my interpretation as does your belief in information that is being sought and how this assists Simon's case/ appeal. I am giving you my honest view on the Police evidence.

If Simon's statement is not ready and I assume it is not, then please email it this evening and I can reschedule for 4.30pm tomorrow.

Regards

Josephine

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Lorraine Cordell lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:

Dear Josey

due to not getting replies to my emails since the new year asking if anything else was needed to be done by as and getting no reply I have not had time since yesterday to deal with getting a statement re Dwayne, but I think that is covered already as Jamie Duffy was there and he has already wrote a statement.

I told you before Christmas Dwayne was due to go away to complete his trip that he has to cut short due to my mum's death. I told you he is back packing so would be very hard to get hold of once he left which was a few days after you asked me to get the tickets to show when he was leaving and the hall details. and when you told me about Dwayne would need to attend, I told you that would be imposable as he was due to leave a few days after you asked me. I even called him in your office Josey so you cannot say you did not know this.

Yes, I should be able to get statement of other people and in your last email you did not say you needed these statements today in the daytime you said by tomorrow evening. Which is tonight.

I am sorry you now feel you have to rush things as they have not been done but that is not my fault or Simon's

Josey you know I have many health problems and I have only just had a huge amount of injections into my spine on the 17/01/2016 and I am not allowed to run around and do things for 6 to 8 weeks after having these done. I also got the flu really badly and have not been well for the last 2 weeks. but have still tried to get things due that was needed but getting no replies to my emails did not help.

Josey you have had Simon 65-page statement for months I think since Oct 2015 at the last meeting you allowed him to attend it was given to you. It is this statement he is updating again since we got the information from the cps in am email on the 04/02/2016.

Simon is trying to get things done so you do not have so much to do. I have done the same thing. Me and Simon from the start of this case have done all that was asked of us and much more,

We were asking for things to be done since this case started which was not and only started to be done when the appeal was put in.

If you feel the need to re-schedule the meeting which has happened many times before then please update us, but this meeting is to

395,

deal with Simon updated statement Josey which he has never had a chance to do.

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD

mailto:iosephinewardsolicitor®gmail.com1

Sent: 09 February 2016 14:53

To: Lorraine Cordell; too smooth

Subject: Simon's updated statement

Lorraine / Simon

I note that I have not received the updated statement from Simon, nor any additional statements from any witnesses re Dwayne's leaving party. I advised you previously that Dwayne was required to attend court, clearly, he cannot as he is travelling, hence the request for alternative witnesses to back up Simon's alibi.

If the updated statement is not received by 3.30pm then I will have to re-schedule the meeting for until such time as the updated statement is received.

Regards

Josephine

 

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment February 2016 10-02-2016 14-08

10/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 396

 

 

10.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment February 2016 10-02-2016 14-08

10/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 396

--

396,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 10/02/2016 02:07:42 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

too smooth

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Office appointment 9.30 am on Thursday 11th February 2016

Simon

Please attend my office for 9.30am tomorrow morning for an appointment from 9.30am - 11.30am so that I can draft and finalise your updated statement. You make reference in this statement to your mother making enquiries from local councils who have confirmed that the ASBO will affect future applications etc. I need a full statement itemising in chronological order the different persons spoken to contact numbers, emails to demonstrate hardship etc. Please email across this statement as soon as possible.

Please confirm that you can attend this appointment.

Many thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Simon Cordell oner – appeal - 11-02-2016 17-51

11/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 397,398

 

 

11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Simon Cordell oner – appeal - 11-02-2016 17-51

11/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 397,398

--

397,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 11/02/2016 05:50:48 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>; too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sb Fwd.: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

Lorraine /Simon

For your information and as specifically requested contrary to advice I am forwarding the email that I sent to Superintendent Coombs pursuant to your instructions.

Regards

Josephine

Forwarded message   

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Date: Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:49 PM

Subject: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

To: Adrian.Coombs@essex.pnn.police.uk

Dear Superintendent Coombs

I am representing Simon Cordell in respect of an appeal against a standalone ASBO that was imposed at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court on 4th August 2015.

One of the many incidents referred to in the bundle as a reason cited requesting the ASBO is date specific on 6th,7th and 8th June 2014 at Progress Way, Enfield.

Miss Lorraine Cordell, Simon Cordell's mother researched the internet for any information in relation to Progress Way incident on 6th and 7th June 2014 to try to show that her son was not involved in this incident and did not set up the rave. etc. She found an article on the internet which had your contact details. She states that she telephoned you regarding this incident as she believes that the event originally planned in Essex relocated to Progress Way due a male called Chris Lurcher Lewis posting an entry on a Facebook page. We are interested in whether this information is accurate and also whether you took any action to prevent this event from being set up elsewhere. Miss Cordell refers to you are stating that you issued a dispersal notice and she also states that you notified your colleagues in the Met regarding this.

The Met Police are accusing Simon Cordell of setting up this event at Progress Way. They have also only produced evidence from 7th June 2014 in relation to CAD messages that appear to relate to a number of different GPS Locations, one of which is Crown Road, near Southbury Road where another rave was taking place.

We are seeking to show the court that Mr Simon Cordell did not organise this event and that another male did. We are also seeking to establish that the Met Police could have closed this event down on 6th June 2014 when they were aware that it had started up i.e. the dispersal notice that you issued would demonstrate this.

We would very much appreciate if you could give this matter your earliest attention and provide us with a statement concerning the event that was originally scheduled to set up in Essex but due to your vigilance was stopped. Could you please provide specific detail of any event page/ media publication that you monitored and whether you relayed this information to the Met and they simply did not act on your information.

Can you also please confirm whether Simon Cordell was present for the Essex event and whether he was one of the organisers that you served the dispersal notice on or telephoned during your enquiries.

We thank you in advance for your kind assistance in this matter and we await hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO SOLICITORS

798 High Road

398,

Tottenham London N17 0DH Office

Tel: 0208 365 9900

 

 

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - appeal against 13-02-2016 19-13

 13/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 399,400,401,402

403,404

 

12.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - appeal against 13-02-2016 19-13

 13/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 399,400,401,402

403,404

--

399,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 13/02/2016 07:12:43 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

RE: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown

Subject: C. Court on 22nd February 2016

Attachments: Page-283-Grid-Map.pdf

09-08-14-03.png

Simon please look at this email and attachments and see if it ok to send Josey please as I am not sending it without your say so.

Hi Josey

I know it is the weekend and I am not asking you to reply to this over the weekend but if you could please do this on Monday, I would be grateful.

I am very worried and know that things will not be ready for the 22/02/2016 when this 3-day trial is due to start.

You don't have a barrister yet and from what you have said all the barristers you asked have said no they will not deal with this case as it is to large, and I am very worried as any barrister will not time to go over all the paper work if they agreed to take this on.

I don't know what will happen in a case if you can't get a barrister as this has never happened. And I don't want a barrister turning up that don't know anything about this case nor does Simon.

I am not sure what is going on with the public order unit information I know you said you can deal with this when you got the refusal from the section 35 DPA and FOI Act you put in from Val Tanner. Also I have large issues with how she did the refusal due to the rules that are set when a DPA request or a FOI request is put in. it has to be sent to the data protection officer to deal with it, Val Tanner should not have just been able to refuse this. But as far as I am aware nothing has been done can you please explain what your plans are for this matter please.

There has been no list given to the court for witnesses that will need to be called and this is worrying me a great deal as they can just say sorry your witness list was not in time it should have been in for the 8th Feb 2016.

We were meant to be asking for all the missing CAD's and for them to un blacked the CAD's grid ref out for all grid ref this would be

·         ATT - Map grid Ref:

·         INC - Map Grid Ref:

·         CALL LOC - Map Grid Ref:

The reason for this is please see attached PDF and you will see why.

Also I cannot see why nearly full pages are blacken out, I cannot understand a need for this as far as I am aware the only thing that should be needed to be blacked out is the information as to the caller. Why would there be a need to blacken out full pages.

Also on page 39 statement of PC Jason Ames there is a next CAD that is missing CAD 9717 09/08/2014 that related to the intelligence received to the illegal rave on Millmarsh Lane the information in that CAD must have given the information to the address as PC Jason Ames and Aaron King went right to the address, this is Every Decibel Matters. Please also see Aaron King statement page 41. I believe the information came from the public order unit for Every Decibel Matters. Due to this post which I have attached to this email.

I know you had all the information that was meant to be asked for re the CAD's. And I not sure if anything has been done about this. Or what the plan of action will be for this is.

I know you have sent the email now to Superintendent Coombs for him to do a statement, we don't know if this will come back in time, I know when I spoke to him he said he was willing to do a statement but that was a long time ago.

This case has made Simon so ill they have the information on the police Systems Josey they know this was not Simon already. Are they allowed to withhold information they have got that they know will prove someone has not done what they say to get a case proved or guilty?

Josey this needs to go back to court ASAP as I do not want the judge blaming Simon that things have not be done and it is not ready. the judge needs to understand the information we are after and why.

Regards

Lorraine

400,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD [mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 12 February 2016 12:12

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

Lorraine

I did cite 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 in my email.

Read second paragraph of my email which clearly states 6th June 2014.

Superintendent Coombs will hopefully comment on orders etc that he issued.

Regards

Josephine

On 11 Feb 2016 22:03, "Lorraine Cordell" <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Josey

What I forgot to add is where you put the information we got only started from the 07th June 2014 the police in the application have been proved wrong and there got to be information as from the 6th June 2014 as if you look at page 34 and 35 of the bundle you will see PC Donald McMillan states from the 6th to the 8th June 2014 so he is the only one who has said the truth as to the dates at Progress Way. I should have added this to the information that you got wrong in the email to Superintendent Coombs in my below email sorry

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 11 February 2016 21:07

To: 'JOSEPHINE WARD'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

Hi Josey

He served a dispersal notice which would have only covered Essex and an order to not setup within 24 hours after they were dispersed from Essex it is that order not to setup for 24 which would cover the UK as it comes under the public order act.

He also landed in a helicopter in the Field they were going to use in Essex as they were out all day looking for the location.

He called the organiser many times way before the date of the rave to try and get it stopped.

He told me on the phone all of this and that he had called and spoke to a Superintendent in the met police and gave them all the information as he was still not sure due to the boundaries if the rave would take place in Essex or the MET area so told the Superintendent in the Met to keep a close eye on the event page. he also said he took an inspector’s name that would be on duty that full weekend in cause of problems.

| So there was a lot of information passed to the Met police.

He also said after we spoke in an email that he had got his full file and notes out, but this was back in Sep 2015.

He has also got pictures of Chris in that file.

401,

He said more than this but can't remember it all but I did send you an email with everything back in Sep 2015 after I spoke to him.

Regards

Lorraine

From: JOSEPHINE WARD mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

 Sent: 11 February 2016 17:51 To: Lorraine Cordell; too smooth

Subject: Fwd.: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

Lorraine/Simon

For your information and as specifically requested contrary to advice I am forwarding the email that I sent to Superintendent Coombs pursuant to your instructions.

Regards

Josephine

Forwarded message   

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Date: Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:49 PM

Subject: Simon Cordell v. The Metropolitan Police Commissioner - appeal against the imposition of an ASBO to be heard at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

To: Adrian.Coombs@.essex.pnn.police.uk

Dear Superintendent Coombs

I am representing Simon Cordell in respect of an appeal against a standalone ASBO that was imposed at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court on 4th August 2015.

One of the many incidents referred to in the bundle as a reason cited requesting the ASBO is date specific on 6th,7th and 8th June 2014 at Progress Way, Enfield.

Miss Lorraine Cordell, Simon Cordell's mother researched the internet for any information in relation to Progress Way incident on 6th and 7th June 2014 to try to show that her son was not involved in this incident and did not set up the rave. etc. She found an article on the internet which had your contact details. She states that she telephoned you regarding this incident as she believes that the event originally planned in Essex relocated to Progress Way due a male called Chris Lurcher Lewis posting an entry on a Facebook page. We are interested in whether this information is accurate and also whether you took any action to prevent this event from being set up elsewhere. Miss Cordell refers to you are stating that you issued a dispersal notice and she also states that you notified your colleagues in the Met regarding this.

The Met Police are accusing Simon Cordell of setting up this event at Progress Way. They have also only produced evidence from 7th June 2014 in relation to CAD messages that appear to relate to a number of different GPS Locations, one of which is Crown Road, near Southbury Road where another rave was taking place.

We are seeking to show the court that Mr Simon Cordell did not organise this event and that another male did. We are also seeking to establish that the Met Police could have closed this event down on 6th June 2014 when they were aware that it had started up i.e. the dispersal notice that you issued would demonstrate this.

We would very much appreciate if you could give this matter your earliest attention and provide us with a statement concerning the event that was originally scheduled to set up in Essex but due to your vigilance was stopped. Could you please provide specific detail of any event page/media publication that you monitored and whether you relayed this information to the Met and they simply did not act on your information.

Can you also please confirm whether Simon Cordell was present for the Essex event and whether he was one of the organisers that you served the dispersal notice on or telephoned during your enquiries.

We thank you in advance for your kind assistance in this matter and we await hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

402,

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO SOLICITORS

798 High Road

Tottenham

London N17 0DH

Office

Tel: 0208 365 9900

403,

09-08-14-03.png

Every Decibel Matters

10 August

We apologise profusely for the outcome of tonight however the circumstances were beyond our control We had police turn up at both of our houses threatening us with arrest if this event were to have happened In addition to that we had a massive venue in harrow but police spent the day looking for us in the area with helicopters leaving us no option but to relocate With all odds against us. we still tried our absolute hardest to deliver however within 30 minutes of sending out the location we had police turn up and they simply did not have a bar of it from us. We really are sorry for tonight as we were truly as excited as you were. We will be back in the future to make amends for this

We hope you all manage to have an amazing night anyway. Sorry guys! The Every Decibel Matters Team!

404,

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2

 Re Personal licence 15-02-2016 11-51

15/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 405

 

 

13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2

 Re Personal licence 15-02-2016 11-51

15/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 405

--

405,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 15/02/2016 11:50:32 AM

To: Licensing <Licensing@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: Personal licence [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Thank you and many regards for your help, Mr Simon Cordell.

On Monday, 15 February 2016, 10:21, Licensing <Licensing@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Dear Sir

Please see attached application form. I have also attached information on how to pay on line.

Kind regards

Licensing Team

Regeneration & Environment Department

London Borough of Enfield

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. FOIA Disclosure - Partial 16-02-2016 20-03

16/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 406,407,408

409,410,411,412

 

14.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. FOIA Disclosure - Partial 16-02-2016 20-03

16/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 406,407,408

409,410,411,412

--

406,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 16/02/2016 08:02:47 PM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: FOIA: Disclosure - Partial

Lorraine / Simon

Please see response to my request for further information.

Regards

Josephine

Original Message       

From: catherine.carrington@met.police.uk

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 16 February 2016 at 15:51

Subject: FOIA: Disclosure - Partial

Dear Ms Ward

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2015120000861

I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 15/12/2015. I note you seek access to the following information:

·         Whether Simon Cordell has been named as an organiser of any illegal raves on the Metropolitan Police Area of Greater London since The Public Order Unit was tasked by the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in June 2014, following the Croydon rave

·         Whether Simon Cordell has been contacted by the Public Order Unit to desist from organising illegal raves

·         Whether Superintendent Adrian Coombes from Essex Police notified the Metropolitan Police regarding Hippy Fest, an event that was originally planned as an open air rave in Essex but potentially could have been set up in the Metropolitan Police area due to the closeness of the border of both forces. Whether he provided information regarding Simon Cordell as being the organiser of this event, or if not then who did Superintendent Coombes state was the organiser.

·         Please provide the details held of the organisers of the following illegal raves: (I) Wharf Wood (Canary Wharf) 12.01.2013 (ii) Cannabis Day 420 day 24.04.2014 (iii) Unit 5 St Georges Ind Estate, White Hart Lane, N17 (iv) 1 Falcon Park, Neasden Lane 20.06.2014 (v) Carpet Right, A10 Enfield

·         (vi) Millmarsh Lane, Enfield 27.07.2014 (vii) Millmarsh Lane, Enfield 09.08.2014 and

·         10.08.2014

·         How many of the above events were organised by Every Decible Matters and who are the persons attributed to Every Decible Matters

Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within the MPS to locate information relevant to your request.

EXTENT OF SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within the MPS.

DECISION

Before I explain the reasons for the decisions I have made in relation to your request, I thought that it would be helpful if I outline the parameters set out by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) within which a request for information can be answered.

407,

The Act creates a statutory right of access to information held by public authorities. A public authority in receipt of a request must, if permitted, confirm if the requested information is held by that public authority and, if so, then communicate that information to the applicant.

The right of access to information is not without exception and is subject to a number of exemptions which are designed to enable public authorities to withhold information that is not suitable for release. Importantly, the Act is designed to place information into the public domain, that is, once access to information is granted to one person under the Act, it is then considered public information and must be communicated to any individual should a request be received.

In accordance with the Act, this response represents a Partial Refusal Notice for this particular request under Section 17(1)&(4) of the Act.

Constituents of this information attract section 31 and 40 of the Act.

Please see the Legal Annex for the sections of the Act that are referred to in this response.

The MPS can provide information which answers both question 1 and 2 of this response.

This information can be accessed via the link to the MPS external website, provided below.

http://content.met.police.uk/News/Man-given-a-five-year ASBO/1400033211719/1257246745756

In case you have any difficulty with the link, I have provided you with another link to information in the public domain.

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/13595919.Man_given_ASBO_for_organising_illegal_raves/ REASONS FOR DECISION

Some of the information you have requested is exempt by the virtue of Section 31 (1)(a)(b) & (3) of the Act.

Section 31 (1) of the Act is applied to information, that if it was disclosed, would or would be likely to cause significant harm to the functions of a public authority (in this instance the MPS) and Section 31 (3) is applied if to confirm or deny that information is held would prejudice any of the matters in subsection (1).

Section 31(1) is a prejudice based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm that would be caused, as well as carrying out a public interest test (PIT) for both subsections (1) and (3).

The purpose of the PIT is to establish whether the 'Public Interest' lies in disclosing or withholding the requested information for subsection (1) and to articulate the harm that would be caused in confirming or denying that any information is held for subsection (3).

Section 31(1) Evidence of Harm

You have asked whether Superintendent Adrian Coombes from Essex Police notified the MPS of certain events.

There is sufficient information within the public domain which confirms the sharing of information by police forces and certain law enforcement agencies and partners. To confirm what information has been shared and by whom, will affect the prevention and detection of crime, which is the core function of the MPS. The disclosure of specific information will affect the law enforcement and tactical approaches undertaken by the MPS.

Public Interest Test

Section 31(1) Public interest considerations favouring disclosure

Disclosing and confirming intelligence could promote public trust in providing transparency and demonstrating openness and accountability into where the MPS spends public funds. This transparency would provide a better awareness to the general public regarding this type of sharing of information to prevent crime. Disclosure can aid accurate debate around the use MPS resources and the MPS's

408,

approach to tackling and deterring this type of crime. This could empower individuals to make more effective decisions about their own activities regarding criminal behaviour.

Section 31(1) Public interest considerations favouring non-disclosure

Policing today is intelligence led and the MPS share information with other law enforcement agencies as part of their investigative process. To disclose what intelligence was shared and by whom (on a case by case basis) would identify tactical approaches used by police forces and identify cases or persons of interest to the police. This could hinder the prevention and detection of crime as well as undermine the partnership approach to investigations and law enforcement.

Balancing Test

The MPS is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve. Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency policing abilities, processes and techniques, there is a strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of the MPS.

It is therefore in our opinion, that the balancing test for full disclosure is not made out.

Section 31(3) - Evidence of Harm

The public interest is not what interests the public but what will be of greater good if released to the community as a whole. It is not in the public interest to disclose information that may compromise the MPS's ability to complete any future criminal investigations.

You have also asked for the details held of organisers for the stated illegal raves you referred to above, and whether any of the events were organised by Every Decible Matters.

The release of such information, if it exists, would reveal policing tactics regarding who was of interest to the police generally. This could be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.

Information disclosed under the Act is considered to be a release to the world as once the information is published the public authority in this case the MPS has no control over what use is made of that information. Whilst not questioning the motives of the applicant it could be of use to those who seek to disrupt any police investigation as it would by a process of elimination, enable them to identify whether specific people or groups have or have not been subject of a police investigation. This would lead to an increase of harm to either the investigation itself or the subject of the investigation. To release details as to whether specific individuals, groups or events have or have not been investigated would enable any member of the public to define and identify who or who is not of interest to the MPS.

This could be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.

Section 31(3) Factors favouring confirmation or denial

By confirming or denying whether information is held would enable the public to have a better understanding of the type of events and individuals the police are focussing their resources on, in order to disrupt and deter such events from taking place, in line with their law enforcement role.

Better public awareness may lead to more information from the public about individuals who they believe may be linked to organising illegal raves, thereby providing intelligence to reduce crime.

Section 31(3) Factors against confirmation or denial

By confirming or denying that the requested information exists, law enforcement would be compromised which would hinder the prevention and detection of crime. More crime of this nature would be committed, and individuals would be placed at risk. This would result in further risks to the public and consequently require the use of more MPS resources.

Disclosure of information, if it exists would provide valuable intelligence into the public domain, which would be useful to criminals captured by this request, in that they can take steps to evade apprehension and prosecution, thereby continuing with criminal behaviour. This will directly affect the law enforcement role of the MPS.

Balance Test - Section 31(3) Law Enforcement

The disclosure of this information to the public by the MPS would undermine individuals' confidence in

409,

helping the MPS and would furthermore impact on the trust of witnesses in making statements in the future.

Anything that undermines this would have a detrimental affect reducing the quality of information the MPS receives and consequently compromise any ongoing or future similar investigations. Therefore, I consider that considerations favouring non-disclosure of the requested information, if it exists, far outweighs the considerations favouring disclosure.

However, this should not be taken as necessarily indicating that any information that would meet your request exists or does not exist.

Section 40(5) - Personal Information / Absolute Exemption

You have asked for personal information about individuals attributed to Every Decible Matters. To

confirm or deny whether personal information exists in response to your request could publicly reveal information about an individual or individuals, thereby breaching the right to privacy afforded to persons under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). When confirming or denying that information is held would breach an individual's rights under the DPA, Section 40(5) of the Act becomes an absolute exemption, and there is no requirement for me to provide evidence of the prejudice that would occur, or to conduct a public interest test.

The MPS is unable to confirm and unable to deny whether the information in relation to this request is held.

To ensure you understand why this response is necessary I have provided excerpts from the Information commissioner’s office (ICO):

The Duty to Confirm or Deny

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) guidance titled 'When to refuse to confirm or deny information is held' states:

'In certain circumstances, even confirming or denying that requested information is held can reveal information...

It can be important to use a neither confirm nor deny response consistently, every time a certain type of information is requested, regardless of whether the information is actually held or not...

Within the ICO guidance there is a specific police example:

'...a police force may hold information regarding particular properties they have under surveillance - it is likely that if a request were made for information about the surveillance of a certain property, this information would be exempt under section 30 (investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities)...

Furthermore, this would apply even if information was requested about a property not under surveillance. If a police force only upheld its duty to confirm or deny where it was not keeping properties under surveillance, an applicant could reasonably assume that where the police force refused to confirm or deny, the property named in the request was under surveillance.'

A public authority could therefore refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds information about a property under surveillance...

This should not be taken as necessarily indicating that any information that would meet your request exists or does not exist.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response, please read the attached paper entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to make a complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact me by email quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

410,

Catherine Carrington Information Manager Freedom of Information Rights Unit (IRU)

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

PO Box 57192 London SW6 1SF

LEGAL ANNEX

Section 17(1) & (4) of the Act provides:

Refusal of request

(1) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision of Part II relating to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request or on a claim that information is exempt information must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice which-

states that fact,

specifies the exemption in question, and

states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

A public authority is not obliged to make a statement under subsection (1)(c) or (3) if, or to the extent that, the statement would involve the disclosure of information which would itself be exempt information

Section 31(1)(a)(b) & (3) of the Act provides:

Law enforcement

(1) 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.

the prevention or detection of crime,

the apprehension or prosecution of offenders

Section 40(5) of the Act provides:

Personal Information

(3) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would, or would be likely to, prejudice any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1)

The duty to confirm or deny-

(i) does not arise in relation to information which is (or if it were held by the public authority would be) exempt information by virtue of subsection (1), and

(ii) does not arise in relation to other information if or to the extent that either-

(a) the giving to a member of the public of the confirmation or denial that would have to be given to comply with section 1(1)(a) would (apart from this Act) contravene any of the data protection principles or section 10 of the [1998 c. 29.] Data Protection Act 1998 or would do so if the exemptions in section 33A (1) of that Act were disregarded, or

(b) by virtue of any provision of Part IV of the [1998 c. 29.] Data Protection Act 1998 the information is exempt from section 7(1)(a) of that Act (data subject's right to be informed whether personal data being processed).

In complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information, the Metropolitan Police Service will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information will continue to be protected by law. Applications for the copyright owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached information should be addressed to MPS Directorate of Legal Services, 1st Floor (Victoria Block), New Scotland Yard, Victoria, London, SW1H 0BG.

411,

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint, you are welcome to discuss the response with the case officer who dealt with your request.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint Information Rights Unit PO Box 57192 London SW6 1SF foi@met.police.uk

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your complaint within 20 working days.

The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner please visit their website at www.ico.org.uk. Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK95AF

Phone: 01625 545 745

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely

412,

scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 17-02-2016 01-54

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 413

 

 

15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 17-02-2016 01-54

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 413

--

413,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 17/02/2016 01:53:55 AM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

I do not like to know that you are upset, but I cannot blame you as you do help me as my mother and friend a lot in that sense, you say I throw tantrums but you are the one saying you are going to delete all my life files rather than just send them to me. I clearly am not a three-year-old kid, this is why I keep telling you to stop answering questions when people are asking me them. I do not think that of myself that I have done nothing wrong in my life in earth, but I do think that if I was left to my own judgement and you to action to such guidance when supporting me that I would make the right decisions for myself. I am not different from any other person that has been made to pay so many judges, police offices and solicitors wages growing up in London just because of wanting to make some think of themselves. I did try and do well but no matter what I do I get treated different in this country as if I am the bad guy all the time. I look around and see the rich getting richer, I believe being white should not be the main element to who you can be and what you are allowed to achieve in life, as it seems to have been for me. All the good things I have done and tried to do compared to a lot of the people I know that should have been noticed and taken into account, we live in 2016 a modern society and should all be equal to one and other, but in many instances this does not happen, the fact is that the police did lead me and tucker into believing that we may be able to help others and repeat history by becoming like a Glastonbury but in London, on stead I feel like they gave him the chance while ripping it from me, in turn helping the wrong person at the time of the generations of a large circle of people coming together united. I have been locked away under one or another condition(s) for years now with no justice so yes my life has been a lot of stress for you, my self and every one and as for being disrespect full yes at times in life I have been and I am sorry for that but you must take admit if it was not for you doing josie’s job and blocking me because you trusted in your instincts and her word against what I am saying is best for me and I turn out to be right, Any one would be upset.

 

 

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re dates 17-02-2016 14-23

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 414

 

 

16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re dates 17-02-2016 14-23

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 414

--

414,

12/09/2014

police say they served paperwork to your flat

06/10/2014

was meant to be hearing for interim hearing but legal aid had not been granted Michael came to court with that other lady and the judge overturned and granted legal aid for you. Interim hearing the judge would not hear

22/10/2014

Interim hearing but could not go ahead due to Andy Locke having flood

05/11/2014

Interim hearing and it was granted

02/12/2014

I got note on phone you were at court at Highbury Corner not sure what they were for.

09th 10th 11th 03/2015

Meant to have been set for trial but the court only booked 1-day hearing, this was then put off until the 03rd and 04th Aug 2015

03rd 4th 08/2015

Highbury Corner trial case part proven on the 04th 08/2015

26/10/2015

1st hearing at Wood Green Crown to see if case was ready for appeal on the

09/11/2015

Was 1st appeal date which was set for a 1-hour hearing

22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016   Set for appeal at the crown court.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 17/02/2016 02:23:13 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: dates

you need to stop kidding off at me you should have asked josei all this yesterday before you left her office and now you are blaming me.

you kick off all the time tell me to leave then forget to ask the most important things then I get call after call and you blame me. Believe these dates to be correct could be missing a few.

 

 

 

 17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE Some ink like this 17-02-2016 23-58

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427

 

17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE Some ink like this 17-02-2016 23-58

17/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427

--

415,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 17/02/2016 11:57:47 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Some think like this.

Attachments: Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

CAD-Included-Missing.doc

Please look I only done a little as had to table all missing CAD's see the 2 Attached files

From: Rewired [mailto:re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 17 February 2016 20:33

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Some think like this.

416,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

I have taken time to listen to my solicitor’s advice in regard to the applicant’s proposal of an ASBO order that was on the

13/08/2014

ASBO application was in progress and being created by Steve Elesmore

13/08/2014

A meeting was held with Steve Hodgson who is a representative for Enfield Local Authority Council and Jane Johnson on behalf of the Metropolitan police alongside others.

12/09/2014

A ASBO Application bundle is said to have been served on Mr Simon Cordell at 109 Burncroft Avenue, to which he disputes.

06/10/2014

Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have a hearing for an interim Order, but legal aid had not been granted. Michael Carroll acting solicitor came to court; the judge overturned and granted legal aid. The application for the Interim hearing the judge would not hear on this day.

22/10/2014

Interim hearing but could not go ahead due to Andy Locke Acting Barrister had a flood at his home address.

05/11/2014

Interim hearing and the order were granted.

02/12/2014

Mr Simon Cordell’s mother has a note on her mobile phone, stating he was in court at Highbury Corner not sure what it was for in the ASBO Application.

09th 10th 11th 03/2015

Meant to have been set for the full ASBO Application trial but the court only booked 1-day hearing, this was then put off until the 03rd and 04th Aug 2015

03rd 4th 08/2015

Highbury Corner full ASBO Application trial case part proven on the 04/08/2015 no Illegality was proven.

26/10/2015

1st hearing at Wood Green Crown to see if case was ready for appeal on the 09/11/2015 this was put off until 22nd 23td and 24th 02/2016

09/11/2015

Was 1st appeal date, which was set for a 1-hour hearing, this hearing was put off on the 26/10/2015.

22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016

Set for appeal at the crown court.

1

417,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

It is said that Mr Cordell had been found proven partly on the 3rd 4th August 2015, to which he disputes to be correct.

An appeal date has been set for Feb 22nd 23rd 24th 2016

Legal aid was re granted on the 00/00/2015

In understanding that Mr Simon Cordell’s acting solicitor has explained to him that she cannot arrange a barrister that every barrister that has been asked will not take the case on due to the size of the case and due to it being at appeal stage and legal aid will not cover the cost of such a large case. I have been explained that Andy Locke who did the trial at the lower court is on sabbatical leave till April 2016, and that the acting solicitors wish to put the appeal date of until April 2016 when Andy Locke will be back from sabbatical leave.

If granted by the Judge this would in fact set the new appeal date to be two months after the already agreed appeal date of 22rnd February 2016, if the court agreed to such a date, contained within the time scale of April 2016 and not any time after, due to the court diary already being pre booked.

Mr Simon Paul Cordell is asking for a Former judge to examine the role of police officers, who present the applicant cases of an ASBO order against himself.

Mr S. Cordell is asking for this to be assessed and agreed under the grounds of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Right to a Fair Trial Act 1998, Legislation.

Which in legal terms, should be the best means of separating the guilty from the innocent and protecting against injustice. Without this right, the rule of law and public faith in the justice system collapse. The Right to a Fair Trial is one of the cornerstones of a just society.

Article 6 the Right to a fair hearing:

The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law and to democracy itself.

The right applies to both criminal and civil cases, although certain specific minimum rights set out in Article 6 apply only in criminal cases.

The right to a fair trial is absolute and cannot be limited. It requires a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The procedural requirements of a fair hearing might differ according to the circumstances of the accused.

2

418,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

The right to a fair hearing, which applies to any criminal charge as well as to the determination of civil rights and obligations, contains a number of requirements and I believe the causes below full within them requirements.

An ASBO order has been appealed against after the magistrates court decided a decision to prove the application case in part but with no legality being proven, the decision had been made against Mr Simon Cordell, this was at Highbury Corner, Magistrates Court, on the 4th August 2015 in pursuant to s.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 it was agreed to make him subject to an Anti-Social behaviour order. This was in pursuit for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

The respondent’s case is that Mr Simon Cordell has been accused of being integrally involved in the organisation of illegal raves in London and Enfield.

Part of the Barrister submissions that represented Simon Cordell, had been that the allegations were that he was involved in the organizing of illegal raves, but the applicant hadn’t adduced evidence, of trespass or evidence of breach of the licensing Act 2003 which is a requirement for proving, that an indoor rave was illegal. The Deputy District Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality, - all the needed to prove was he had acted in an anti-social manner. In the view of the barrister this was a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus, Simon being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

It should be agreed with the barrister statement as when dealing with this case Mr Simon Cordell was addressing the applicant’s case to prove that he had not been involved in organizing illegal raves, as this is what the application against him was.

Yet in the application papers themselves and on trial at the lower court no police officer had said Mr Simon acted in an anti-social manner, nor did any of the hearsay witnesses give an ID of any people.

Other points of concern are.

Inaccuracy’s leading to incorrect time stamps contained within the applicant’s bundle created by Steve Elsmore on the 13/8/2014.

CAD

Number

Date

Time

Page

CAD

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

3

419,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

Please note every day the met police call centre starts at CAD 01 and goes up to the average of 10,742 to 15,000 callers per day the clock is reset to 01 each day at 00:00 hours.

(We can tell this by the number of CAD incident numbers supplied, within the applicants ASBO bundle supporting the evidence supplied, for a standalone ASBO order to be gained against Mr Simon Cordell.

On the average the Met police call centre will receive on the average of 300 callers per hour as marked and time stamped below.

Every half hour is 150 callers on average and every 15 mins is 75 callers on average Every 7 half mins is 33 callers on average and 3 half mins 17 callers on average

Please take note to (CAD number / Incident Number 10481 7th June 14) this is the 10,481 Met police call of the 7th June 2014 time stamped 22:47 hours.

So it is incorrect for (CAD 10506 7th June 14) externally inputted 25 calls later, to have an earlier time stamp of the 7th June 2014 at 22:44 hours.

In fact the time should have been 22:49 hours for CAD 10506.

Please take note to (CAD number / Incident Number 4323 7th June 2014 at 12:25)

(CAD numbers 7th June 2014 at 08:16

Date

Incident no

number

Time

7th June 2014

1012

01

01:53

7th June 2014

1047

02

01:59

7th June 2014

1323

03

02:41

7th June 2014

1608

04

03:34

7th June 2014

1722

05

03:58

7th June 2014

1816

06

04:15

7th June 2014

2141

07

05:50

7th June 2014

2255

08

06:24

7th June 2014

2271

09

06:27

7th June 2014

2601

10

08:09

7th June 2014

2637: p187 to 190:

11 (Error)

08:18

7th June 2014

2672: p196 to 198:

12 (Error)

08:16

7th June 2014

2854

13

08:56

7th June 2014

3005: p203 to 205:

14 (Error)

09:22

7th June 2014

3037: p179 to 183:

15 (Error)

09:20

7th June 2014

3252

16

10:07

7th June 2014

3986

17

11:47

4

 

420,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

7th June 2014

4323

18

12:25

7th June 2014

4325

19

Missing

7th June 2014

5206

20

13:57

7th June 2014

8841

21

20:07

7th June 2014

10393

22

22:38

7th June 2014

10462

23

Missing

7th June 2014

10471

24

22:45

7th June 2014

10481: p233 to 237:

25 (Error)

22:47

7th June 2014

10506: p238 to 241:

26 (Error)

22:44

7th June 2014

10742

27

23:01

7th June 2014

10844

28 Missing

7th June 2014

10967

29

23:25

Time Scales between calls below.

· 35 people cads 1012 to 1047 time 6 mins

· 276 people cads 1047 to 1323 time 42

· 285 people cads 1323 to 1608 time 53

· 114 people cads 1608 to 1722 time 24 mins

· 94 people cads 1722 to 1816 time 17 mins

· 325 people cads 1816 to 2141 time 1:35

· 114 people cads 2141 to 2255 time 34 mins

· 16 people cads 2255 to 2271 time 3 mins

· 330 people cads 2271 to 2601 time 42 mins

·  36 people cads 2601 to 2637-time 1 hour 9 mins

·  35 people cads 2637 to 2672 time 58 mins (1st Time Laps 08:18)

· 182 people cads 2672 to 2854-time 1 hour 10 mins (1st Time Laps 08:16)

· 151 people cads 2854 to 3005 time 26 mins

· 32 people cads 3005 to 3037 time 58 mins (2nd Time Laps 09:22)

· 215 people cads 3037 to 3252 time 47 mins (2nd Time Laps 09:20)

· 734 people cads 3252 to 3986-time 1 hour 39 mins

· 337 people cads 3986 to 4323 time 38 mins

· missing people cads 4323 to 4325 time missing So; -

· 883 people cads 4323 to 5206-time 1 hour 32 mins

· 3,635 people cads 5206 to 8841-time 6 hour 13 mins

· 1,552 people cads 8841 to 10393 time 2 hours 31 mins

· missing people cad 10393 to 10462 time missing So; -

· 78 people cads 10393 to 10471 time 7 mins

· 10 people cads 10471 to 10481 mins 2 mins Cads 10481 to 10506 (3rd Time Laps 22:47 to 22:44)

The time stamps go back for the 3rd time, so to even be able to work the true format is impossible.

5

421,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

Supported Evidence, supporting the fact that the CAD's supporting the applicant ASBO should not be time stamped wrong, this evidence does include.

· Standard Operational Guidelines - East of England. http://www.eastamb.nhs.uk/FOI%20Docs/Disclosure%20Log/Emergency%20Op s/July%202013/F15152h%20-%20attachment.pdf

· National Standards for Incident Recording (NSIR) Collection and recording of police;

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment data/file/11 6658/count-nsir11.pdf

· Understanding Control Command; http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts UC2.pdf

· police Central Communications Command incident procedure; https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lkd4sarsfdMC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=police+Central+Communications+Command+incident+procedure&source=bl&ots=663ZhaKX9&sig=Z7DgHlgJncwLNuam0g8EBcCja8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif39YsMbKAhWI8A4KHdnMAoQQ6AEIMzAE#v=onepage&q=police%20Central%20Commnications%20Command%20in cident%20procedure&f=false  

Point 2

Blocked out Inc locations and other relevant information that should be contained within the cads that have been presented in the applicant’s bundle. Only in serious circumstances in cases such as were it is absolutely necessary to aid in the prevention of witness or victim intimidation should an officer be trusted to block out such information.

Under oath pc Steve Elsmore state to the district Jude that he “Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.” When in fact it is his login that created and printed the applicants bundle this can be proved by his signature and also by the computer id log that must be used to print the data contained within the Police National Computer and now has been submitted and is contained with the applicants bundle and is verified at the top of most of the pages or within.

Pc Elsmore states under oath that he did not carry out any further investigations in regard to speaking to the owners of any premises to fix that of a notice of trespass or conviction of twok as the main investigating officer. “I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue”

Pc Elsmore states under oath “There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day.” (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

“Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)”

CADS CONTAINED WITHIN THE BUNDIL THAT ARE PRINTED IN Pc Steve Elsmore name and as the leading investigator he would have known the truth to the locations blocked out that are in fact crown road another house party a five minute drive from progress way and if not for the grid numbers being not blocked out inclusive of

6

422,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

other landmarks such as A&J cars based in Enfield, I would not have been able to prove my innocents in the ongoing application leading to an unfair trial.

· Cad

· Cad

· Cad

· Cad

· Cad

in his statements of his facts that are incorrect he led the district Jude into believing the manufactured and engineered evidence that he had fabricated to aid him to leading the District Jude to making a guilty verdict.

Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

Witness 1 - Inspector Hamill -R. O - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday. (This was in fact early Hours of the 8th around 1:00am.)

I did not go inside, the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way) Witness - Pc Elsmore - R.O - 14;10 EIC Tab 6 - pg. ?14?

DEF XEX

Council (unreadable text) curfews (unreadable text) that PNC info on statement adds no (unreadable text) probatory (unreadable text) value of info re: Witness being “afraid of D” What he puts down to the way he worded, but he meant that people actually are afraid of possibly giving evidence in court.

R V CORDELL 4

DEF

Counsel argues that officer’s statement is designed to cause on evidence reaction of this of no value and speculatory in nature.

7

423,

Si-Information-Part-Edited-01.doc

DJ

How many calls from public did police receive?

Witness

In excess of 15 calls - how many to the same venue and not other address.

Doe’s does not know the number of callers that are in relation to each of these occasions.

On page 15 - Allegations re: Millmarsh Lane, evidence from officer not first-hand - relied on cads and another Intel.

Query Re: “3 massive nitrous tanks”

DJ

Where did you get such info officer.

Witness

From Page 65 - sergeant King - Crimit’s Re reports, other Intel but not from people at the venue.

COUNSEL

Officer you signed a statement of truth (unreadable text) to other witness statements.

DJ

We all know that on ASBO apps hearsay is allowed.

R V CORDELL 5

Counsel

Why did officer no and rely on Pc Kings Statements later than on the Crimit’s reported. Officer no and involved in taking info from Pc King.

(Confesses he did it.)

He did not notice the discrepancy regarding official statements.

Have heard of Every Decibel Matters - They were advertising and I believe the D knows a member of the above company.

No evidence D is involved in running their operations.

No attempt has been made to speak to directors of company.

No reason to why you didn’t /contact the company.

I think from memory have met D once @ Edmonton police station.

(At Page 16 1st paragraph - not consistent to fact that he met him on the 7/6/2014) All notes with cad number were listed from reports not officers’ own words - same applies from Cads that had known input.

Has not made attempts to contact owners of premises.

Officers unable to assist courts in relation to why statements were not signed on notebooks profiles.

Another example of doings put in statements to blacken Mr Cordell’s evidence in statement @ point 12, No convictions that of class A drugs unlike what’s written in Statements - another example of untrue cut and paste.

DJ

Ill ignore because no convections of class A drugs or supplying is present on the criminal record.

Counsel

You cannot assist with witness reliability of info contained, can you?

Can Intel be wrongfully inaccurate? No

Officer

8

424,

On that particular re post, it appears to be right.

I did not speak to Parcell he is force @ seven boroughs.

I believe he was not included in the email, because Intel (unreadable text) Email sent to LDE only.

Searched (unreadable text) for info on Cordell’s convections.

Moving on to statement on Page 30

Does PO investigating unit have more info than it is letting on?

Officer

No

Are you aware that Miss Cordell has spoken to other officers Re: Rave?

This suggests that you do not want DS Tanner to be examined on these proceedings because she has information Re knowledge of raves and them not being connected to W/D.

Spoke to Pc Tanner but not written what - spoke to (unreadable text) this year You have no recorded that you emailed her but then spoken to her.

Emails have been deleted and no copies keep on record.

9

425,

CAD-Included-Missing.doc

All CAD’s Time’s Wrong

CAD

Numb

Date

Time

Page

CAD

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

All CAD’s For 7th June 2014

CAD

Numb

Date

Time

Page

CAD

943

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1012

07/06/2014

01:53

Page 143 to 146

CAD

1047

07/06/2014

01:59

Page 174 to 178

CAD

1323

07/06/2014

02:41

Page 147 to 151

CAD

1380

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1571

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1608

07/06/2014

03:34

Page 184 to 186

CAD

1722

07/06/2014

03:58

Page 152 to 154

CAD

1816

07/06/2014

04:15

Page 155 to 159

CAD

2141

07/06/2014

05:50

Page 160 to 164

CAD

2255

07/06/2014

06:24

Page 165 to 169

CAD

2291

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2271

07/06/2014

06:27

Page 170 to 173

CAD

2456

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2525

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2601

07/06/2014

08:09

Page 187 to 190

CAD

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

CAD

2757

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2854

07/06/2014

08:56

Page 199 to 202

CAD

2904

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2906

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

CAD

3252

07/06/2014

10:07

Page 206 to 209

CAD

3326

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

3436

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

3838

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

3986

07/06/2014

11:47

Page 210 to 213

CAD

4015

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

4322

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

4323

07/06/2014

12:25

Page 214 to 217

 

426,

CAD-Included-Missing.doc

CAD

4598

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

4809

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

5206

07/06/2014

13:57

Page 218 to 220

CAD

5571

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

8841

07/06/2014

20:07

Page 221 to 224

CAD

8931

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

10311

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

10393

07/06/2014

22:38

Page 225 to 232

CAD

10462

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

10471

07/06/2014

22:45

Page 242 to 245

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

CAD

10742

07/06/2014

23:01

Page 246 to 249

CAD

10844

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

10967

07/06/2014

23:25

Page 250 to 254

All CAD’s For 8th June 2014

CAD

Numb

Date

Time

Page

CAD

47

08/06/2014

00:00

Page 255 to 259

CAD

167

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

340

08/06/2014

00:29

Page 260 to 263

CAD

625

08/06/2014

00:54

Page 264 to 267

CAD

749

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

793

08/06/2014

01:10

Page 268 to 272

CAD

930

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1081

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1206

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1631

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1646

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1667

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

1768

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2410

08/06/2014

05:35

Page 273 to 277

CAD

2456

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2608

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2654

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2764

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2766

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2796

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2845

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2890

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2904

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2942

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

2948

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

 

427,

CAD

3132

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3151

08/06/2014 09:08 Page 278 to 282

CAD

3179

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3194

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3260

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3319

08/06/2014 09:39 Page 283 to 286

CAD

3350

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3515

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

3946

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

5644

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

CAD

5897

08/06/2014 Missing CAD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v.at Wood Green 19-02-2016 15-55

19/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 428

 

 

18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v.at Wood Green 19-02-2016 15-55

19/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 428

--

428,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 19/02/2016 03:55:12 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Simon Cordell v. The Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis at Wood Green Crown Court on 22nd February 2016

Lorraine

Simon needs to finalise his statement. The 90-page document will be sent across will have to be chopped back unless he wants me to email that across to the Public Defender Service.

Also, in an email dated 12th February 2016 the screen shot from Every Decible Matters dated 10th August I do not believe will assist. If, however Simon wants this included to demonstrate that no ASBO has been applied for against Moses etc then please confirm by return email as I am in the process of emailing this across to the Public Defender.

There are two attachments to the email (a) the screen shot from Every Decible Matters (b) Crown Road grid reference map showing a Crown Road rave in contradiction to the evidence that PC Elsmore gave.

Please get back to me as soon as possible.

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2

Asbo Appellant response respondent's-20-02-2016 14-30

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 429,430,431,432

433

 

 

19.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2

Asbo Appellant response respondent's-20-02-2016 14-30

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 429,430,431,432

433

--

429,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 02:29:47 PM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Appellant response to respondent's

Attachments: "SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON ARGUMENT

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

Thanks

Josephine

430,

SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON ARGUMENT 20.02.2016.docx

IN THE WOOD GREEN CROWN COURT        CASE NUMBER: A21050064

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ORDER

BETWEEN:

SIMON CORDELL

Appellant

-and-

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE FOR THE METROPOLIS

Respondent

Listing: For appeal hearing 22.02.2016 for 3 days

Issues: (I) whether the Appellant has acted in an anti-social manner

· whether an ASBO is necessary

1. The Appellant's case is that he has not acted in an anti-social manner on any occasion.

2. The Appellant has not organised or supplied any equipment for any the events cited in the Respondent's original application.

3. The Appellant challenges and disputes the evidence presented that he was an organiser. The Appellant will deal with each event, chronologically.

4. In response to paragraph 13 of the Respondent's skeleton argument the Appellant will state that he did not organise this rave on 7th / 8th June 2014. The Appellant will state that this event

 

431,

SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON ARGUMENT 20.02.2016.docx

commenced on 6th June 2014 and not 7th June 2014. The Appellant will state that the Respondent has wrongly specified that this event started on 7th June 2014. The statements on PC Donald Mc Millian dated 19th August 2014 confirms the date the event started.

The Appellant will state that he did not provide any sound recording equipment, speakers, generators etc to this event. The Appellant will state that both him and his brother Tyrone Benjamin have been wrongly accused of organising this event. The Appellant will state that his brother Tyrone Benjamin was incapacitated due to a major traffic accident that resulted in both his legs being broken and also his pelvis. He was immobile. The Appellant relies on the account he gave in his initial statement dated 24th February 2015.

          I.The Appellant disputes that he was inside the premises. The Appellant will state that he was not the male identified by security at the gate. The Appellant takes issue with the evidence of Inspector Hamill and APS Miles. The Appellant will state that he was approaching the premises to drop off keys to a friend. The Appellant will state that he had left his cousin's leaving party, Dwayne Edward's to do this. The Appellant was approached by police and Environmental officers who tried to serve a noise abatement notice. The Appellant refused to accept the notice and he did not engage in any conversation with the police. The Appellant was not asked whether he had organised the party, had he been asked this then the Appellant would have denied this.

       II.The Appellant disputes that admitted to Inspector Skinner that he organised the event on 7th / 8th June 2014.

    III.The Appellant disputes that he admitted to Inspector Skinner that he organised the rave that was stopped by police on 19th July 2014. The Appellant will state that he never entered the premises. The Appellant will state that he never provided any equipment’s or generators etc to any persons inside the premises. The Appellant will state that none of his vehicles were inside these premises. CAD 10635 19THJULY2014 (R 303-313). The Appellant will state that he is mixed race and not white and therefore he could not have been one of the males inside the premises. The Appellant will also state that CAD980419JUL14 entry 22.12:53 police did not see any (PG 301 R bundle) audio equipment inside the building.

     IV.The Appellant accepts that he had a conversation with PC Edgoose concerning his efforts to establish a mini festival or the community within the Enfield Borough. He accepts that he discussed equipment. He totally disputes any conversations about Occupy London, Black Block, anarchist groups of Notting hill carnival. The Appellant disputes that he was driving in the manner alleged and believes that had he been driving like this then he would have been arrested.

432,

SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON ARGUMENT 20.02.2016.docx

        V.The Appellant does not accept that he had any sound recording equipment at this incident. He attended this incident in his car. He had no sound system, speakers, generators etc. The Appellant specifically requests the CAD 9717 referred to in the statement of PC Ames as he believes that this will reveal the true identity of the organisers.

5.      The Appellant will state that he has no connection with Every Decible matter. The Appellant will state that he met Moses Howe in 2011. Moses Howe was a sound engineer. The Appellant will state that he was offered a three-month trial at Club Juice,

6.      1 Jute Lane, Enfield, EN3 7PJ to see if he could increase numbers to the Club. Moses Howe was going to be the Appellant's sound engineer. The Appellant will state that Liam Philip was an MC who was going to inspect Club Jute. The Appellant provided entertainment at the Club previous to this. See attached promotional flier for an event, "Rewired" organised on 23rd July 2011 at Club Jute featuring DJ Substance and DJ Calous. This was licensed. The Appellant however had to stop due to police persistently stopping and searching him.

7.      The Appellant will state in response to paragraph 17 that he had nothing to do with the organisation of the event at Progress Way that gave rise to the complaints of anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance.

8.      The Appellant will state that this ASBO is disproportionate and it prevents him from engaging in lawful business. The ASBO will prevent the Appellant from applying for licences to hold events. The Appellant will state that whilst he is subject to an ASBO he will be prohibited from applying for any entertainment licence and any licence application will automatically fail and therefore this is disproportionate.

9.      The Appellant has designed a business plan, a festival plan and community event that sets out clearly the plans for events including marketing, safety, stalls etc and also specifically refers to co-operating with the police. The ASBO prevents any applications from being successful.

10.  The Appellant will state that he has never been involved in the organisation of an illegal rave as defined under section 63 of the CJPOA 1994.

11.  The Appellant will state that he has never had any equipment seized during an illegal rave as defined by section 63 of the CJPOA 1994. The Appellant will state that there has only been one occasion when his sound system was seized, and he had hired this out to he believed to be a genuine customer. The Appellant will state that

12.  The Appellant will also state that the current terms of the ASBO are too broad.

--

433,

Signed:

Dated:

 

 

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant re respondent's -20-02-2016 15-42

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 434

 

 

 

 20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant re respondent's -20-02-2016 15-42

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 434

--

434,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 04:02:45 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Cc- lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Appellant response to respondent's

Simon

With regards to your statement I have tried to help you with this. I have explained what is not helpful etc. You simply disagree with the advice that I am giving, and this has always been the case. You are misinterpreting the Respondent's case which is simply that the raves / parties whether legal or not cause anti-social behaviour - i.e. sleepless nights, noise, nuisance etc. You dispute that you are the organiser and that is the only facts that I requested information about. The court is not looking at one isolated date but all dates and the conduct on each of the dates. I have also explained to you the events that cause you problems and the reasons why. Organisation is not simply providing equipment, manning the gate but also sourcing premises and I have explained that this can be inferred. Even if a section 144 LAPSO is up there can still be antisocial behaviour albeit the event is not a rave under the legislation.

I have made it very clear the irrelevant points and aspects that do not assist you. You do not accept the advice.

Josephine

On 20 February 2016 at 15:41 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not. I have made a bundle of but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 14:29, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-03

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 435

 

21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-03

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 435

--

435,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 03:41:44 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Subject: Re: Appellant response to respondent's

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not. I have made a bundle of but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 14:29, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

22.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-05

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 436

 

 

22.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-05

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 436

--

436,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 04:04:49 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Appellant response to respondent's

Simon

Please confirm if I can forward this to the Public Defender?

Josephine

On 20 February 2016 at 15:48 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

updated I made a typo error at the bottom of the first copy I sent.

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clei states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a sector a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation rega the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it no that I do not think that I can stand a fair trial with the time stamps being the way that they are under article 6 of my human rights and have drafted a letter in regards to this which I would like to go over with yourself. I have made a bundle of all the relevant documentation oi think is relevant towards my case but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 15:41, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of an environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not. I have made a bundle of but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 14:29, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-33  

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 437,438

 

 

23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2

Asbo Re Appellant res respondent's 20-02-2016 16-33        

20/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 437,438

--

437,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 20/02/2016 04:32:54 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Subject: Re: Appellant response to respondent's

The applicant’s case is that I organised illegal raves which caused alarm harm and distress.

To which there is no breach of the licencing 2003 Act or no breach to section 63 present such as tress pass.

The incidents in question are not of a consecutive manner over a long time period and any person not in breach of licencing acts or trespass is entitled to have a party without local authority permission for as long as there is no health and safety risks.

Not that I organised legal moving in or out House party's or birthday parties, with or for others. that caused alarm harm and distress, as they are not a breach of law in doing so without a warning of the local council. With regards to statement I know you have helped me and I have taken a your advice in so many different aspects of the case already, but strongly believe it is in my best interest to confront the police statements point out the consistence’s as they seem to be misled to the truth.

as for the Time stamps do I stand a fair trial or would any other person do so if presented with such errors in the evidence, when polices rely on as the case against myself with no civil witness mentioning myself to be present or acting in a manner likely to cause alarm harm distress.

I would also like to point out that as my acting solicitor and that of you having a copy of my criminal record, you would know if I had been the dates in question for acting anti-social, no matter if civil or criminal.

And I do listen to you and respect you and what you say to me, I just some time question it.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 16:02, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Simon

With regards to your statement I have tried to help you with this. I have explained what is not helpful etc.

You simply disagree with the advice that I am giving, and this has always been the case. You are misinterpreting the Respondent's case which is simply that the raves / parties whether legal or not cause anti-social behaviour - i.e. sleepless nights, noise, nuisance etc. You dispute that you are the organiser and that is the only facts that I requested information about. The court is not looking at one isolated date but all dates and the conduct on each of the dates. I have also explained to you the events that cause you problems and the reasons why. Organisation is not simply providing equipment, manning the gate but also sourcing premises and I have explained that this can be inferred. Even if a section 144 LAPSO is up there can still be antisocial behaviour albeit the event is not a rave under the legislation.

I have made it very clear the irrelevant points and aspects that do not assist you. You do not accept the advice.

Josephine

On 20 February 2016 at 15:41 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

no Josie I am not happy, I did not write this with you or was not involved in the making of it, you want to deal with the applicants skeleton bundle but I have yet been able to put my updated deference statements in towards the police statements which the applicant clearly states, that they rely upon in the skeleton bundle point 2. I did send them to you but could not draft them, with the skills need by a person of your profession. I listen to your legal guidance and it is up to me to make the decision to which way I decide to steer my case and evidence. I do trust in you, but it is legally right for the decision to be mine. I would like the legal points of my defence added as the back bone to my statements such as a copy of the licencing act 2003, copy of the magistrates court transcripts, a copy of a section 144 a copy of a environmental section 80 abatement notice, Adr carriage of dangerous gas's, parliaments official documentation regarding the word (rave) so the acting barrister can clearly state out the points of law relevant to my plea of innocents, I would also like it noted that I do not. I have made a bundle of but would like to go over it with you if and when possible please.

On Saturday, 20 February 2016, 14:29, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Lorraine / Simon

I am attaching the response to the Respondent's skeleton argument.

Can you please sign if you are happy with the content and email straight back to me as I need this to be forwarded to the Public Defender.

438,

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE read Sun 21-02-2016 20-28

21/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 439,440

 

24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE read Sun 21-02-2016 20-28

21/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 439,440

--

439,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 21/02/2016 08:27:58 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: read

Read section 20 of the Skeleton Argument that’s why they have now added the word recorded music. as it was not in their application

Live music:

Q: What about Live Music?

A: We are proposing to raise the audience limit for live music to 500 to bring it in parity with the other deregulated activities.

Q: Why aren’t you deregulating live music fully apart from in licensed premises?

A: The Government is fully behind creativity. But there is a balance to be struck in protecting our communities from potential noise nuisance. We think that the exemptions that will be put in place, as well as raising the audience threshold from 200 to 500 people in on-licensed premises and in workplaces, is a great deal for sensible musicians and audiences.

Q: Why aren’t you waiting to assess the impact of the Live Music Act 2012 before going ahead with further deregulatory measures in this area?

A: To bring it into parity with the other deregulated activities and to avoid unnecessary confusion. But we will of course keep all these changes under review

Q: Why aren’t you extending the Live Music Act deregulation until midnight?

A: Residents groups, local authorities and the police all had concerns about deregulating beyond 11pm, which is recognised in noise legislation as a time when disturbance caused by noise can have a greater impact. However, we will keep these changes under review.

Q: What is the definition of a workplace in relation to regulated entertainment?

A: The term is defined in the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 and is, broadly speaking any non-domestic place where someone works. Recorded music:

Q: What is recorded music?

A: Recorded music activities amount mainly to discos and DJ events - where the audience is there primarily to be entertained by the music activity. If in doubt, check with your local licensing authority.

Q: Why have you not deregulated recorded music?

A: The Government is fully behind the creative industries but there is a balance to be stuck in protecting our communities from potential noise nuisance. We think that the exemptions that will be put in place, as well as the measure for on-licensed premises will be a boost for those holding responsible recorded music events.

Q: Why is live music deregulated in workplaces, but recorded music will not be?

A: As recorded music events are easily portable; they have in the past been more prone to noise and public order problems from unscrupulous operators. We have looked to support responsible community events but retain controls where the risks are higher.

Q: Won’t this allow raves?

A: No. Recorded music activities (usually disco and DJ events) will only be deregulated in the following places (between 08:00­23:00): In premises with an alcohol licence (unless this has been precluded by a licence^ condition) In events organised by Local authorities, schools, nurseries or hospitals, or in ‘community  premises’.

Read

Q: What if a recorded music event is noisy? A: Other legislation is already in place which gives powers to Local authorities

440,

and the police to deal with issues, arising from a problem event. We do not see this situation as much different to the status quo.

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 21 February 2016 19:59

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: ff

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/svstem/uploads/attachment_data/file/267737/Deregulating_entertainment_licensingQA_final.docx.pdf

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/20/pdfs/uksi 20160020 en.pdf Entertainment Licensing - Detailed guidance - GOV.UK

image   Entertainment Licensing - Detailed guidance - GOV.UK

Information on whether you need approval to put on certain types of regulated entertainment.

View on www.gov.uk

Preview by Yahoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 2

Asbo TAKE A LOOK AT TEDS FINISHING 22-02-2016 00-50

22/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 441

 

 

25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 2

Asbo TAKE A LOOK AT TEDS FINISHING 22-02-2016 00-50

22/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 441

--

441,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 22/02/2016 12:49:51 AM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: TAKE A LOOK AT THIS IT NEEDS FINISHING

Attachments: SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Re R v Simon Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 17-39

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 442,443

 

 

26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Re R v Simon Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 17-39

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 442,443

--

442,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 24/02/2016 05:38:59 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

I am in the right by asking you to look into the time stamps so that I can have a fair trial and you will not, I have many emails of myself and my mother asking you to act with my best interest at heart and write to the witness in time for my appeal date, to which this was not done in time as I had explained I was worried about as well as the true points of law relevant to the applicants case. The Jude did set a fair time period for you to set the key objectives so that I could be ready to stand a fair and speed trial.

You have refused to meet myself in this time set and would only meet my mother, this was due to me asking you on the phone, if I could take a copy of the minutes in audio format of our meeting, to which you took as a fret, I have the texts of me being polite to you straight after our conversation stating that I meant no offence and saying sorry if I did upset you, as I class you as a close family member after you representing me over the years.

I have not sent you any correspondence to show that I am not of well health as you seem to be claiming and had not meet you for months, as you refused to do so.

after you are refusing not to meet me after such a long period and you only meeting my mother who was not at any of the incidents contained within the applicant’s bundle. I find it unjust as I clearly have the texts asking you to deal with just me about my statements and case and asked if you would forward my mother as she is going to help with my emails.

on the last occasion of a meeting regarding my case you allowed me to attend with my mother as you had got over me asking for minutes of the meetings you was holding with my mother or any that you might have with myself, I attended and there was no problems at your office I even tidied up a little in your office as our meeting was coming to an end as you had your next client waiting so I was very quiet.

I have already been assessed by the mental health team on 3 occasions now over a fair period of time and each time I have been told that I am well. In fact, the last time I asked for minutes of the meeting to be taken with the mental health team, as I did with you and there was no problem in me doing so, I have the whole recording on cd dated 25/01/16. In the time I had with the mental health team I showed them issues about my court case and the time stamps and other issues that I have raised with yourself and they clearly state on the cd that it is a serious error that you my solicitor needs to pay attention to me as does any other person that I show my case.

Points I have not seen you to show you that I am of ill health

The barrister that meet me on our first occasion only see me for 2 mins the other day at my said appeal date which was not ready in time I have already been cheeked by 3 different teams, who clearly state and write if the members of the Met police had treated them in such a manner over a period of time they would have issues of concern regarding equal rights and many other relevant rights I am well on mind as the police put their signature at the end of the case papers that I ask you to make sure that I get a fair trial with and the doctors agree that I am right on cd as does many over people on the internet and legal ombudsman

please can you reply to what grounds you believe me not to be fit for trial and any plans of action that you may plan to take in regard to my ongoing appeal.

On Wednesday, 24 February 2016, 16:18, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Dear Simon / Lorraine

I am forwarding across to you a letter that I have received from HHJ Pawlak, who will be adjudicating at the appeal hearing on 26th September 2016. He will also be presiding over the mention hearing on 4th April 2016.

The first point that must be addressed in question 3 and this concerns your mental health Simon and your fitness to follow proceedings, instruct solicitors and consider advice. I am therefore going to apply for funding so that you can be assessed so that this area can be clarified. This is important. Your behaviour in court on Monday raised a number of concerns surrounding this point.

The second point is answering and responding to question 2. This question can only be properly addressed once we receive confirmation from a Psychiatrist that you are able to follow proceedings etc

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person. We cannot advance your case or respond to question 2 until such time as the psychiatric confirms that there are no issues with your ability to follow proceedings.

You will note the areas that the court wishes to concentrate on are listed in paragraph 2. All the points will have to be carefully considered; in my view they are loaded questions that are seeking to achieve foundation for the ASBO application. The Judge is referring to events but in brackets using the word rave.

He is not stating illegal rave. There are five subsections but ultimately subsection 2(c) is probably the question that Judge is most interested in knowing your response to.

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person or unless you wish to transfer legal aid.

443,

Paragraph 5 deals with the hearsay application to be served by the respondent.

Superintendent Coombes is forwarding his statement in the post. I will forward this on receipt.

Can you please confirm by return email Simon whether you are willing to be assessed by a Psychiatrist so that we can determine whether you are fit to follow proceedings.

I await hearing from you by return email.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 24 February 2016 at 14:33

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 16-19

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 444

 

 

27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 16-19

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 444

--

444,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 24/02/2016 04:18:47 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Dear Simon / Lorraine

I am forwarding across to you a letter that I have received from HHJ Pawlak, who will be adjudicating at the appeal hearing on 26th September 2016. He will also be presiding over the mention hearing on 4th April 2016.

The first point that must be addressed in question 3 and this concerns your mental health Simon and your fitness to follow proceedings, instruct solicitors and consider advice. I am therefore going to apply for funding so that you can be assessed so that this area can be clarified. This is important. Your behaviour in court on Monday raised a number of concerns surrounding this point.

The second point is answering and responding to question 2. This question can only be properly addressed once we receive confirmation from a Psychiatrist that you are able to follow proceedings etc

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person. We cannot advance your case or respond to question 2 until such time as the psychiatric confirms that there are no issues with your ability to follow proceedings.

You will note the areas that the court wishes to concentrate on are listed in paragraph 2. All the points will have to be carefully considered; in my view they are loaded questions that are seeking to achieve foundation for the ASBO application. The Judge is referring to events but in brackets using the word rave. He is not stating illegal rave. There are five subsections but ultimately subsection 2(c) is probably the question that Judge is most interested in knowing your response to.

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person or unless you wish to transfer legal aid.

Paragraph 5 deals with the hearsay application to be served by the respondent.

Superintendent Coombes is forwarding his statement in the post. I will forward this on receipt.

Can you please confirm by return email Simon whether you are willing to be assessed by a Psychiatrist so that we can determine whether you are fit to follow proceedings.

I await hearing from you by return email.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 24 February 2016 at 14:33

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 18-09

44/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 445,446

 

 

28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 18-09

44/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 445,446

--

445,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/02/2016 06:09:29 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>; Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Dear Josey

You have not attached any paperwork so we cannot see what has been said by the judge or the barrister that was there can this be forwarded please.

Josey at court the judge would not hear what the barrister for Simon was saying or anyone else this case went in and out of court. I asked if I could speak to the judge myself which he took no notice off when a note was written by a person in the court and handed to the clerk to pass to the judge.

For Appeal against Conviction - Case Started - 10:19

For Appeal against Conviction - Respondent Case Opened - 10:50

For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until - 11:20 - 11:08

For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:29

For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until - 11:50 - 11:41

For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:43

For Appeal against Conviction - Hearing finished for SIMON PAUL CORDELL - 11:58 And there was one more time that the judge went out in fact it could have been 2.

And as even the barrister said to us the judge was not hearing what we wanted to say or he would have understood all the judge wanted to do was make this case go ahead even when Simon Barrister was saying it could not, at this point it was not due to Simon heath. it was other reasons that the barrister felt uncomfortable going ahead.

If the judge had heard what was being said and was being fair, then at that point it should have been put off as the barrister had very good reason for it not to go ahead.

It was at this point I asked the lady to write a note to the judge to ask if I could speak which she did and it was pasted to the judge, and the judge took no notice of it.

Simon has had an assessment from the mental health team on I believe 03/02/2016 as you are well aware as Simon told you himself in the office. the warrant was granted on the 25/01/2016 but they never used it until the 03/02/2016

He agreed that he would work with them and have meetings with Goody. The judge does not know any of this because he would not let me speak in court.

Also have you heard yet from Superintendent Adrian Coombs I believe from what you said to me on the phone he was meant to be getting a reply from him on Monday

Regards

Lorraine

From: Josephine Ward [mailto: josie@michaelcarroNandco.com

Sent: 24 February 2016 16:19

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Dear Simon / Lorraine

I am forwarding across to you a letter that I have received from HHJ Pawlak, who will be adjudicating at the appeal hearing on 26th September 2016. He will also be presiding over the mention hearing on 4th April2016.

The first point that must be addressed in question 3 and this concerns your mental health Simon and your fitness to follow proceedings, instruct solicitors and consider advice. I am therefore going to apply for funding so that you can be assessed so that this area can be clarified. This is important. Your behaviour in court on Monday raised a number of concerns surrounding this point.

The second point is answering and responding to question 2. This question can only be properly addressed once we receive confirmation from a Psychiatrist that you are able to follow proceedings etc

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person. We cannot advance your case or respond to question 2 until such time as the psychiatric confirms that there are no issues with your ability to follow proceedings.

446,

You will note the areas that the court wishes to concentrate on are listed in paragraph 2. All the points will have to be carefully considered; in my view they are loaded questions that are seeking to achieve foundation for the ASBO application. The Judge is referring to events but in brackets using the word rave. He is not stating illegal rave. There are five subsections but ultimately subsection 2(c) is probably the question that Judge is most interested in knowing your response to.

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person or unless you wish to transfer legal aid.

Paragraph 5 deals with the hearsay application to be served by the respondent.

Superintendent Coombes is forwarding his statement in the post. I will forward this on receipt.

Can you please confirm by return email Simon whether you are willing to be assessed by a Psychiatrist so that we can determine whether you are fit to follow proceedings.

I await hearing from you by return email.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 24 February 2016 at 14:33

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 19-54

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467

 

 

29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Cor Appeal Letter 24-02-2016 19-54

24/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467

--

447,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 24/02/2016 07:54:23 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Att h t the right to a fair trial.doc new 2003 7th Jan 2013 licencing if profit is to be Licencing act 2003 no regulations private air.png Legal definition of (Raves).pdf

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house parties or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal. I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority applies at the local court to give the police such powers such as a section 80 noise abatement notice, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants bundle, I believe this is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

On Wednesday, 24 February 2016, 18:09, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Josey

You have not attached any paperwork so we cannot see what has been said by the judge or the barrister that was there can this be forwarded please.

Josey at court the judge would not hear what the barrister for Simon was saying or anyone else this case went in and out of court. I asked if I could speak to the judge myself which he took no notice off when a note was written by a person in the court and handed to the clerk to pass to the judge.

For Appeal against Conviction - Case Started - 10:19

For Appeal against Conviction - Respondent Case Opened - 10:50

For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until - 11:20 - 11:08

For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:29

For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until - 11:50 - 11:41

For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:43

For Appeal against Conviction - Hearing finished for SIMON PAUL CORDELL - 11:58 And there was one more time that the judge went out in fact it could have been 2.

And as even the barrister said to us the judge was not hearing what we wanted to say or he would have understood all the judge wanted to do was make this case go ahead even when Simon Barrister was saying it could not, at this point it was not due to Simon heath. it was other reasons that the barrister felt uncomfortable going ahead.

If the judge had heard what was being said and was being fair, then at that point it should have been put off as the barrister had very good reason for it not to go ahead.

It was at this point I asked the lady to write a note to the judge to ask if I could speak which she did and it was pasted to the judge, and the judge took no notice of it.

Simon has had an assessment from the mental health team on I believe 03/02/2016 as you are well aware as Simon told you himself in the office. the warrant was granted on the 25/01/2016 but they never used it until the 03/02/2016

He agreed that he would work with them and have meetings with Goody. The judge does not know any of this because he would not let me speak in court.

Also have you heard yet from Superintendent Adrian Coombs I believe from what you said to me on the phone he was meant to be getting a reply from him on Monday

Regards

Lorraine

From: Josephine Ward mailto: josie@michaelcarroNandco.com

Sent: 24 February 2016 16:19

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

448,

Dear Simon / Lorraine

am forwarding across to you a letter that I have received from HHJ Pawlak, who will be adjudicating at the appeal hearing on 26th September 2016. He will also be presiding over the mention hearing on 4th April2016.

The first point that must be addressed in question 3 and this concerns your mental health Simon and your fitness to follow proceedings, instruct solicitors and consider advice. I am therefore going to apply for funding so that you can be assessed so that this area can be clarified. This is important. Your behaviour in court on Monday raised a number of concerns surrounding this point.

The second point is answering and responding to question 2. This question can only be properly addressed once we receive confirmation from a Psychiatrist that you are able to follow proceedings etc

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person. We cannot advance your case or respond to question 2 until such time as the psychiatric confirms that there are no issues with your ability to follow proceedings.

You will note the areas that the court wishes to concentrate on are listed in paragraph 2. All the points will have to be carefully considered; in my view they are loaded questions that are seeking to achieve foundation for the ASBO application. The Judge is referring to events but in brackets using the word rave. He is not stating illegal rave. There are five subsections but ultimately subsection 2(c) is probably the question that Judge is most interested in knowing your response to.

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person or unless you wish to transfer legal aid.

Paragraph 5 deals with the hearsay application to be served by the respondent.

Superintendent Coombes is forwarding his statement in the post. I will forward this on receipt.

Can you please confirm by return email Simon whether you are willing to be assessed by a Psychiatrist so that we can determine whether you are fit to follow proceedings.

I await hearing from you by return email.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 24 February 2016 at 14:33

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

449,450,451,452,453,454,455,456,457,458,459,460,461,462,463,464,465,466,467,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 2

Asbo Please can you tff importance 25-02-2016 18-40

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 468

 

 

30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 2

Asbo Please can you tff importance 25-02-2016 18-40

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 468

--

468,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 06:39:31 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Subject: Please can you take time to read this and reply as it is off importance.

I am a 35 year old gentlemen as you already understand I am telling you that I do not want you emailing or talking to my mother behind my back and not forwarding me in the correspondents that you send to her about myself, in fact from the present time 18:29 hours of the 25/02/2016 I would like you to just contact myself. I am also prepared to meet yourself the sooner the better, so I can continue with my appeal. I would like you to know that you are more than welcome to come to my flat and see the mental health team letters I have as well as maybe listen to the cd and take a look over the bundle and statements I have prepared for yourself to put your professional skills towards so that I can stand my fair trial. As for you wanting to re asses me straight after I have just been checking I do not find this just as I had Katie and my mother present at the assessment.

I feel that You are in the wrong for what you are putting me throw, the texts I have and emails prove the truth that you refuse to see me for months due to me asking you a professional question such as can I have minutes to the meetings that you hold with my mother or myself in audio format.

All you had to do was say no but on stead you stated that "no client has ever asked you this before and that I am frightened by what I had asked you” as I keep clearly saying in all the emails and texts I have sent to you that I never meant any offence.

You refused to meet me for months and would only meet my mother, not once did iPhone you again after and still to date have not as I do not want you to upset You.

You have acted for me for well over 20 years and I have never been any problem to yourself in fact we have always had a good friendly professional relationship as I keep stating

the cd I am in possession of does in fact prove my statements to yourself to be true, that being from the mental health team's "in proving that they even think that I am well of mind as I keep stating and will do so if you question my health or integrity.

I am mixed race as you do no yourself and the time stamps are wrong in the applicant case, I can get a calculate in front of yourself and prove this or in front of doctor and it is you that does not want to accept this and question my stability, which has lead me to being found guilty for a case that I should never have been. (or in fact was not as Andy Lock states the barrister paid to represent me)

I also went to a private psychiatrist who has wrote me a letter explain that I am well and that you need to pay attention to what is going on with the police and harassment towards myself.

I have a large network of friends and family who also agree that this is wrong.

I have emails of my mother taking to x police offices in a delegated forum room, who we also showed parts of the case and they state that it is wrong and you should help they even have offered to create an injunction for myself against the police to which they once were them self's.

Andy lock the barrister that you hired also agrees in his substitution in regards to the points of law that I have been asking you to act on since the start of this case I have the emails as do you of you.

What I am willing to do is pay for my own private psychiatrist opinion and forward that to yourself if need be, please can you contact me and tell me if I need to book an appointment with one ASAP, so I can get your help in continuing my case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2

Asbo Re Please can yoff importance 25-02-2016 22-55

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 469

 

31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2

Asbo Re Please can yoff importance 25-02-2016 22-55

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 469

--

469,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 10:55:29 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Please can you take time to read this and reply as it is off importance.

Simon

I have just now seen this email.

Further to your instructions I will cease all contact with your mother concerning your case.

Please see attached HHJ Pawlak's letter.

You refer to the letter regarding your Mental Health assessments. Can you please scan and email to me and if they are recent the this may well avoid the necessity for me engaging a Psychiatrist, funded by the Legal Aid Agency.

Regards

Josephine

On 25 February 2016 at 18:39 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I am a 35 year old gentlemen as you already understand I am telling you that I do not want you emailing or talking to my mother behind my back and not forwarding me in the correspondents that you send to her about myself, in fact from the present time 18:29 hours of the 25/02/2016 I would like you to just contact myself. I am also prepared to meet yourself the sooner the better, so I can continue with my appeal. I would like you to know that you are more than welcome to come to my flat and see the mental health team letters I have as well as maybe listen to the cd and take a look over the bundle and statements I have prepared for yourself to put your professional skills towards so that I can stand my fair trial. As for you wanting to re asses me straight after I have just been checked I do not find this just as I had Katie and my mother present at the assessment.

I feel that You are in the wrong for what you are putting me throw, the texts I have and emails prove the truth that you refuse to see me for months due to me asking you a professional question such as can I have minutes to the meetings that you hold with my mother or myself in audio format.

All you had to do was say no but on stead you stated that "no client has ever asked you this before and that I am frightened by what I had asked you” as I keep clearly saying in all the emails and texts I have sent to you that I never meant any offence.

You refused to meet me for months and would only meet my mother, not once did I phone you again after and still to date have not as I do not want you to upset You.

You have acted for me for well over 20 years and I have never been any problem to yourself in fact we have always had a good friendly professional relationship as I keep stating

the cd I am in possession of does in fact prove my statements to yourself to be true, that being from the mental health team's "in proving that they even think that I am well of mind as I keep stating and will do so if you question my health or integrity.

I am mixed race as you do no yourself and the time stamps are wrong in the applicant case, I can get a calculate in front of yourself and prove this or in front of doctor and it is you that does not want to accept this and question my stability, which has lead me to being found guilty for a case that I should never have been. (or in fact was not as Andy Lock states the barrister paid to represent me)

I also went to a private psychiatrist who has wrote me a letter explain that I am well and that you need to pay attention to what is going on with the police and harassment towards myself.

I have a large network of friends and family who also agree that this is wrong.

I have emails of my mother taking to x police offices in a delegated forum room, who we also showed parts of the case and they state that it is wrong and you should help they even have offered to create an injunction for myself against the police to which they once were them self's.

Andy lock the barrister that you hired also agrees in his substitution in regards to the points of law that I have been asking you to act on since the start of this case I have the emails as do you of you.

What I am willing to do is pay for my own private psychiatrist opinion and forward that to yourself if need be, please can you contact me and tell me if I need to book an appointment with one ASAP, so I can get your help in continuing my case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Appeal Letter 25-02-2016 10-41

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 470,471

 

32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 2

Asbo Re R v Simon Appeal Letter 25-02-2016 10-41

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 470,471

--

470,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 10:41:09 AM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Will you take this back to court so I can get my life back I have been locked in my house for two years because I listened to your guidance the documents I sent you are right I am being held against my rights.

Please contact me in regard to my last emails to yourself as you leave me worried.

On Wednesday, 24 February 2016, 19:54, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house party’s or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal. I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority applies at the local court to give the police such powers such as a section 80 noise abatement notice, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants       bundle, I believe this

is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

On Wednesday, 24 February 2016, 18:09, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Josey

You have not attached any paperwork so we cannot see what has been said by the judge or the barrister that was there can this be forwarded please.

Josey at court the judge would not hear what the barrister for Simon was saying or anyone else this case went in and out of court. I asked if I could speak to the judge myself which he took no notice off when a note was written by a person in the court and handed to the clerk to pass to the judge.

· For Appeal against Conviction - Case Started - 10:19

· For Appeal against Conviction - Respondent Case Opened - 10:50

· For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until 11:20 - 11:08

· For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:29

· For Appeal against Conviction - Case adjourned until 11:50 - 11:41

· For Appeal against Conviction - Resume - 11:43

· For Appeal against Conviction - Hearing finished for SIMON PAUL CORDELL - 11:58 And there was one more time that the judge went out in fact it could have been 2.

And as even the barrister said to us the judge was not hearing what we wanted to say or he would have understood all the judge wanted to do was make this case go ahead even when Simon Barrister was saying it could not, at this point it was not due to Simon heath. it was other reasons that the barrister felt uncomfortable going ahead.

If the judge had heard what was being said and was being fair, then at that point it should have been put off as the barrister had very good reason for it not to go ahead.

It was at this point I asked the lady to write a note to the judge to ask if I could speak which she did and it was pasted to the judge, and the judge took no notice of it.

Simon has had an assessment from the mental health team on I believe 03/02/2016 as you are well aware as Simon told you himself in the office. the warrant was granted on the 25/01/2016 but they never used it until the 03/02/2016

He agreed that he would work with them and have meetings with Goody. The judge does not know any of this because he would not let me speak in court.

Also have you heard yet from Superintendent Adrian Coombs I believe from what you said to me on the phone he was meant to be getting a reply from him on Monday

Regards

471,

Lorraine

From: Josephine Ward

mailto: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Sent: 24 February 2016 16:19

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Cc: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Dear Simon / Lorraine

I am forwarding across to you a letter that I have received from HHJ Pawlak, who will be adjudicating at the appeal hearing on 26th September 2016. He will also be presiding over the mention hearing on 4th April2016.

The first point that must be addressed in question 3 and this concerns your mental health Simon and your fitness to follow proceedings, instruct solicitors and consider advice. I am therefore going to apply for funding so that you can be assessed so that this area can be clarified. This is important. Your behaviour in court on Monday raised a number of concerns surrounding this point.

The second point is answering and responding to question 2. This question can only be properly addressed once we receive confirmation from a Psychiatrist that you are able to follow proceedings etc

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person. We cannot advance your case or respond to question 2 until such time as the psychiatric confirms that there are no issues with your ability to follow proceedings.

You will note the areas that the court wishes to concentrate on are listed in paragraph 2. All the points will have to be carefully considered; in my view they are loaded questions that are seeking to achieve foundation for the ASBO application. The Judge is referring to events but in brackets using the word rave. He is not stating illegal rave. There are five subsections but ultimately subsection 2(c) is probably the question that Judge is most interested in knowing your response to.

Paragraph 4 makes it clear that the Court will not allow Michael Carroll & Co to come off the record unless the Senior Partner attends in person or unless you wish to transfer legal aid.

Paragraph 5 deals with the hearsay application to be served by the respondent.

Superintendent Coombes is forwarding his statement in the post. I will forward this on receipt.

Can you please confirm by return email Simon whether you are willing to be assessed by a Psychiatrist so that we can determine whether you are fit to follow proceedings.

I await hearing from you by return email.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

Original Message       

From: Patrick McElligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 24 February 2016 at 14:33

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Appeal Letter

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 15-28

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 472

 

33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 15-28

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 472

--

472,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 03:27:50 PM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Si

Simon

I will be posting out to you a letter of authority requesting permission to access the notes concerning the recent Mental Health Assessments in the past 18 months that your mother disclosed to the Court. Once I receive these and the opinion is that you are well and can follow proceedings, we can progress matters from there.

If the notes suggest that you are not well then, I will be applying for funding from the Legal Aid Agency so that you can be formally assessed to determine whether you can follow proceedings.

I have forwarded to you a letter that I received from the Judge. This is one of the points raised. Mr Morris, the Public Defender has also expressed concern as to your ability to concentrate on and follow proceedings, so I am duty bound to resolve the Mental Health Issue first of all.

Superintendent Coombes has telephoned me, and he is going to be forwarding a statement to me this coming week confirming detail with regards to the Essex event that Christopher Lewis was trying to organise before it was closed down.

I will scan and email this across to you when I receive it.

If you can please sign the letter of authority as soon as it arrives that will greatly assist me.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house parties or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal. I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority serves a noise abatement notice and then applies at the local court to give the police such powers as to be able to enter the premises, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants bundle, I believe this is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 16-40

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 473

 

 

34.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 16-40

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 473

--

473,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 04:39:57 PM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephmewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Si

I am going to take legal action against you for what you have done to my life if you do not act in a professional manner, I have copied the email: between us and am going to put them on a legal websites for advice. if you have a problem with this please contact me, I have shown a few people all ready and have had their opinion and that is that you should be stuck of the list what does that mean.

On Thursday, 25 February 2016, 15:27, JOSEPHINE WARD josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I will be posting out to you a letter of authority requesting permission to access the notes concerning the recent Mental Health Assessments in the past 18 months that your mother disclosed to the Court. Once I receive these and the opinion is that you are well and can follow proceedings, we can progress matters from there.

If the notes suggest that you are not well then, I will be applying for funding from the Legal Aid Agency so that you can be formally assessed to determine whether you can follow proceedings.

I have forwarded to you a letter that I received from the Judge. This is one of the points raised. Mr Morris, the Public Defender has also expressed concern as to your ability to concentrate on and follow proceedings, so I am duty bound to resolve the Mental Health Issue first of all.

Superintendent Coombes has telephoned me, and he is going to be forwarding a statement to me this coming week confirming detail with regards to the Essex event that Christopher Lewis was trying to organise before it was closed down.

I will scan and email this across to you when I receive it.

If you can please sign the letter of authority as soon as it arrives that will greatly assist me.

Yours sincerely Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house parties or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal. I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority serves a noise abatement notice and then applies at the local court to give the police such powers as to be able to enter the premises, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants bundle, I believe this is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 16-59

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 474

 

 

35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2

Asbo Re Si 25-02-2016 16-59

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 474

--

474,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 04:59:22 PM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephmewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Si

This is up to you but I have been advised that if you keep doing what you are doing I should go public and I do not want to have to do this t take everyone else’s advice as I clearly am not white as you want me to take the blame for being as that is what the applicant has blamed

being as well as the points of law I ask you for your guidance in, the cd I have of the mental health team is one of the professionals making confessions of breach of regulations such as feeling in the court warrant incorrect to gain entrance to my flat as she clearly admits that s never needed to feel the form in as she had prior permission of myself to arrange a meeting with me whenever they wanted but choose to gain a section 135 under the mental health act. the cd is enough to make people lose their jobs, phone them, and ask them, I already have complaint in place regarding the problems but have chosen not to carry it on, at this present time. Any person can clearly hear on the cd the doctor doing his cheeks then coming back in the room and saying that I am of well mind, I made a noise such a woo who and you can he; least 6 doctors cheer along a go yeah, You are wasting my time Josie as you have done with the time the Jude gave you to n sure you had answered the questions you still refuse to answer to date contained within the last three emails sent to yourself.

On Thursday, 25 February 2016, 16:39, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I am going to take legal action against you for what you have done to my life if you do not act in a professional manner, I have copied the emails between us and am going to put them on a legal websites for advice. if you have a problem with this please contact me. I have shown a few people all ready and have had their opinion and that is that you should be stuck of the list what does that mean.

On Thursday, 25 February 2016, 15:27, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I will be posting out to you a letter of authority requesting permission to access the notes concerning the recent Mental Health Assessments in the past 18 months that your mother disclosed to the Court. Once I receive these and the opinion is that you are well and can follow proceedings, we can progress matters from there.

If the notes suggest that you are not well then, I will be applying for funding from the Legal Aid Agency so that you can be formally assessed to determine whether you can follow proceedings.

I have forwarded to you a letter that I received from the Judge. This is one of the points raised. Mr Morris, the Public Defender has also expressed concern as to your ability to concentrate on and follow proceedings, so I am duty bound to resolve the Mental Health Issue first of all.

Superintendent Coombes has telephoned me, and he is going to be forwarding a statement to me this coming week confirming detail with regards to the Essex event that Christopher Lewis was trying to organise before it was closed down.

I will scan and email this across to you when I receive it.

If you can please sign the letter of authority as soon as it arrives that will greatly assist me.

Yours sincerely Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house parties or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal.

I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority serves a noise abatement notice and then applies at the local court to give the police such powers as to be able to enter the premises, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants bundle, I believe this is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2

Asbo Si 25-02-2016 10-52

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488,489,490,491,492

493

 

36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2

Asbo Si 25-02-2016 10-52

25/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488,489,490,491,492

493

--

475,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/02/2016 10:51:37 AM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Si

Attachments: Legal definition of (Raves).pdf new 2003 7th Jan 2013 licencing if profit is to be the right to a fair trial.doc

Please can you reply as what you have said has left me with concerns.

All I want is a fair trial and a professional good relationship with yourself. I ask for legal guidance off yourself. I have created a bundle with the relevant back bone points of law, relevant to my case and a shorter up dated statement, I have also made a skeleton argument out of the docs you have provided me with up to date. at this time I would like you to apply to the court so that I can have the ASBO conditions defined as trespass was not present for section 63 conditions to be imposed, neither was there any breach of the licencing act 2003 as amended Jan 7th 2013 and 2016, also proofing the fact that the applicants case of illegal raves, could not be correct in law. please see a copy of the licencing act 2003 attached that clearly states that all house parties or private parties are not regulated and do not need a licence and there for not illegal. I would also like the right under article 6 of my human rights to be called as I do not feel that it is possible with the only evidence the police rely on not only to be incorrect in law but that of a fabricated evidence by way of the time stamps and other relevant errors such as PC Elesmore stating under oath to the district judge that any location blocked out or within the applicants bundle, are that off progress way, when we have clearly proved otherwise. Please see a draft copy of my backbone points of law attached. The folder I have attached proves that illegal raves was not possible to be present, as the police have no power on private parties, until the local authority serves a noise abatement notice and then applies at the local court to give the police such powers as to be able to enter the premises, which has not been served within any of the dates in question contained within the applicants bundle, I believe this is why the local council never turns up to any of the court hearings which they are bound by law to do so, as I would like them to attended and answer such questions. please can you reply to my points in the last 3 emails in bullion points so I can understand your legal guidance.

476,

477,

478,

479,

480,

481,

482,

483,

484,

485,

the right to a fair trial.doc

I have taken time to listen to my solicitor’s advice in regard to the applicant’s proposal of an Asbo order that was on the

13th August 2014

Was created by Steve Elesmore

13th August 2014

A meeting was held with Steve Hodgson who is a representative for Enfield Local Authority Council and Jane Johnson on behalf of the Metropolitan police alongside others.

12th September 2014

A bundle is said to have been served on Mr Simon Cordell at 109 Burncroft Avenue, to which he disputes.

06/10/2014

22/10/2014

05/11/2014

02/12/2014

09th 10th 11th 03/2015

03rd 4th 08/2015 26/10/2015

09/11/2015

Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have a hearing for an interim Order, but legal aid had not been granted.

Michael Carroll acting solicitor came to court, the judge overturned and granted legal aid. The application for the Interim hearing the judge would not hear.

Interim hearing but could not go ahead due to Andy Locke Acting Barrister had a flood at his home address.

Interim hearing and the order were granted.

Mr Simon Cordell’s mother has a note on her mobile phone, stating he was in court at Highbury Corner not sure what they were for.

Meant to have been set for trial but the court only booked 1-day hearing, this was then put off until the 03rd and 04th Aug 2015

Highbury Corner trial case part proven on the 04th 08/2015

1st hearing at Wood Green Crown to see if case was ready for appeal on the

Was 1st appeal date which was set for a 1-hour hearing

22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016   Set for appeal at the crown court.

It is said that Mr Cordell had been found guilty on the 3rd 4th August 2015, to which he disputes to be correct.

An appeal date has been set for Feb 22nd 23rd 24th 2016 Legal aid was re granted on the 00/00/2015

486,

the right to a fair trial.doc

In understanding that Mr Simon Cordell’s acting solicitor has explained to him that she cannot arrange a barrister till April 2016, due to him being on leave, if granted by the Jude this would in fact set the new appeal date to be two months after the already agreed appeal date of Feb 22nd, if the court aggress to such a date, contained within the time scale of April 2016 and not any time after, due to the court diary already being pre booked.

Mr Simon Paul Cordell is asking for a Former judge to examine the role of police officers, who present the applicant cases of an ASBO order against himself.

Mr S. Cordell is asking for this to be assessed and agreed under the grounds of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Right to a Fair Trial Act 1998, Legislation.

Which in legal terms, should be the best means of separating the guilty from the innocent and protecting against injustice. Without this right, the rule of law and public faith in the justice system collapse. The Right to a Fair Trial is one of the cornerstones of a just society.

Article 6 the Right to a fair hearing

The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law and to democracy itself.

The right applies to both criminal and civil cases, although certain specific minimum rights set out in Article 6 apply only in criminal cases.

The right to a fair trial is absolute and cannot be limited. It requires a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The procedural requirements of a fair hearing might differ according to the circumstances of the accused.

The right to a fair hearing, which applies to any criminal charge as well as to the determination of civil rights and obligations, contains a number of requirements and I believe the causes below full within them requirements.

An ASBO order has been appealed against after the magistrates court decided a decision of guilt, the decision had been made against Mr Simon Cordell, this was at Highbury Corner, Magistrates Court, on the 4th August 2015 in pursuant to s.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 it was agreed to make him subject to an Anti-Social behaviour order. This was in pursuit for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

The respondent’s case is that Mr Simon Cordell has been accused of being integrally involved in the organisation of illegal raves in Enfield.

Part of the Barrister submissions that represented Simon Cordell, had been that the allegations were that he was involved in the organizing of illegal raves, but the applicant hadn’t adduced evidence, of trespass or evidence of breach of the licensing Act 2003 which is a requirement for proving, that an indoor rave was illegal. The Deputy District Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality, - all the needed to prove was he had acted in an anti-social manner. In the view of the barrister this was a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus,

487,

the right to a fair trial.doc

Simon being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

It should be agreed with the barrister statement as when dealing with this case Mr Simon Cordell was addressing the applicant’s case to prove that he had not been involved in organizing illegal raves, as this is what the application against him was.

Other points of concern are.

• Inaccuracy’s leading to incorrect time stamps contained within the applicant’s bundle created by Steve Elsmore on the 13/8/2014.

CAD numbers 10471 / 10481 / 10506 of the 7th June 2014 = Please take note every day the 999-call centre starts at CAD 01 and goes up to the average of 10,742 to 15,000 callers per day. (We can tell this by the number of cad’s incident numbers supplied, within the applicant’s bundle supporting the evidence supplied, for a standalone ASBO order to be gained against Mr Simon Cordell.

On the average the 999-call centre will receive on the average of 300 callers per hour as marked and time stamped below.

Every half hour is 150 callers and every 15 mins is 75 callers Every 7 half mins is 33 callers and 3 half mins 17 callers

Please take note to (CAD number / Incident Number 10481 7th June 14) this is the 10,481 emergency Met police call of the 7th June 2014 time stamped 22:47 So it is incorrect for (CAD 10506 7th June 14) externally inputted 25 calls later, to have an earlier time stamp of the 7th June 2014 at 22:44 hours.

In fact, the time should have been 22:49 hours.

Please take note to (CAD number / Incident Number 4323 7th June 2014 at 12:25)

(CAD numbers 7th June 2014 at 08:16

Date

Incident no

number

Time

7th June 2014

1012

01

01:53

7th June 2014

1047

02

01:59

7th June 2014

1323

03

02:41

7th June 2014

1608

04

03:34

7th June 2014

1722

05

03:58

7th June 2014

1816

06

04:15

7th June 2014

2141

07

05:50

7th June 2014

2255

08

06:24

7th June 2014

2271

09

06:27

7th June 2014

2601

10

08:09

7th June 2014

2637: p187 to 190:

11 (Error)

08:18

7th June 2014

2672: p196 to 198:

12 (Error)

08:16

--

488,

--

the right to a fair trial.doc

7th June 2014

2854

13

08:56

7th June 2014

3005: p203 to 205:

14 (Error)

09:22

7th June 2014

3037: p179 to 183:

15 (Error)

09:20

7th June 2014

3252

16

10:07

7th June 2014

3986

17

11:47

7th June 2014

4323

18

12:25

7th June 2014

4325

19

Missing

7th June 2014

5206

20

13:57

7th June 2014

8841

21

20:07

7th June 2014

10393

22

22:38

7th June 2014

10462

23

Missing

7th June 2014

10471

24

22:45

7th June 2014

10481: p233 to 237:

25 (Error)

22:47

7th June 2014

10506: p238 to 241:

26 (Error)

22:44

7th June 2014

10742

27

23:01

7th June 2014

10844

28 Missing

7th June 2014

10967

29

23:25

Time Scales between calls below.

· 35 people cads 1012 to 1047 time 6 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 276 people cads 1047 to 1323 time 42 mins (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513 main cad police Insp Hillmill sent to location progress way)

·  285 people cads 1323 to 1608 time 53 mins (Lincoln Way grid 534657,195453)

·  114 people cads 1608 to 1722 time 24 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 94 people cads 1722 to 1816 time 17 mins (Orchard Terrance Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

· 325 people cads 1816 to 2141 time 1:35 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 114 people cads 2141 to 2255 time 34 mins (Hardy Way Grid Ref 531438, 197711 miles away Gorden Hill)

· 16 people cads 2255 to 2271 time 3 mins (Leighton Road Grid Ref 534144,195627 Bush Hill Park)

· 330 people cads 2271 to 2601 time 42 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 36 people cads 2601 to 2637-time 1 hour 9 mins (Ayley Croft Grid Ref 534219,195697)

· 35 people cads 2637 to 2672 time 58 mins (1st Time Laps 08:18) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

· 182 people cads 2672 to 2854-time 1 hour 10 mins (1st Time Laps 08:16) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

· 151 people cads 2854 to 3005 time 26 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 32 people cads 3005 to 3037 time 58 mins (2nd Time Laps 09:22) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

--

489,

the right to a fair trial.doc

· 215 people cads 3037 to 3252 time 47 mins (2nd Time Laps 09:20) (Tynemouth Drive miles away Grid Ref 534375,198125)

· 734 people cads 3252 to 3986-time 1 hour 39 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 337 people cads 3986 to 4323 time 38 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· missing people cads 4323 to 4325 time missing (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

So; -

· 883 people cads 4323 to 5206-time 1 hour 32 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 3,635 people cads 5206 to 8841-time 6 hour 13 mins (no grid or att location

· 1,552 people cads 8841 to 10393 time 2 hours 31 mins (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

· missing people cad 10393 to 10462 time missing So;-

· 78 people cads 10393 to 10471 time 7 mins (Great Cambridge road miles away Grid Ref 534396, 197692 Carter hatch Lane but states behind tops tiles)

· 10 people cads 10471 to 10481 time 2 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· 25 People Cads 10481 to 10506-time mins (3rd Time Laps 22:47 to 22:44) (Wood stock Cres grid Ref 534657,195453)

· 236 People Cads 10506 to 10742 time 17 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380.195513)

· Missing People Cads 10742 to 10844 time missing So:-

· 225 People Cads 10742 to10967 time 26 mins (Lincoln Way grid 534657,195453)

· Cad 10967 (In Albury Walk Miles Away grid ref 535375. 202125 Cheshunt)

The time stamps go back for the 3rd time, so to even be able to work the true format is impossible.

There are 37 CAD/ Incident numbers for the 8th June 2014, to which there is only 7 in the ASBO application and only Cad Number 47 represents Progress Way, the rest represent 32 Crown RD another premises being occupied under section 144 lazppo 10 minutes away from progress way.

By the statistics, the call centre receives on the 8th June 2014, 300 people call per hour. Cads 2410 and 3151 should equal 741 callers the same as Cads 793 to Cad 2410 Cad 3151 Caller is 3 HOURS: 25 Minutes, please can this be explained.

Date

Incident no

number

Time

 

8th June14

47

01

00:00

Progress Way

8th June14

340

02

00:29

Crown Road

8th June14

625

03

00:54

Crown Road

8th June14

793

04

01:10

Crown Road

--

490,

--

the right to a fair trial.doc

8th June14

2410

05

05:35

Crown Road

8th June14

3151

06

09:08

Crown Road

8th June14

3319

07

09:39

Crown Road

· 293 people cads 47 to 340 time 29 mins (In Progress Way grid ref

534380,195513)

· 285 people cads 340 to 625 time 24 mins (In Crown Road grid ref

534960.196240)

· 168 people cads 625 to 793 time 16 mins (In Crown Road grid ref

534960.196240)

· 1617 people cads 793 to 2410 time 4 hours 25 mins (In Crown Road grid ref

534960.196240)

· 741 people cads 2410 to 3151 time 3 hours 33 mins (In Crown Road grid ref

27. (450 people missing)

· 168 people cads 3151 to 3319 time 31 mins (In Crown Road grid ref

534960.196240)

Supported Evidence, supporting the fact that the CAD's supporting the applicant ASBO should not be time stamped wrong, this evidence does include;

· Standard Operational Guidelines - East of England. http://www.eastamb.nhs.uk/FOI%20Docs/Disclosure%20Log/Emergency%20Op s/July%202013/F15152h%20-%20attachment.pdf

· National Standards for Incident Recording (NSIR) Collection and recording of police.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment data/file/11 6658/count-nsir11.pdf

· Understanding Control Command; http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts UC2.pdf

· police Central Communications Command incident procedure; https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lkd4sarsfdMC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq= police+Central+Communications+Command+incident+procedure&source=bl&ot s=663ZhaKX9 &sig=Z7DgHlgJncwLNuam0g8EBcCja- 8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif39iYsMbKAhWI8A4KHdnMAoQQ6AEIMz AE#v=onepage&q=police%20Central%20Communications%20Command%20in cident%20procedure&f=false

Point 2

Blocked out Inc locations and other relevant information that should be contained within the cads that have been presented in the applicant’s bundle. Only in serious circumstances in cases such as were it is absolutely necessary to aid in the prevention of witness or victim intimidation should a officer be trusted to block out such information.

Under oath pc Steve Elsmore state to the district Jude that “Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.” When in fact it is his login that created and printed the applicants bundle this can be proved by his signature and also by the computer id log that must be used to print the data contained within the Police National Computer and now has been submitted and is contained with the applicants bundle and is verified at the top of most of the pages or within.

--

491,

--

the right to a fair trial.doc

Pc Elsmore states under oath that he did not carry out any further investigations in regard to speaking to the owners of any premises to fix that of a notice of trespass or conviction of twok as the main investigating officer. He states “I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue”

Pc Elsmore states under oath “There was a rave on an adjourning Road but not on that day.” (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

“Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)”

CADS CONTAINED WITHIN THE BUNDIL THAT ARE PRINTED IN Pc Steve Elsmore name and as the leading investigator he would have known the truth to the locations blocked out that are in fact crown road another house party a five minute drive from progress way and if not for the grid numbers being not blocked out inclusive of other landmarks such as A&J cars based in Enfield I would not have been able to prove my innocents in the ongoing application leading to an un fair trial.

• Cad Page 276 == A& J cars Enfield ===Crown rd. ==I would not have been able to prove my innocence in this case if it was not for A & J CARS being left in text, and no this is the same from many of the other Cads contained within the ASBO application.

· Cad 340 8th June 2014 blocked out page 260

· Cad 793 8th June 2014 blocked out page 268

· Cad 2410 8th June 2014 blocked out A&J cars Crown Road page 276

· Cad 3151 8th June 2014 Southbury Road Crown Road page 278

· Cad 3319 8th June 2014 Southbury Road / Crown Road page 283

· Cad 11822 19th Jul 2014 Southbury Road / Crown Road page 302

In Insp Hamill statements of facts. that are incorrect he led the district Jude into believing the manufactured and engineered evidence that he had fabricated to aid him to leading the District Jude to making a guilty verdict.

Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

Witness 1 - Inspector Hamill -R. O - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday. (This was in fact early Hours of the 8th around 1:00am.)

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

--

492,

--

the right to a fair trial.doc

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way) Witness - Pc Elsmore - R.O - 14;10 EIC Tab 6 - pg ?14?

DEF XEX

Council (unreadable text) curfews (unreadable text) that PNC info on statement adds no (unreadable text) probatory (unreadable text) value of info re: Witness being “afraid of D” What he puts down to the way he worded, but he meant that people actually are afraid of possibly giving evidence in court.

R V CORDELL

4

DEF

Counsel argues that officer’s statement is designed to cause on evidence reaction of this of no value and speculatory in nature.

DJ

How many calls from public did police receive?

Witness

In excess of 15 calls - how many to the same venue and no other address.

Doe’s does not know the number of callers that are in relation to each of these occasions.

On page 15 - Allegations re: Millmarsh Lane, evidence from officer not first-hand - relied on cads and another Intel.

Query Re: “3 massive nitrous tanks”

DJ

Where did you get such info officer.

Witness

From Page 65 - sergeant King - Crimit’s Re reports, other Intel but not from people at the venue.

COUNSEL

Officer you signed a statement of truth (unreadable text) to other witness statements.

DJ

We all know that on ASBO apps hearsay is allowed.

R V CORDELL

5

Counsel

Why did officer no and rely on Pc Kings Statements later than on the Crimit’s reported. Officer no and involved in taking info from Pc King.

(Confesses he did it.)

He did not notice the discrepancy regarding official statements.

--

493,

--

Have heard of Every Decibel Matters - They were advertising and I believe the D knows a member of the above company.

No evidence D is involved in running their operations.

No attempt has been made to speak to directors of company.

No reason to why you didn’t /contact the company.

I think from memory have met D once @ Edmonton police station.

(At Page 16 1st paragraph - not consistent to fact that he met him on the 7/6/2014) All notes with cad number were listed from reports not officers’ own words - same applies from Cads that had no input.

Has not made attempts too contact owners of premises.

Officers unable to assist courts in relation to why statements were not signed on notebooks profiles.

Another example of doings put in statements to blacken Mr Cordell’s evidence in statement @ point 12, No convictions that of class A drugs unlike what’s written in Statements - another example of untrue cut and paste.

DJ

Ill ignore because no convections of class A drugs or supplying is present on the criminal record.

Counsel

You can not assist with witness reliability of info contained, can you?

Can Intel be wrongfully inaccurate? No Officer

On that particular re post, it appears to be right.

I did not speak to Parcell he is force @ seven boroughs.

I believe he was not included in the email, because Intel (unreadable text) Email sent to LDE only.

Searched (unreadable text) for info on Cordell’s convections.

Moving on to statement on Page 30

Does PO investigating unit have more info than it is letting on?

Officer

No

Are you aware that Miss Cordell has spoken to other officers Re: Rave?

This suggests that you do not want DS Tanner to be examined on these proceedings because she has information Re knowledge of raves and them not being connected to W/D.

Spoke to Pc Tanner but not written what - spoke to (unreadable text) this year You have no recorded that you emailed her but then spoken to her.

Emails have been deleted and no copies keep on record.

 

 

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

 37. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie - 29-02-2016 22-48

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 494

 

 

37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

 37. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie - 29-02-2016 22-48

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 494

--

494,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 10:48:19 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarTollandco.com>

Subject: Josephine Ward wants me to have a medical check

Josephine I am not will to sign any form giving you consent to my personnel records as no judge has ordered for you to do so, I would not be a free man if there was a chance of me being a danger to myself or the general public. As I am sure you would understand the Mental Health Team are trained in dealing with people in such cases under section 135, 136, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Mental Health Act 1983 & 2007 as amended 2016. I do in fact take offence in you questioning my ability to make decisions for myself and them decisions that I make I am making being of clear judgement towards the applicants case which contains false facts such as me being white and contained in side a warehouse surrounded by police, marked in the cads.

You know this not to be true for as long as two years.

For two years I have asked you and Michelle Carroll and co solicitors to write to the witness also the applicant and point out the true facts of law but most importantly make sure I have a fair trial.

Any person can get a calculator and see that the time stamps are in error as I have been emailing you and stating.

All I ask from you, is to have my best interest at heart and you refuse to see me for months now try to force me to see doctors when you have no legal obligation too.

I have a hard copy bundle of all the emails that have been sent to you from the start of this case and a list of the questions and guidance that I have been given I have taken the time to work out how many times and the dates, myself and my mother have had to asked you to deal with the same question(s) I am still asking to date 29/02/2016. to answer and the points of law that make my case illegal that I am supposed to have broken in fact how I have this standalone Asbo with no previous convictions of similar nature and it was not an Asbo on conviction granted.

I feel as if I have missed a whole interview and being charged for some think that clearly states that it is illegal in turn not having the right to defend myself.

I want the case taken  back to court this week if possible as I want to start a night  job driving

and it involves me delivering to any possible address, can you please sort this.

Josephine, I have started to seek legal guidance as you will not give it to me, this is not right.

I will not wait till April for a pretrial hearing that will not go ahead as I cannot stand a fair trial, as I have explained I will bring a calculator to you and show you what I sent you in my drafted witness statement months ago asking you to defend me, in the fact that it would be impossible to stand a      fair trial with us both knowing this.

The other day in your  office you told me that I might lose my case knowing about the only evidence being that of the time stamps and the same people who created the application corrupting the time stamps then making statements about myself also that of me clearly pointing out the law and that I never done any think illegal and even you cannot explain to me how my case states it is illegal but I have not been arrested and in the understanding off section 63 inclusive of the licensing act as well as the warehouse becoming a place of residence when a section 144 is present.

As stated, I want to work can you bring this back to court please.

If you want, I will bring you the copy of the section 135 and that it has been signed now as void and you can see that I am still here.

If any think needs covering, it is what has not been done in this case already to date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 29-02-2016 15-00

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 495

 

38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 29-02-2016 15-00

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 495

--

495,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 03:00:06 PM

To: josie@michaelcarroUandco.com

Subject: RE: Medical Information

Dear Josey

What you are saying in your emails is that the judge says in his letter that I have got to have an assessment, but this is not the case as part 3 of his letter states

If the Appellant wishes to rely on any medical evidence as to his mental health, then any report dealing with such matters must be before the court on the 4th April 2016”

Which clearly states; “if I wish to rely on any mental health evidence then a report has to be submitted by the 04/04/2016,” but this does not say I must rely on this, and I do not wish to rely on this.

Can you please take my case back to court so that my conditions can be defined, and also have a meeting once you get the letters you are waiting on from Superintendent Adrian Coombs so we can deal with the appeal.

Can you also please send me the notes from court from the public defender that was there for me please as I have not had these as of yet.

Also, the issue about the public order unit if they are not willing to give the information then they need to be summoned to court for the appeal.

Also, what is going to happen as to the missing CAD and the errors in the CAD

The case is that I organised illegal raves on page two of the applicants first bundle it clearly states I quote "The Defendant is involved in the organisation and conduct of illegal raves. These primarily take place on disused or industrial land in London and cause alarm and distress to the local residents. These raves are licensing activity, cause significant noise pollution and directly lead to destruction of property and breaches of peace."

In defence to my case the 2nd line down clearly states The Defendant is involved in the organisation and conduct of illegal raves, I have sent you the licensing act 2003 apex 4 which states, house party’s and places of residents do not need a licence, which all the incidents in the applicants bundle are places of residence in contained fencing in private air. In the licensing act it states this includes gardens and private car parks. I have linked index page 4 off the licensing act 2003 within this document, which clearly states unless profit is being made, to which I am not being accused off, then there is no breach of the law, and there for not illegal.

For members of the public to have a moving in-house party is not a breach of law and there for not            illegal.

The word rave clearly states the key element such as in open air must be present and when in private       air trespass must be present.

So what law have I broken to make the case law abiding under reasonable doubt if I am not being accused of making profit it is not illegal to organize a private house party for any British citizen, as long as you have respect for the residence living in around the local area?

In regard to the statement off, “These primarily take place on disused or industrial land in London and cause alarm and distress to the local residents.”

All locations are a place of fixed a bow and residence.

In reference to “These raves are licensing activity, cause significant noise pollution and directly lead to destruction of property and breaches of peace."

No home is licensable, unless a breach of the 2003 licensing act has been made, to which contained within the applicants bundle their ins none.

I have a bundle of the laws that are relevant to my case that should be in my defence bundle, please will you help me go over them.

I would like to start trading my company as I have explained to you for months and keep asking you to take the case back to court to get my bail conditions defined,      to which you have not to date even low Andy Lock states that I am right in my points of law and how it leaves me in a state of utter confusion to what I am            aloud to do or not as the applicants case is based on illegal raves there for banning me from what is lawfully legal.

I cannot think of any jobs the conditions will not have an effect of that my professions are in, I cannot be a delivery driver, as most company deliver to industrial estates,

I cannot deliver parcels or goods to any person living under a section 144, this is not correct in law.

I am very concerned as the applicant’s case is for an ASBO in it civil manner, and the case is based on illegal activities, to which I have never had the right to defended my innocents in.

An ASBO on convection is when a person has committed criminal activities and has been found guilty and there is such a need to apply for a court to sit in its civil capacity to obtain such an order against any person, straight or therefore after.

I have a standalone ASBO which should be on the 3rd strike of a smaller criminal conviction, to which I have never been arrested for illegal raves is and in being granted is a breach of my human rights, a standalone ASBO put against myself with no criminal conviction is wrong in practice of law.

Thanks

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 29-02-2016 14-19

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 496,497,498

499,500,501,502,503,504

505,506,507,508,509,510

511,512,513,514,515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

 

 

39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 29-02-2016 14-19

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 496,497,498

499,500,501,502,503,504

505,506,507,508,509,510

511,512,513,514,515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

--

496,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 02:19:05 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: hh

Attachments: STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT SKELETON

 

497,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

STATEMENT OF WITNESS

(C.J. Act 1967, S2,9. M.C. Rules 1968 R58)

STATEMENT OF: Simon Cordell

AGE OF WITNESS (if over 21): 34

OCCUPATION OF Unemployed

WITNESS:

ADDRESS: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7JQ

TELEPHONE:

This statement consisting of 7 page(s) each signed by me, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

Dated the 24th day of February 2015

Signed

Signature Witnessed by

YA/450/15

This is an updated statement further to the statement of Mr Simon Cordell Dated 24th day of February.

In reference to the 12th Jan 2013 Canary Wharf

• This date in question has been add to the applicants bundle as a reference as to the Limitation Act 1980. Which states a case must be applied six months prior from the date of the incident. Please take note to Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the 24/02/2015; he was in fact taken to The Royal London Hospital.

In reference to the 07th April 2013, Blakey’s House

07/04/2013 = In Steve Elsmore Statement dated 11/08/2014

In regard to 07/04/2013 = Please read Mr Simon Cordell’s last statement dated the 24/02/2015. He states that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave, Mr Cordell did not involve himself in the organization of any illegal rave this was his friends housing estate and was on a Sunday, nor did he supply equipment on said date.

Mr Simon Cordell will State; “that he was not rude to police, but he did feel like he could not even go out for the day with some of his friends, without getting stopped and searched by members of the police.

It is also noted that the caller was very clear that they saw a flat screen TV being put into Mr Cordell’s van, which is confusing to why when the police searched the van they found no TV, but did in fact find two of his off road motor bikes, which is not included in Steve Elsmore statement. The police did checks on Mr Simon Cordell’s

Off Road Motor Bikes but this is also not stated, but should show’s up on the seizer notice, as Mr Simon Cordell did ask the police office to take careful note of the two off road motor bikes, as due to the high value of them.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did get a bit upset when the police said they were going to seize his van, as he did have insurance in place to be able to drive the van in question, but there was an error on the MID database. Miss Cordell had been trying to help her son resolve the issue concerning his insurance policy not showing on the mid data base alongside with members of their local police force and his insurance company KGM too, together they had tried to work out why Mr Simon Cordell was showing as uninsured. There was information noted as intelligence on the police National Computer stating this I had asked the police to check on their systems due to this, but they would not they just wanted to seize Mr Simon Cordell’s van without checking, so he knew he was being wrongfully accused at this point, as he had done nothing wrong and he did have insurance to be driving and had paid a lot of money for his insurance. He states he did not get upset in the manner that the police have said he did and that he does not mean to come across as rude to police. In this case he was just trying to explain the error on the system.

1

498,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

In addition, the prosecution offered no evidence in respect of the charges that were brought even though they were reliant on police witnesses. Mr Simon Cordell had been wrongfully arrested for not having insurance when he was insured to drive. He also did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour on this date in question.

There are no CAD’s for this date, but yet they was meant to be, a CAD referring to the pacific details that should be relating to a person stating, that they believed a burglary was in progress and of the 999 caller stating that they had seen a person who was putting a flat screen TV into Mr Simon Cordell’s van.

In reference to 24th May 2013 police station

Please take note to the picture above and that of the building on the far right being the old police station, you cannot see the front vehicle entrance as it is in the far right of the picture and is the only entrance.

The alley way in the middle is where I drove my car down and stopped there is no rear entrance to the police station from the ally as there is two other running companies in-between and to the far right is another running company.

24.05.13 = Mr Simon Cordell was looking for venues to set up an illegal rave

On the 24.05.13 = Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave neither was he involved in the organization of any illegal raves, nor did he supply equipment. This case was only added as a reference as the limitation Act 1980 which states that a case must be applied 6 months from the date of the incident, to which it was not. Please read my last statement dated the 24/02.2015.

It is alleged that Mr Simon Cordell was looking for venues in which illegal raves could be held, on 24th May 2013. Mr Simon Cordell dispute’s this. He will state that he had been contacted by a friend called Joshua, who was living at 204 High Street Ponders End EN3 4EZ, also known as the Old Police Station at Ponders End, as he and some others were homeless, so was living and residing under section 144. as Mr Simon Cordell was driving towards 204 High Street, he drove his car down the alleyway so that he could park the vehicle he was in, He parked between two well-known land marks, Which is where many people who do live in an around the surrounding areas would be able to remember as the old ponders End police station next to the Kinder Garden Centre.

Mr Cordell states he knows the area very well as this is where he has lived all of his life, so he knew about the car park at the back of the two well-known landmarks, as he states you cannot park on the high road, because of the double yellow lines or other restrictions. He had parked there before, he states he believes and knows that the police saw his car as he began to take a right turn to be able to drive down to where he intended to stop, he knew the police had followed him, as he had seen them pay attention to himself as he had driven past.

Mr Cordell does remember clearly that of himself locking his vehicle as the police approached him and now was standing by his side. He states that this is normal for him and over the years of his life he has become use to the police approaching him for numerous accusations, so that has also made him used to their presents, Mr Simon Cordell states that that this is so normal for him, so he got ready for the police procedures, as they said they wanted to search him and his car because the police believed that the car he was driving smelt strongly of cannabis, Mr Simon Cordell sates that he would always consented to this. He is sure of his statements of facts and that the police cannot dispute this, that of the police officers that had approached him and who had stopped him as he had just got out of my car, or how would they have said his car smelt strongly of cannabis, which is the reason that the police officers gave him the conditions of search and their consent form due to a search of himself and that of his vehicle that he was driving.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he had not done anything wrong and nothing was found on his person or in his car.”

Mr Simon Cordell will dispute making any comments about being able to attract people to illegal raves and illegal 3-day events, what reason would he have had to say this. Mr Simon Cordell will state to the applicant that he was a visitor to the location of interest, due to a call from a friend who asked if Mr Simon Cordell could loan him some money for food. He will also include that he did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour on the 24th May 2013.

Mr Simon Cordell does not know what Joshua said to the police, as he was never with

Joshua. Mr Simon Cordell does not know why Joshua would have said to the police that he was his lawyer, or if Joshua said this at all to police. Mr Simon Cordell has tried to get hold of Joshua to make a statement for this case, but due to him being homeless, it has been very hard. As far as he is aware the building was being occupied by people to live in, he states he does not know anything Joshua said to police about know any think about a rave. Mr Simon Cordell did not manage to visit him on this day.

At no point is Mr Simon Cordell being accused of acting in an anti-social manner on this date, or by any members of the public inclusive of members of the police, neither was he arrested.

Hyde Park 20th 04 2014

2

499,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

In Reference to Pages 213 - pages 98 to 100 created by Steve Hoodless yr contained within the applicant’s first bundle. 5 St George’s Industrial Estate,

It is said that on 25.05.14 Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and or attended an illegal rave at unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, Whit Heart Lane,

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not attended any premises on this date to rave neither was her involved in the organization off any raves, nor did he supply equipment for an illegal rave at unit 5, St George’s Industrial Estate, White Hart Lane, N17.

In respect of Mr Simon Cordell presence at Unit 5 St George’s Industrial Estate,

White Hart Lane on 25th May 2014. He attended a commercial building that the occupiers were residing in, having displayed section 144 LASPO notices and in turn treating the premises as their home. Nothing was said to Mr Simon Cordell about a rave by any of the 20 occupiers. He will state that he was visiting friends and they were just sitting and chatting while having a laugh. He remembers taking about ways to better life for himself and his friends as well as others.

There was no music being played or about to be set up. He was not involved in the organization of an illegal rave of any sort no Acts of the licensing Bill 2013 was being broken.

Mr Cordell will state; “have used the speaker box’s to play sound, he did ask the police too note this down, and that he was only using the van as storage, this is why the police officers who were in attendance allowed him to leave, while talking to the current occupiers of the premises.” “that he did drive there in his van VRM CX52JRZ, and he does accept that he had 2 speaker boxes in the van; however, he did not have a full sound system present with himself and the speaker boxes did not have any drivers in them, so he and others could not

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not on the date in question have what would constitute as a full sound system like what he accused of and is now being pursued by the applicant. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not rude to the police, that he allowed his van to be searched by members of the police and nothing was seized, and He went home. Mr Cordell will state that he did not cause any anti-social behaviour on the 25th May 2014 or any other behaviour that might have caused alarm harm or distress to others.”

Since this ASBO application was served on Mr Simon Cordell, he has moved the speakers out of his van and they are still in the (open air), at his mother’s address and are in the back garden still to date, as if in the first day that off when he had taken them out of his van, with no drivers in them because he felt uncomfortable ball because of the terms of the ASBO application. Mr Simon Cordell states yes at the time it would have been better to keep them in his van due to the weather, but when he does intend to go for a drive that he does not feel safe any longer travelling with any sound equipment.

It is also noted that on page (98 of the main applicant’s bundle) that the report was created on the 26/05/2014 for criminal damage, the event date, is noted at:

25/05/2014, but was last updated on the 19/06/2014 why would there be a need to update this report, Mr Cordell will state that it was proven that he did nothing on the CCTV.

Ref: Shinniek

Unit 5 ST Georges Industrial Estate White Hart Lane N17: 25th May 2014 At 23:21 pm.

Pc Hoodlese states; “Contacted by security guard at the venue stating suspects were on the premises."

Mr Simon Cordell states; “that he spoke to his friend that he knew to have problems due to being homeless at the time and that he had been trying to help out by offering them work from the local council such as Ponders End Community Festival, Winch more Hill Community Festival, Lock To Lock Community Fest, Club Juice, Club White Sands. There were no (profit events) Mr Simon Cordell has provided proof of the events that they did engage in, he will state that he did attended to friends occasional Birthday parties and had checked with the licensing Act 2003 not to be in breach as printed below.”

3

500,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

REGULATED ENTERTAINMENT APPENDIX 4 -PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENTERTAINMENT'

The Descriptions of Regulated Entertainment:

plays (both performance and rehearsal).

the showing of films (or any exhibition of moving pictures including videos):

all indoor (inside a building) sporting events (in which physical skill is the main factor e.g. tennis).

outdoor boxing and wrestling matches; (no other form of outdoor sport is regulated):

music (both for public performance of live music and public playing of recorded music).

the performance of dance: or

entertainment of a similar description to any of the above.

Venues

Licensable Entertainment

Not Licensable

Special Considerations

 

 

•’laying of inre music

Unamp*f-oo music In • pub

t. Where 9.1*.it. TV I* provided. or recorded nuc that is incKwntm to drink ng or Mbng. no Norm conankm.

 

Community Centra and Ullage

2. SSemo.ndO.nc.ne

 

Benefit* from a mom Informal system ot DermStad temporary ecllvtbea.

Entertainment in Reboots and

1. Where them is public admittance

1. A concart or other perfWmanoe ehlch

Charging simply lo receiver costs a not 1 consume

 

M of mug . prom nduung raexrrj

takes plica tor pur■ or* end students

Charging parents and students out only

Any performance of music, dancing, ate

 

 

licences/'DBC Guides/Entertainment

 

 

REGULATED ENTERTAINMENT

•PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENTERTAINMENT'

Venue

Licensable Entertainment

Not Licensable

Special Considerations

Private Homes and Gardens

 

Private parties and weddings will not be licensable unless the host takas the unusual step of charging the guests to attend with a view to making a profit

Charging simply to recover costs is not keens able

Churches. Synagogues. Mosques, and other places of

 

If incidental to. a religious meeting or

Engagement by any faith in worship or any form of religious meeting

Rave held In a Church providing no alcohol Is sold

Classical concerts

Singing of hymns or other relgcus

 

Sports Clubs

Where there is public admittance

It those attending is charged with the aim of making a profit Including raising funds for charity

Private events

 

Music and Dance Studios

Studio Is being used to provide entertainment to the public

People take part in the entertainment

A dress rehearsal is provided for the public

Performances in a rehearsal studio or broadcasting studio where there is no audience /spectators present

A broadcasting studio recording a programme without an

audience/spectators

 

licences/'DBC Guides/Entertainment

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he had also been letting friends stay at his flat and that he cooked them food and helped out with other living accessories such as trainers and cloths, while giving them a place to sleep and wash.”

4

501,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that his friend called him earlier in the day and explained to him that he was living at Unit 5 St. Georges Industrial Estate White Hart Lane N17; Mr Simon Cordell will state that he went and meet him. That he did not hear any alarms, nor would he be on any CCTV cameras committing any offence on this date in question. That he did in fact arrive and had ordered food. He used his van to travel from his home to where his friend was staying. Due to storage space and the size of the speakers, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he could not remove the speaker boxes on his own because of the size and weight of each box and used his van as storage on some occasions.”

On the 25th May 2014 the police checked the index CX52 R2 and there were two speaker boxes with no speakers in them that Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had keep in the van. There was no amps or deck’s inclusive of any other equipment to power or create a full sound system just two speakers that he keeps in there for storage. The police could see there was no way to run a sound system and allowed him to leave.’

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he is not sure if the people were still allowed to stay in their home by the police.

Ref: Pc Hoodlese states; “Approx. 20 young males and females ran out the rear of the premises."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “at no point was he one of the males or females that run out of the building.”

Ref: Pc Hoodlese states; “Approx. 20 people are claiming to be squatters."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point was he one of the 20 people occupying Unit 5 St. Georges Industrial Estate White Hart Lane N17, living under a section 144 Laspo treating and respecting it as their home, as for fact he was a guest and has his own home.

Several males were still inside the premises calming to be squatters."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that as said people were occupying the building and that he went home.”

Ref: Pc Hoodlese states.

“Police had footage of several suspects causing damage to the security cameras and door locks.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state that was not one of them people."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point will he be on any of the said camera evidence as he never committed the offences stated, he believes if he were on the security cameras then criminal charges would have been placed on him. At no time have any charges be placed against Mr Cordell he will state that as he was not one of the suspects causing any damage.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that if police officers watch the security cameras footage that this would also show in court Mr Cordell was just a visitor.

Ref: Pc Hoodlese states.

“At the venue."

Mr Simon Cordell will state that this was a commercial building being occupied under section 144 Laspo, as far as he was aware and had been told by the occupiers they had been living there for weeks before this date, they had their belongings and bedding at the premises."

Ref: Pc Hoodlese states; “Caught on camera opening the venue upon opening the premises."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he will not be on camera acting in an anti-social manner neither will he be causing any criminal offences, that he was invited into the premises by the occupiers that were living there."           

In Reference to the 6th 7th 8th JUNE 2014; Progress Way in relation to the Applicants first bundle.

In relation to the 06/07/8th June 2014 Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty warehouse on Progress way Enfield.

In the applicants bundle there are 93 incident numbers relating to the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 that Mr Simon Cordell is being accused of and only 34 complete cad files in the bundle, to which Mr Simon Cordell would like to apply to the applicant to receive related missing documentation to 59 cads.

A list of Cad; incident numbers including the supported relevant missing articles that should be contained within the applicants bundle has been listed and is required so that Mr Simon Cordell will be able to deafened himself from all accusation creating the bases of an ASBO application.

Around 2:00am on the 8th Mr Simon Cordell states he was just arriving at progress way and was said to have been seen by police.

On page 32 A/Insp Hamill 01566 states at 0200hrs on Sunday 8th June that he did in fact see Mr Simon Cordell for the first time, on the 3rd line from the last sentence.

CAD 1047 Name PC239YE Shinnick (pages 174 to 178) at 1:59 on 7th June 2014, was a 999 call location, which was a police officer calling the Enfield Patrol Site, Call name is of a PC Shinnick, “please allow an officer to call on duty.”

A/ PS Charles Miles 724ye (page 31} explains that this date was on the 7thth June

2014 in his statement by is mistaken, this can be confirmed by any person who can do so by looking at cad 1047, to which A/Inspector Hamill 201566 states he had created cad 1047 at the first point of police intelligence leading to the police offices first point of contact in regards to progress way, as he dispatched officers to the location of the incident, from this information provided we can tell that this was in fact the 8th June 2014 at 1:59.

A/Insp Hamill then states, that the officers that he had sent, had reported back that Mr Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin were present, and goes on to state that officers were not allowed access into the occupied building, due to the demand during the shift and low policing numbers, but cad incident number 1047

5

502,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

07th June 2014 pages 174 to 184, states them officers in attendance who could not gain entry, somehow managed to see Mr Simon Cordell and his brother Tyrone Benjamin earlier in the day, to which Mr Simon Cordell will state would be incorrect as only he had arrived to visit a friend, and this was his first time at the location and for the true facts of the matter to be that of Tyrone Benjamin being in hospital.

As A/Insp Hamill 01566 states at 0200hrs on Sunday the 8th June 2014, Mr Simon Cordell did in fact arrive.

A/Insp Hamill 01566 Could not be sure of the fact of the person that he is stating was at the gate did in fact bring Mr Simon Cordell back to the gate, he does not state that she or he came back with Mr Cordell, who would have told A/ Insp Hamill that Mr Simon Cordell was in fact the person she had gone to collect and asked to assist in speaking to police as the event organiser, neither did he take any name(s) or personal details of the gate assistances. He also states that Mr Simon Cordell would not in fact speak to him, so if this was true then why would Mr Simon Cordell have approached him to speak to him as the event organiser and not speak, as for fact he was just arriving.

No police officers did in fact see Mr Simon Cordell, on the 6th 7th Jun 2014

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not talk to any police or council as he felt intimidated.

Mr Cordell will state that he was not given any noise abating order from the local council as confirmed on page 34 by A/Insp Hamill 01566 as he was not in fact the organiser.

(On page 33) A Insp Hamill 201566 states that he see Mr Simon Cordell, at the gates but believed that Mr Simon Cordell was coming from inside the premises, Mr Simon Cordell will state due to the large number of people at the location and due to other reasons and believes of the inspectors own that he is mistaken, Mr Simon Cordell states that he remembers clearly, that of the police approaching him, as he was walking towards the gates, when he was arriving from the Great Cambridge road, and that of the police asking him questions in regards to illegal raves. A Inspector Hamill states that he ask Mr Simon Cordell his name and that he gave him a reply, such as to the answer of “yes” verbally and then A Inspector Hamill states that he asked Mr Cordell the same question again but Mr Cordell would not reply, (chapter one of (A) Inspector Hamill statement page 33 the 5th line down;) he then states the 3rd time when Mr Simon Cordell was asked again, but this time by the council officers with inspector Hamill present his name, that he would not reply again, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did not speak to anybody, he just listened to what was being said to him and complied when he was asked to walk back to where he had just parked his vehicle. The police officer is incorrect in saying that Mr Cordell was the person that the gate assistant went and collected, as the event organiser, as Mr Simon Cordell was in fact approaching the occupied building and was visiting his friend. He did state this in his first statement dated (24th/02/2015.) Mr Simon Cordell will State that, as he was approaching the ally way were tops tiles is before the entrance gate for progress way as stated by A/Insp Hamill 201566 on (page 33 2nd line up from the last sentence.) Simon remembers it being dark and a lot of people being present in the ally way. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he saw, who he now knows to be A/ Insp Hamill for the first time, at around 2:00 am on the 8th June 2014 as he was arriving and had not seen a police officer on the date in question, till that point of time, when he had seen An Inspector Hamill talking too other people at the gate than himself as he was approaching, Mr Cordell will state he does remember the police trying to speak to him and that he felt that the police was accusing him of being an organiser, to which he was not, so he choose not to say any think, without a solicitor being present.

The Police and council let Mr Cordell go and he walked across the road to the petrol station, while waiting for his friend to turn up, which he had to give a set of keys back too.

Crown Road == There was no Licensable events or private parties on the 2nd apart from Crown Road that is contained within the applicant’s bundle, a council freedom of information act has been provided, from local council as proof of this statement. (Exhibit)

(Cad 3151 8th June 2014 page 278) clearly states that the rave / private party was at crown road not progress way relating to cad 3151 8th June 2014 and that members of the public were using Southbury train station, to get to this location, which is across the road from Crown Road the old man building which is grid reference; X (Easting) 534960 Y (Northing) 196240

Under oath to the DJ A/Insp concealed the truth true facts of evidence. Please read court train scrip off (A) Inspector Hamill below.

(This also proofs that all the Cad’s are linked together and corrupt)

Witness 1 - inspector Hamill -R. O - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead

DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday.

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D’S Van reg is known to the police but I would not personally know.

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

(Hearsay of officers continues D @ venue but (unreadable text) Officer (unreadable text) Not present here today.)

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day. (Please Take Note Here of inspector Hamill stating under oath that he was sure all locations were to do with progress way on this date.)

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way)

Cad 3319 8th June 14 page 283 is also related to Southbury train STN /Crown RD (cad 11822 8th June 14 page 302)

Southbury STN cad 2410 8th Jun 14 page 276. Also blocked out so no person can see, apart from the makers of the bundle themselves, when creating their application towards Mr Simon Cordell, what evidence there is to support this claim is the mistake of A and J cars Enfield not

6

503,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

504,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE states; "There I spoke with a man who I recognized as Simon Cordell, from previous illegal rave events on Enfield Borough. I would describe him as a light skinned black male, and at the time he was wearing a white long-sleeved T shirt and Grey bottoms, he is approximately f5;09 tall and of medium build. He refused to provide his details to the council representatives in order that a noise abatement order could be served, however he was provided with a copy. Approximately 10 minutes later we left the scene having risk assessed the incident."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he was attending an occupied building that was being lived in under section 144 LASPO on the 8th at around 200 hours on the 8th June 2014 as a visitor and not on the 7th June 2014.

His intentions were to drop keys to a friend which had been left at his flat.

When Mr Cordell approached progress way a man, he now knows to be a police officer from the statements provided, approached him while he was walking down a foot path leading to the occupied building. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was accused of being an organizer to which he gave no reply and decided at this point to cross the road and call his friend to come out side to give him his keys back, to which he had, came to visit.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he then left and headed home and at no point did he except any paper work of any person(s) nor did he give his name or personal details to anybody for his personal details to be on any official headed piece of paper, to which in the statement he is being accused of being presented to him.

It is also noted that in A/Insp Hamill 201566 statement that he did not note that a copy of the paperwork had not been handed to anyone.

Which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is sure he would have noted in his statement. As from his statement he was the main person dealing with this matter.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he would like to ask for any noise abatement order made on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014."

It is also noted that police statement was written on the 02/08/2014, 26 days after therefore Mr Simon Cordell is asking for a copy of the 101 books.

A/PS Charles Miles 724YE states; “ that he returned to the venue approximately two hours later, he again asked to speak with the organiser however none came forward, he asked the two men on the door, who appeared to be party goers to let him in to have a look around. He walked around and there was extremely loud drum and bass music playing, with approximately 100 people dancing. Party goers observed him in Police uniform and ran away into the large open area, presumably because of drug misuse matters - there was significant evidence to suggest illegal drugs were being used such as discarded self-seal bags, and empty canisters consistent with 'laughing gas' use."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "As officers where not permitted access into the venue it is unknown to the extent of drug and alcohol abuse which may or may not have taken place within."

A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE states; "At approximately 06:30Hrs we received a call to nearby Wood grange Gardens, to reports of a male assaulted. Following an initial investigation this individual matched the description of a male earlier observed on the warehouse roof. It appeared that he had fallen off of the roof and into some bushes and his injuries were consistent with a fall from height. He was heavily under the influence of alcohol and quite probably illegal drugs. He went to North Middlesex Hospital with the London Ambulance Service."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "At 05:04hrs CAD 2290 8th June police were called to a male assaulted in the street. Officers and LAS have attended the location of Wood Grange Avenue, where the male had injuries of suspected broken wrists and a bloody mouth, he initially stated that he had been attacked from behind but on investigation it transpired that this male had been one of the people seen on the roof earlier and had fallen whilst getting down."

"Mr Simon Cordell will state; That it was only ever noted by PS 92YE that 1 male was seen on the roof, but if the call came 05:04hrs CAD 2290 how is it his statement it says a call came in at 06:30Hrs this is 1 hour and 26 mins after the first call was made and A/Insp Hamill 201566 had sent officers to the location.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; That he did notice when approaching the building a Section 144 Laspo notice was in place, in turn meaning occupiers were occupying the free hold of the land sleeping in the commercial building and treating it as their home. Mr Simon Cordell will state Nobody could have spoken to him or his brother Tyrone Benjamin, or see Tyrone as his brother Tyrone Benjamin was involved in an ATR involving, a vehicle LRO9BMV he was knocked of his moped on the 10th April 2014 the injuries his brother occurred has changed his life for ever. On the 07/06/2014 Mr Simon Cordell’s brother Tyrone Benjamin could not walk; he was Air lifted to The Royal London Hospital. Mr Simon Cordell will disagree strongly that his brother was at this event dated 06th 07th 08th June 2014 or in any case that is in question presented within this ASBO application, nor did he attend. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he arrived at progress way about 01:45am on the 8th but on his own and on arrival police spoke to him outside the front gates and he then left and went home.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; That allegations of misleading information is being held under his and his brothers name on the police national Computer, and he has been trying to get this rectified, He has provided his brothers medical notes as proof of this as well as stated many other facts and provided a copy of the Police National Computer and the errors that have tarnished his life agreed by the courts.

He would also like to make it noted that the police already have on their system the people they were prettying while he was on curfew for some of the cases within this ASBO application and that the police had contacted other people leading up to dates of the incident numbers but not Mr Simon Cordell in relation to illegal raves. The public order team has confirmed on the phone to his mother and Essex police have too.

It has taken months to gather this information relating to the dates within this ASBO application so that Mr Simon Cordell can clear his name.

Witness Statement

A/Inspector Hamill 201566

Friday 6th June 2014 Progress Way

It is noted that your statement was written on the 06/08/2014 this is 62 days after the fact, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is therefore asking for a copy of your 101 books."

8

505,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that at no point of time did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was did not organize any events within this ASBO application.

And at no point in time did he encourage any other people to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he at no point has he committed or been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 On Friday 6th June 2014 states; when on duty in full uniform working as the Duty Officer for the Borough of Enfield, was working between the hours of 2200hrs to 0700hrs.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "During the early hours of the 7th June I was made aware of a potential Rave that was in progress in a discussed Industrial Building on Progress Way."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "I have had a CAD created reference 1047I 7June dispatched officers to the location to access numbers, crowd dynamics and gather information around times the event is likely to run until  and also to make contact or identify the potential organiser.

Officers have reported back that Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell where at location and to be the believed the event organisers, there were approximately 200 people in attendance, the event was covered by security officers who had stated that they were volunteers and not licensed through SIA. Officers have spoken with staff to confirm that all fire escapes where clear, that there were sufficient fire extinguishers in place and that there were first aid kits available."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this incorrect and not to be true as his brother had medical injuries stopping him from being mobile or transported. Evidence will be supplied.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not in attendance to attend any rave in fact he was dropping keys to a friend as they had been left at his address when he was there last."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "Police Officers have reported back:

Mr Simon Cordell will state; The police sent by inspector Hamill reported back to him and said they had spoken to Security officers at the gate of progress way, who stated that they were volunteers not security as believed by police offices. "Who made this statement?"

If they were believed by police officers to be security, but had said they were volunteers, what makes the police sure beyond reasonable doubt that the people in question presented to be security acting as volunteers could have in fact off been the organisers. As Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not the organiser neither did he hire any sound equipment, nor did he take part in any form of organization on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 or act in an Anti-Social Manner. In the new skeleton argument, the inspector clearly states that he now trusts the security guards when officers state that they believed they were security but said they were volunteers and looked like party goers.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "Police Officers have reported back: Staff was forthcoming with information but refused to allow offices inside the venue."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "As stated they never believed the information provide by said staff at the gates of progress way to be true, as it was believed the security was to be presenting them self's as volunteers, so why would any information provided to officers can be classed and stated as forthcoming be classed as to be true, if not believed to be true by the person writing the statement in the beginning, as said by police officers, the people at the gate also refused to allow police officers inside the venue."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "Due to call demand during the shift and low policing numbers it was inappropriate to enter the premises to seize the equipment and close the event, but he deployed officers to conduct regular visits to the venue, where number at their peak where 500 but reported to be quiet and peaceful."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not involved in any event or Anti-Social Behaviour on the 6th 7th 8th June2014, he only went to drop some keys off to a friend that he had a call from due to him leaving his keys at his address the last time he was there and his friend needed them back."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "Local authority noise team were contacted reference T548832. The event was expected to run until 0700hrs on Saturday 7th June, with plans for the event to continue again later in the evening on the 7th June. During the course of the shift we received a total of calls from local residence complaining about the noise of the rave."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "On Saturday 7th June 2014 I was again on duty in full uniform working as the Borough's Duty Officer for the hours of 2200hrs to 0700hrs, as with the previous evening I was made aware again of a Rave at an empty warehouse of Progress Way. As with the previous evening, I have posted officers to make regular visits to the venue to access numbers, crowd dynamics and general intelligence around the event.

During the course of the number numbers at the event were around 300.

At 02:00hrs I have attended the venue with A/PS Miles and two environmental officers.

The entrance to the venue was located off progress way, down the side off "Tops Tiles". The warehouse was at the bottom of this side road behind a metal gate, the gate padlock had been removed and security officers were opening the gate to allow access. As Insp Hamill and A/PS Miles and the EO have approached the gate they have closed the gate preventing us access."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that for Inspector Hamill: To be able to state the gate padlock had been removed.” By this statement made Inspector Hamill was this close to pay this much attention to such an object as a pad lock on the gate, he then states a security officer was opening the gate to allow access. Followed by them have closed the gate, with so many people walking in and out of such numbers of 300 people in attendance Mr Simon Cordell will state that he believes the inspector see Mr Simon Cordell and took his own believes.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "I have introduced myself and asked to speak with the event organisers, to which a member of staff has disappeared into the venue and returned with a male who I would describe as light skinned black male, Approximate age of 35, wearing a white long sleeved t-shirt, grey bottoms. I recognized this male as Simon Cordell.

“Inspector Hamill states; that he then introduced himself and asked if we could speak at the bottom of the' road where the noise levels would allow us to talk. We all moved to the bottom of Progress Way where I have introduced myself and explained the purpose of the visit and asked

9

506,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

"It's Simon isn't it?" to which he has replied "Yes" I have then further asked "Simon Cordell" to which he has indicted that it was but not verbally confirmed the answer. I have introduced the two EO's the Simon who have explained the purpose of their visit and the fact that they were going to severe a noise abatement order, they have produced the paperwork and asked the male for his name to which he has refused to provide his details, It was explained that without the name of a person from the venue the EO's are unable to serve the paperwork. As we have been unable to progress this line of action, I have made the request to Simon Cordell to turn the music down."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that Inspector Hamill: States he approached the gate and spoke to security, but the police are not sure if they were in fact security, police state in there statements that the people on the gate introduced themselves as volunteers. The case is the police did not know who they were they could have been security/volunteers or organisers. The police only believed Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell could have been the organisers, which is not the case.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that Inspector Hamill: Asked to speak to an organiser and has said that a member of said staff disappeared into the occupied building. For a male Inspector Hamill recognised to be Simon Cordell to approach him. This could not have been the case as Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was not in the building and that he was walking up to the building when he was approach by Inspector Hamill and others.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he does remember this day 08th June 2014 a friend who had stayed at his who had forgotten to take his set of keys with him, when he left his flat prior to the 06th and 07th 8th June 2014.”

He will state that his friend had contacted him and told him that he need his keys back and wanted him to meet him at progress way were he had been residing and asked Mr Simon Cordell to drop the keys to him.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was given a post code and had never been to this location before. That he travelled by car and parked outside a company that he remembers to be tops tiles, as he approached he could hear music, after finding the address given to him he had to walk down a side ally leading to the front gates to be seen by a man he now know to be Inspector Hamill from the statement provided he asked him his name to which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he gave no reply to his question. ”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that as he see the police leave the people on the gate he was already chatting to him and asked Mr Simon Cordell to follow him to the road side which he did, at no time did Mr Simon Cordell talk to any police officers or any other person(s) as he felt he had not done any think wrong and new how the police was with him and he just did not want any problems.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was the police officer was with other people, who Mr Simon Cordell now know to be environmental officers due to the statements. Mr Cordell remembers feeling like he was being accused of being an organiser by the way in which the police officer was talking to him.

This is the reason he did not want to talk to the police as he knew how they was with him from over many years of being harassed by the police.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he just wanted to leave so he decided at this point to cross the road to the local petrol station and call his friend to come outside to give him his keys back.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no time did he speak to police and give any details and did not take any paper work from anyone, the police did not follow him across the road to the petrol station where he called his friend to come and get his keys.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did notice sound coming from said occupied building and at this point in time he would like everyone to make a note that he did not hire any sound equipment or any other form of equipment or neither was he involved in the organisation of any events on dates of the 6th 7th or the 8th June 2014.

He then gave his friend their keys and headed home, at no point did Mr Simon Cordell except any paper work of any person nor did he give his name or personal details to any other body, for his personal details to be on any official piece of paper.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would like to ask for said paperwork Noise abatement order."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "Inspector Hamill: Asked "It's Simon isn't it?" to which he replied, "yes he then further asked "Simon Cordell" to which he has indicated that it was but not verbally confirmed the answer."

Mr Cordell will state; "As stated above at no point did he speak to any police office to give his name and do not understand how he could have done so in a none verbally manner as he did not shake his head or shake the police offices hand to indicate this to be true. Police states that Mr Simon Cordell replied yes than states but would not verbally confirm the answer"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; “To which Mr Simon Cordell refused to provide his details."

Mr Cordell will state; "A/Insp Hamill further verifies that he did not in fact speak to himself."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; “It was explained that without the name of a person from the venue the EO's are unable to serve the paperwork, as we have been unable to progress this line of action."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “The police state they see him on the 7th June 2014 walking up to the front gates in pc Shinick statements time stamped 01:59 7th June 14 and no he was in attendance with Inspector Hamill at 02:00 hours on the 8Th June 2014in true fact and that he had walked back to where his car was parked on the Great Cambridge Road Enfield, Mr Cordell believes that if he had walked into the building it would have been in there notes, so there for see him leave after not gaining entry to a friend’s place of residence. The police also understand that this party had been going on since the 6th June 2014.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he did not speak to any one as said in their statement and that he did not accept any noise abatement order section 80 as he was not an organiser neither an occupier nor did he accept any money from any event on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; “I have made the request to Simon Cordell to turn the music down."

"I had left the grounds and waited in the petrol station for my friend to come out of progress way to me next to the petrol station and get his keys, then left and went home."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; “During the course of the 8th of June 2014 we had approximately 40 calls complaining about the noise."

10

507,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state: "That he did only attended progress way on the 08th for about 30 mins max and left to go home.

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; “During the course of the shift police had contact with several groups that had been attending at the Rave all of which were extremely intoxicated and their behaviour had clearly been using drugs which they all confirm they had used but on police contact did not have any drugs on them."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “"At no point did he travel with any of the said people in relation to the police statements, nor did he invite them to any place to rave or attended to supply any equipment or source of entertainment for them or any drinks or drugs."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; as officers were not permitted access into the venue it is unknown the extent of drugs and alcohol abuse which may or may not have taken place within."

Mr Simon Cordell would like it noted that A/Insp Hamill states; "You say that no officers were allowed in the building yet police officer A/PS Charles Miles 724YE says people allowed him to enter but you have not been told nothing about this, in your reports from the police officers."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; A call from CAD 2410 of the 8th June received at 05:35hrs stated that drugs were openly being sold."

"Mr Cordell will state that he was not at the occupied building at this point of time, neither does he sell drugs or advise or in courage any other person to do so"

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "At 03:10hrs on the 8th June PS 92YE noticed a male from the roof of the adjourning building to the venue. The venue backs onto that of the police parade site which did mean as officers entre and left the premises they had a full and unobstructed view of the rear of the rave premises, officers have attended the venue, however the male had already come down of the roof. Staff where given advice as to ensuring that people do not get onto the roof again."

"I had no involvement in organising this said event on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 and do not feel I should be held responsible and was not attending to rave at a private house party."

Mr Simon Cordell would like it noted that; "As noted the police arrived at 03:10hrs to deal with the matter of a person on a nearby roof of the occupied building located in progress way, however the male had already come down from the roof.

Police state: "Staff occupying another building was notified.

"At no point would Mr Cordell have been notified as he was not the organiser on the 8th June 2014."

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "At 05:04hrs CAD 2290 8th June 2014 police were called to a male assaulted in the street. Officers and LAS have attended the location of wood Grange Avenue were the male had injuries of suspected broken wrist and a bloody mouth, he initially stated that he had been attacked from behind but on investigation it transpired that this male had been one of the people seen on the roof earlier and had fallen whilst getting down."

"If checked there is a time laps in the statements made by police PS 92YE it states that he attended at 03:10hrs and noted the boy had come down from a roof in Wood Grange Avenue the rear of Progress Way and then Police spoke to staff at progress way.

But CAD number 2290 8th June at 05:04 states the same boy is in wood Grange Avenue again and made a 999 call making a claim of assault 01:54 mins after and is believed to be the man fallen of the roof at 03:10 who was seen getting down safely and police state that they can see the roof top clearly from there police service centre.

It is also noted A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE "statement at approximately 06:30Hrs we received a call to nearby Wood grange Gardens, to reports of a male assaulted. Following an initial investigation this individual matched the description of a male earlier observed on the warehouse roof. It appeared that he had fallen off of the roof and into some bushes and his injuries were consistent with a fall from height. He was heavily under the influence of alcohol and quite probably illegal drugs. He went to North Middlesex Hospital with the London Ambulance Service."

These times do not match up as in A/Insp Hamill 201566 statement he says he sent someone to the attack at 05:04 CAD 2290 and in A/PS CHARLES MILES 724YE statement he said the call did not happen until 06:30Hrs.

Was it 5 or 6 hundred hours or at 1 hundred hours and if it was at 100 hours why did police leave him to go and speak to people at the gate of progress way, if his injuries were so server he had to go to the hospital at 5 0r 6 hundred hours?

Mr Simon Cordell would state; that he believes the police already have on their systems, the person’s name they were in contact with leading up to this. The public Order Unit at Scotland Yard would hold the information and also the police in Essex would have information.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; It has taken him months to gather information to the dates in this ASBO application, and he feels that the police already hold the information that he is being accused off.

Statement off: Eric Baker Police Officer 219382 Dated 19/08/2014

He is a police officer in London Borough of Enfield and has been tasked to contact residents of the Borough who had called police to inform them of an illegal rave that took place over Friday 7th June 2014 and Saturday 8th June 2014, in a warehouse in Progress Way Enfield

On Tuesday 19th August 2014 I contacted the caller of the CAD 10471/07June 2014 by telephone that was happy to give an impact statement regarding how illegal rave affected her and her husband over the above dates mentioned.

The caller wishes to remain anonymous. I will refer to her as complainant "A" The original notes taken from the below statement are present in my pocketbook serial 370/14, page 1.

Complainant "a" said it was a warm evening and we had to keep the windows shut because of the noise. The next day we could not even go out into the garden because of the noise. It kept me and my husband up all night and made us very anxious the next day. The illegal rave totally ruined our weakened" This concluded what complainant 'A" said regarding this matter.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he take part in any form of Anti

Social behaviour and he did not organize or hire any equipment to this private house party neither was he attending a rave on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014th.

11

508,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Doglas Skinner:

Dated 09/09/2014 Addition to 15th /08/2014 Referring to 07th /June /2014

Doglas Skinner states; He had been asked to clarify how he knows that Simon Cordell is an organizer of raves.

Mr Simon Cordell will states; “that he does not know a Doglas Skinner, and do not see how he can clarify that he is the organizer of illegal raves because this is not true, and at no point was he setting up a rave on 6th 7th 8th June 2014 or on any date within the applicants application off an ASBO.

Doglas Skinner states; “I have known of Simon Cordell for over 20 years.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has had no other dealing in relation to illegal raves with Mr Skinner.

Doglas Skinner states; “That he was tasked to speak to the organizer to see how long it would be carrying on for.”

Mr Simon Cordell will states; that on the 6th June Inspector Hamill sent officers to the expected to be rave in the occupied building under section 144 Laspo, to see how long it would be carrying on for, to which police reported back that they spoke to organisers on the gate who were acting as security as well stating to be just volunteers police state; “who were quite forth coming with information.” The police officer also state they see my younger brother and myself present, which at no point can be true for both Mr Simon Cordell and his brother Mr Tyrone Benjamin on the 6th 7th June 14 in fact only Mr Simon Cordell arrived early hours on the 8th but left due to police attendance.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he gain entry to the occupied building on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

On the 7th June Inspector Charles 724ye states that Inspector Hamill attended Progress way at 10:03pm to which stating in their statement presented within this

ASBO application was in fact June 8th June 2014, while waiting for a female to get the organizer that Inspector Hamill and A/ps Charles had been talking to on the gate acting as security or volunteers as well, while waiting they noticed Mr Simon Cordell approaching progress way and asked him to walk back to the street the way he had just come from. Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point did he speak to any officers on the 6th June 2014, and on the 7th June 2014 and at no point of time on the 8th June 2014 did any female ask him to speak to police as a organizer or supplier of sound equipment.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that that he never attended a rave or caused any Anti-social behaviour.”

Doglas Skinner will state; I waked to the location referring to premises in progress way and see a white van.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he drive into the occupied land under a section 144 Laspo, otherwise referred to as progress way on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 and he does not understand how anybody can state otherwise, as this would not be true and incorrect.

Doglas Skinner states; Inside this van was a male I no to be Cordell.

Mr Simon Cordell will state: If taken that Cordell is referred to himself Mr Simon Cordell, he did not talk to any police on the 6th 7th June 2014 as stated in inspector Hamill statement made on the 06/08/2014 referring to the 8th June 2014."

Doglas Skinner states As I got closer to the van he got out and walked over towards me.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that it was not him who got out of a van on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 and was not approach by pc Doglas Skinner Leading towards the premises in question on the 6th 7th June 2014 in progress way, but does remember police officers and councillors officers walking towards him outside the gate as he was approaching Progress way and then asked by police to walk the way leading back to where he had just come from back to the A10 great Cambridge road." “As Inspector Hamill states”

Mr Simon Cordell states; On the 7th It was not himself who shock Pc Doglas Skinners hand and said hello and talked to him about how he remembered him as a youngest over twenty years ago as he never spook to the police on the 6th 7th and 8th June as stated in Inspector Hamill statement.

• In reference to 2 members of the public statements that are in relation to progress way 6th 7th 8th June 2014.

WITNESS STATEMENT

Statement taken by PC Donald Mc mikan

Dated 14 August 2014

In regard to dates: 6th 7th 8th June 2014

This statement refers to an illegal rave which took place between 6th June and 8th June 2014 on the industrial Estate near Wood grange Avenue. On Thursday 14th August 2014, 1 spoke with a resident who lives in Wood grange Avenue, Enfield.

WITNESS STATEMENT

Statement made by: PC Donald Mc Millen 759YE

Police officer

Dated:14 August 2014

Referring from phone caller taken.6th 7th 8th June 2014

Regards Unit 6 Progress way

Victim off statement is to remain anonymous

This statement refers to an illegal Rave which took place 6th June and 8t" June 2014. On Thursday 14th August 2014 I spoke to a resident in Wood grange Avenue N9 who wished not to be named and remain anonymous.

12

509,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will State.

At no point did Mr Simon Cordell take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress and that he did not organize any events within this ASBO application and at no time did he encourage any other person's to commit any offence causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

However he is sorry for any problems that any person may have suffered as this is the last thing as an honourable person that he would like to hear that is off any suffering of other tenants or citizens of the United Kingdom or any other part of the world.

At no point did Mr Simon Cordell commit or have any intention of causing any problems that any person may have suffered neither has he been rightfully arrested and charged for an offence to one of a similar nature presented within this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell would again like to state that he did not supply any equipment on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 or take part in the organisation of any party on the dates in question.

Falcon Park 20th 06 14

In reference to Page’s 77 to 94 in the first applicant’s bundle.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that on the 20.06.2014 he was not involved in the organization of and/ supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at 1 Falcon Park, Neasden Lane, NWIO

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was at home; Address Burncroft Avenue Enfield and did not cause any Anti-social behaviour. He will state that he did attended a friend’s home address, who had hired equipment off himself and that he had hired the equipment in good faith.”

Mr Simon Cordell will also state; that he attended the premises of (1 Falcon Park), this was due to police involvement in what he understood to be a private house party, after he was contacted by his friend at the time of; 01:00am.”

Mr Simon Cordell will sate; “that he was travelling that day in his vehicle for 2 hours of the 5 hours 15 mins before arrival to (1 Falcon park and arrived at around 03:00, as Mr Simon Cordell was asked to collect his equipment by the hirer.

Mr Simon Cordell will then State; that he went home by 05:15 hours and was told by police to collect his equipment at a later date, to which he did do.

At no point is Mr Simon Cordell being accused of acting in an anti-social manner on the 20:06:14 within the ASBO application.

There are no Cad numbers in the applicant’s application in regard to 1 Falcon park.

There are no 999 calls relating to alarm harm and distress.

Mr Simon Cordell has never been arrested for any incident, relating to l. Falcon park, as he had no involvement in the organization of any rave or private party on this date.

Carpet Right 19th 07 14 Duty officer

Statement made dated 15/08/2014

States, On Saturday 19th July 2014 he was on active duty as an officer for Enfield borough. At 2210hrs

Doglas Skinner made his first statement 29 days after the 7th June. and has made additions to his statements 3 months 4 days after. In total 4 month 5 days a total of 70 days after said incident, why would there be such a need.

Doglas Skinner states; 20 people pulling into an estate, the information thought was the 20 people were trying to set up a rave.

Mr Simon Cordell states: “At no point was he one of the 20 people talked about and that he did not take part in organising of any event on the19th or 20th July 2014 nor did he supply any equipment.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not attend the occupied premises to rave. In fact, he pulled over because he sees a friend being detained outside carpet right and at this time he had been helping with food and washing clothes with a lot of homeless people in and around London.”

The CAD number of the call that came in referred to in his statement to 20 people pulling into an estate, the caller states 20 males and females all white people and the address are listed in the CAD, with names and DVLA records of vehicles.

Doglas Skinner states: “The crowd was by an empty building called carpet right and had gained entry to the rear premises.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “If the building had not been occupied under section 144 LASPO and being lived in as a place of residence the 20 people seen and contained in the premises would have been arrested for trespassing or burglary and was not in fact arrested.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was arrested outside the old carpet right and had taking no part in any activity that happened in the premises of the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town En1 LUJ.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "At no point was he one of the people or vans referred to on the land of carpet right or was he attending a rave, neither was he acting in an Anti-Social Manner in reference to pages 295 to 296 of the first applicants bundle."

Doglas Skinner states: “That he sent officers to the scene to stop anyone else gaining entry to the premises. “This was the 1st set of officers sent to the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town EN1 LUJ, pc Doglas Skinner: Made his way to the scene.

"The 2nd set of officers who attended the scene was Doglas Skinner Duty officer."

13

510,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Doglas Skinner states: “There was a metal gate across the entry to the car park, but this had a thick chain and a padlock around it so that it could not be opened.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "At no point had he been to this location before, any of the date in question and neither did he put any lock, chain or padlock on any gate and at no point did he instruct any other person to do so.

Doglas Skinner states: “That he walked around to the rear of the premises where there were several vehicles and about 15 persons.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "At no point was he one of the 15 people or vehicles being mentioned in Doglas Skinner statement"

Doglas Skinner states: “That he saw a large black box which had sound speakers and sound system inside them.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "At no point of time did he hire any sound equipment to anybody on the 19th 8 2014 neither did he take part in any event organized on the 19th 8 2014"

Doglas Skinner states: “That he received a call from our control room stating they believed up to 100 people were going to arrive at south bury road train station to attend a rave at this location. As a result, to this intelligence he believed that the premises and there was going to be used for a rave.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "Please take note to pc Doglas Skinner statement paragraph two dated 15/8/2014 1st line down page 36 of the applicants first bundle,

Doglas Skinner states: I saw a male I knew to be Simon Cordell who came out of the building.

Now please take note to witness statement Doglas Skinner dated 15/8/2014 paragraph three, 1st line page 36 "Outside Carpet right I spoke to Cordell.

Mr Simon Cordell will states; "At no point did he go on the land or in the premises, as stated by Doglas skinner;” “the police had contained all occupiers and sound system and vehicles on the land and in the premises hours before his arrival as the time stamps clearly prove by the start and time of Mr Simon Cordell’s detention, as well as having police officers being at the front gates stopping people gaining entry to the premises otherwise mentioned in statements as the old carpet right 198 Great Cambridge Road Enfield Town EN1 1 UJ, along the Al0 in cads 9804 pages 287 to 290 time stamped 20:51 19th July 2014 and cad 10635 pages 291 to 301 time stamped 22:07. on page number 298 at 03:50:25 on the 20th July 2014 1 arrested by Inspector Skinner for Bop clearly 7 hours Later, after the building had been contained by police on the 19th July 2014 at 22:21 on page number 295.

Doglas Skinner states; He admitted that he was just organising a party for some friends and that was all.

Mr Simon Cordell will states; At no point did he organize any private party or open air party as he feels that he is being accused of doing and at no point would he have said that he did do so, as he had just stopped to help a friend, that he see getting detained by the police and at no point from his arrival was any person permitted by police to go on the land.

Doglas Skinner states; I explained to him I was holding him responsible, Him referring to Simon Cordell.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; "At no point should he get held responsible for any offence that he has not committed.

He was not involved in organising or hiring of any equipment on the 19th 8 2014.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he approached carpet right when the police had it contained stopping access to any person(s) other than police officers gaining entry.

Mr Simon Cordell will states; “ that he was not one of the 20 people being accused of looking for venues in paragraph one dated 15/8/2014 in witness statement made by Doglas Skinner as his name would have been noted in police books as everyone else's on the land did on pages 295 to 296.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that Mr Simon Cordell was arrested and detained. That he continued to try and state his points that he had nothing to do with the event and also stated that it was unjustified that he had been detained and only himself. As stated in the statement provided by police officers stating that people were detained in the land and building.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that as he approached carpet right after the problem had been contained by 2nd set of officer’s arrivals provided by the information in the statements presented in this ASBO application.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; Police offices as well as his friend who Mr Cordell had stopped to help as he had seen him being detained outside carpet right, also see Mr Cordell walk down the foot to his aid.

After he parked his car in the car park which belongs to a company called magnet three company's down from carpet right.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “He was on a pubic foot pavement as he approached the officer and his friend being detained and never had any sound system or equipment and at no point was he involved in the supply of equipment or organisation of any event 19th July 2014. The premises were contained by the police stopping entry in and out as stated in the statements at no point did, he attempted or did he agree to take part in any event on the 19th June 2014.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; At no point did he go on the land or the premises attached to that land and that the police had said occupiers /potential organizer of the private party or accused rave in the said land including the sound system contained within.

Doglas Skinner states; "The main organizer was spoken to by police."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not the main organizer on the 19th July 2014.

Doglas Skinner states; “It is said that Mr Simon Cordell admitted to police that he was an organizing to the party and said he was expecting several hundred people."

14

511,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this is not correct as stated the keys were found on the premises and he never was on the premises, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was arrested outside on the pavement as shown in Inspector Douglas Skinner statement and that he could not have left the premises as said by Inspector Douglas

Skinner the police had secured the premises 7 hours before he had arrived."

Doglas Skinner states; “As a result the people inside the venue all left."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he never went in the premises or venue at any time and that he mealy stopped out of care off a fellow companion,

Mr Simon Cordell will state; That it was wrong for himself to be detained by members of the metropolitan police force, wrongfully without charge or interview.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he feels this shows the way he has been treated over the years and discriminated by police. He states that the facts are the police had secured the premises, they had a sound system contained in the premises, and occupiers on the land, one of these people was arrested then de arrested (Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has found this out since he has contacted the director at company house of every decibel matters, who has provided a statement as he was one of the people detained inside the premises, by the police to then latter be released.)

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he was outside and was arrested for no reason."

Alma Road 24th 07 14 Statement pc Edgoose Dated: 31st August 2014 Referring to: Thursday 24th July 2014

Officer Pc Edgoose States; “On Thursday 24th July2014 I was on duty in plain clothes as operator of an unmarked police vehicle in company with APS 212YE Martin, PC Robertson, and PC 229YE O'NEILL. At around 16:25 hours on Alma

Road EN3, we had cause to stop a silver Ford Focus VRM MA57LDY due to the manner of its driving. The driver was a male I know to be Simon Cordell dob21/01/1981.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has no disputes with reference to statement made by pc Edgoose above, apart from the manner to which Mr Simon Cordell is being accused of driving.

Officer Pc Edgoose States; “I know him as I have dealt with on a number of previous occasions. He was initially hostile about having been stopped, but once he had calmed down, he engaged in conversation with us.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point was he acting in an Anti-Social Manner Officer Pc Edgoose States: he stated that he is staying out of trouble.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has not caused any offence since he was much younger; and that he just gets pulled over and accused and harassed by members of the metropolitan police a lot.

Officer Pc Edgoose States; He stated that he has four brand new speakers at home which are suitable for use at raves, but he does not use them and has offered to lend them to any "youngsters" to use.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he had been on curfew for one year for a case he proved his innocents in and had been working hard in his Local community trying to make a positive effect towards his self and other that he could help, so he had been spending his time building his company and would not link himself to illegal raves,

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did say he had been getting his equipment ready and proposals for pickets lock including barley lands ready and had been in contact with both venues. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he had also been working at his local community hall as well as Muswell Hill festival ponders end festival lock to lock festival and Enfield town festival and would have been talking about such on goings and that he had been working with the youngsters from Kemp Hall Community Hall.

Officer Pc Edgoose States; “He went on to say that they are not interested though, as these days they just want to steal everything.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that the people he meets appreciated the work he was doing for them at the time.”

Officer Pc Edgoose States; “He said he gets inundated with requests to run raves all the time, but he doesn't get involved now. He claims to have 20,000 followers on one social media site, and 70,000 on another. He said he could organize a rave and get 20,000 people at it with no problems whatsoever.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that the word Rave has been used and he does not see how this relates to the conversation on the day or his activities as he was talking about the hard work he had been committing himself to, constrictive legal work and for the term Rave to be used without the key elements it is an injustice.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state that did not cause any Anti-social behaviour on this date in question.

Officer Pc Edgoose States; He gets requests from anarchist type groups to run raves for them.

He went on to say that he had been asked by Occupy London, Black Block and other anarchist type groups to run a rave at Notting Hill Carnival for them so that they could cause carnage and mayhem, but he had refused.

15

512,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he disputes” that he would not say this as he knows that he is not black neither is he white. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is mixed race of British Nationality and that he has neither heard of a group called Black Block, neither would he promote verbally of such a group the same as he would not verbally promote such anarchist type groups such as the kkk because he has been created by both.

Officer Pc Edgoose States; “Whilst on public order duty at Notting Hill Carnival I saw Mr. Cordell walking through the area I was deployed around Tavi Stock

Road. He was pushing a wheelie bin, and he was approached by members of a group of around 10 - 20 people who had been waiting at a junction near our location.

This group had been playing drum and bass music and had told officers they were heading to an event but were awaiting the location. It was somewhere between 2200

2300 hours when I had seen the group, and Mr. Cordell.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that at no point did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour or Alarm harm or distress on the date in question.

Mill Marsh Lane 27th 07 14

On the 27th July 2014

Ref: yerto0376227 pc Chandler:

Information had been received that a rave would be taken place."

Mr Simon Cordell believes if sourced by way of an information request this could prove his innocents in the allegations presented in this police statements and believes that the public order unit at Scotland Yard does in fact hold the information to all dates in question contained within this ASBO application, which would prove Mr Simon Cordell was not the organizer,"

Pc Chandler states: “Police drove down and found the rave."

Mr Simon Cordell would like to see proof that this was a rave that he organised as he states for fact that he never organised any event and was not in breach of any licensing act at the occupied place of residence, nor did he make any profit as the licensing act 2003 clearly states for it to be an illegal rave as does section 63 state that trespass must be present, neither to his knowledge has there been anyone charged with holding a rave on this date in question."

Pc Chandler states: “of which people at said rave had the keys for.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not the occupier of the land and he did not have any keys to it."

Pc Chandler states: “Police spoke to people inside."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “At no point did any police speak to Mr Simon Cordell as if he was not involved in any form of the organization of what is being accused of being an illegal rave, to which he stated he was not."

Pc Chandler states: There was a big stack of speakers which was being powered by a van belonging to Simon Cordell."

Mr Simon Cordell van is a ford transit 2002 this cannot power any think above12v

and a sound system is 240v each appliance, the size of Mr Simon Cordell generator is the size of a transit van and would have been noted down by a police officer due to this Mr Simon Cordell exhibit a picture his generator off his mobile trailer as an (Exhibit.)

Mr Simon Cordell did not hire any sound equipment, or have any involvement in the private birthday party, he will state that he just knew someone, who was treating the premises as their home on the date in question and was living in the local squats in and around Enfield on the dates in the ASBO application, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he was at the premises as a guest."

Pc Chandler states: “The rave accused of it being was a 20th birthday party for one of the occupiers.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this was not the person Mr Simon Cordell was there to visit."

The police talked to the persons whose private birthday party it was. Mr Simon Cordell does not agree with being accused of organizing his birthday party or any form of Anti-Social Behaviour on this date in question, Mr Simon Cordell will state it was not his birthday and he did not hire out any equipment, nor was he involved in the organization of any rave.

Pc Chandler states: “The rave was organized by Simon Cordell”

Mr Simon Cordell states: “that this said rave was not set up by him and in fact was a private birthday party as police offices state them self’s and they’re for could not be an illegal rave.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has never been charged for the organization of this said rave and believes that if this had been a correct statement that he would have been arrested.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this date in question was not his birthday or a party he organised and that he was just merely invited due to knowing someone who was living at the premises. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he is not homeless and that he does in fact live in his own council flat.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he in fact cause any actions that was likely to cause Alarm Harm or Distress.”

Pc Chandler states: “that this was connected to another rave on Alma Road.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; Alma Road is a road just of Green Street, to which Mr Simon Cordell will state that he lives two roads away Green Street then Burncroft Avenue a four minute drive from the incident location dated 24th 7 2014, with mostly private housing developed on it, there is a few long term companies and he does not know of any rave location ever along Alma road that a Rave has ever taken place, or off

16

513,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

any place people have lived as he keeps his private life to himself and only in exceptional circumstances offer official governing body(s) of relevance towards them issues, that may be of concern contained within their departments. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he has checked face book and applied to Enfield local council to be told no rave has happened on Alma Road and asks please can you supply evidence supporting your claims stating connected to another rave along Alma Road.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not involved in any said rave and has never been to a party on Alma Road.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he does in fact drive down Alma Road a fair amount due to his Nan Once living just off there before her recent departure and her living two roads away.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that that he does also travel down Alma Road to get between his flat and his mother’s address.

The only event on Alma Road involving the metropolitan police, that Mr Simon

Cordell remembers was when he was pulled over on Thursday 24th 07 2014, in his car index MA57 LDY.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point was he Anti-Social towards the police that pulled him, or he would have been arrested for a section 5 or of a similar offence and he surely would not have walked away, without even a ticket. He will state that he did in fact shake the police officers’ hands as he left after being pulled over on the 24th 07 2014.”

Thursday 24th July 2014, At around 16.25 hours: Alma Road:

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he was driving index MA57LDY as he stated down Alma Road, and this is a road that he travels down regally.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he uses this road to travel between his mother’s house and his own flat, as it is one of the only routes of access between both flat and house, and it is also the fastest route to take. Mr Simon Cordell will state that this Nan also lived just off Alma Road before her resent death.

On travelling from his mother’s house on Thursday 24th July 2014 from seeing his Nan and mother due to his Nan's illness he was going home to his flat and used Alma Road as a route to travel as he always does do so.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he noticed an unmarked police car, as it was indicating to take a right turn the opposite way from which he was travelling.

The reason he knew this to be an unmarked police car was because he knew the police Officers who was driving from seeing him on active duty within the local area.

As he drove past it changed its indication to the way he had been heading, which was a left direction.

The unmarked police car continued to follow him in turn putting on the blue lights in their vehicle, he pulled over to the left had side of the road opposite the BMW repair centre along Alma Road, on the left hand side of the pavement leading to the back entrance of Durant's park.

A male office got out of the passenger side and approached Mr Simon Cordell driver’s door, he un done his car window to a jar asking why he had been pulled over to which the police office replied he was not sure and said his college had instructed him to do so. He then went back to his police car and then reproached his car window with his college the driver of the undercover police car.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was asked again why he had been pulled over to the reply of the driver of the police car pulling out his police truncheon forcing him to get out of his car or if he declined his window will be smashed.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he got out of his car as he did not have any think to hide, neither had he committed any traffic or criminal offence, nor was he wanted.

The reason given to Mr Simon Cordell for being stopped was that such of an accusation stating that he had been driving to close to the car in front of him. This car did not stop nor was it pulled over by police. Mr Simon Cordell will then state that he was then accused of having drugs; he was searched and so was his vehicle and nothing was found.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was asked by police what he had been up to and that he told them that he was setting up his catalogue that he and his friend had been building. That is why Mr Simon Cordell’s website was well underway to being completed, and he was trying to establish positive effects within his business in today's society, within the business industry. This was a Thursday at 16:25.

Once the police had checked every think that they had needed to, everybody parted and shock each other’s’ hands and went on then, Mr Simon Cordell will state that he made his way home.

Mr Simon Cordell will state: “that he cannot understand why the police officers have said that he was driving in this manner as this would have been classed as dangers driving, and he would have been punished accordingly.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that there is no way that someone can drive linch” from the car in front, off each other’s car’s bumpers; this would have been clearly in possible. If the male’s car in front had been stopped or went to the police stating that, Mr Simon Cordell had being doing this action, would have be taken against Mr Simon Cordell for YR then surely the police would have taken the persons details in there 101 Book of reports.

Mill Marsh Lane 10th 08 2014

It is said that on the 10.08.14 Mr Simon Cordell was involved in the organization of and / or supplied equipment for and / or attended an illegal rave at an empty ware house on Mill Marsh Lane and that Mr Simon Cordell further actively sought to encourage a large group of people to breach the peace. ”

17

514,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will; dispute that he encouraged a large group of people to break the front line of the police.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not organise any raves at mill marsh lane.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that Mill Marsh Lane does in fact contain warehouses that were being occupied under section 144.” (Evidence

Google screen shoots

(Evidence of picture taken at the location)

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not have Nitrous oxide and was in fact carrying Co2 Canisters in accordance of the law.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not carry any sound equipment as he was travelling in his car.”

Statement of Aaron King,

Police officer PS 91YE,

Statement made 15/08/14,

Referring to 9th August 2014 Mill Marsh Lane

Officer Aaron King States: On Saturday 9th August 2014 I was on duty in full uniform posted as Acting Inspector. Shortly before 223ohrs I was informed via us

GPC that Intel had been received via social media that there was going to be a large illegal rave somewhere in the region of Millmarsh Lane, Enfield, EN3. I was advised that this was being advertised on Face book by "Every Decibel Matters" who run unlicensed events.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he understands that information received was by police via social media, stating that there was going to be a large illegal rave, this was said to be some were in the region of Mill Marsh Lane, Enfield En3. This intelligence was past to police Intel Unit public order team, who had been in contact with the director of Every Decibel matters, prior to the information being pasted on to Aaron King, police had attended a location and had spoken to members who were intending to hold a private birthday party in open air in regards to the private birthday party, after taking advise it was then moved into private air and there was to be no breaches of the licensing act 2003 made.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not present at the first location, it then got stopped and moved to the location in private air mill marsh lane, to which he had no control over. This was to no arrangement of his.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he is not a director to Every Decibel Matters Company, neither was he working for the company name every Decibel Matters on this date.

Officer Aaron King States: At this time, I was in company with P5 Ames 123YE and we made our way to the location. On route, I informed the control room of what was potentially occurring and accepted the offer; from some units to attend the location to assist me. On arrival in Millmarsh" Lane it was obvious that something was about to happen. There were a number, of groups of teenagers who were milling around clearly looking for something.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not one of the people in question; neither did he take part in any Anti-social behaviour, organising or should he be accountable for other people’s actions.

Officer Aaron King States: After a brief search I noticed two metal gates next to the

Greggs Factory which suddenly closed as we passed them. We stopped and I got out and approached the gates. Although dark, street lighting was on and I could see a male was using a chain and lock to secure the gates.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not the person locking the gate and he did not have a key as he was not an occupier of the land and that he was just a visitor. Mr Simon Cordell was sitting in his car Ma57ldy parked next to the gates as the police arrived at the place of residence.

Officer Aaron King States: “He could hear music coming from further inside.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “There was no power source and the music was coming from a car related to the same land in another warehouse owned by the same landlord as the land connected to this incident being rented out.”

Officer Aaron King States: Stood by the gate I immediately noticed a 1C3 male who I know to be Simon Cordell. I recognised Mr. Cordell as I have previously spoken to him recently at illegal raves where I have seen him setting up sound equipment and subsequently taking it away.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has nether been arrested and charged for illegal raves.”

Officer Aaron King States: when confronted by Police...I explained to Mr. Cordell why we were there, but he immediately denied it was a rave. Mr. Cordell stated first it was a private conference but then said it was a birthday party.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was there to have a conference with a friend who lived at the premises at the same time another occupier of the land agreed to have a friend’s private birthday party at the location, to no involvement of his own and no profit was intended to be made.

Officer Aaron King States: “When asked about permission to be there he stated friends were squatting on the land and they had said he could stay.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “This is true.”

18

515,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Officer Aaron King States; “I explained to Mr. Cordell that I needed to come onto the site to see what was going on as for all I knew he could be damaging it or stealing from it, eventually after promising I would not remove anyone squatting and only myself and Pc Ames would come in, Mr. Cordell agreed that we could come in.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did get involved and speak to the police as they knew him by name and had already chosen to involve him.

Officer Aaron King States: “Near to the gate was a silver Ford Focus index MA57LDY which I knew was Mr. Cordell's, -The boot was open, and I noticed it contained three large thin industrial gas bottles. From experience I knew this was likely to contain nitrous oxide which is currently used on the rave scene as a legal high. As we passed the car Mr. Cordell quickly lowered the boot. I queried Mr. Cordell about the gas and pointed out that it was on the news earlier how Nitrous oxide was dangerous and Mr. Cordell stated that the Government would probably ban it soon like everything else.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he does remember talking to the police in regards too Nitrous Oxide but at no point did he cause any Anti-Social Behaviour or was he breaking the Law.”

Officer Aaron King States: “Mr Cordell was polite and showed us around the site which appeared to be a large concreted area that was completely open to the air.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this location was being occupied under section 144 and also has self-contained warehouse on it, evidence supplied in case bundles this is not open to air land.”

Officer Aaron King States: “There was a large sound system to the rear which was amplified though I could not see any power source.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this proves the fact that music could not have been made by anyone spoken to by police.”

Officer Aaron King States: “There were a number of people wearing yellow hi-vis jackets who Mr. Cordell stated were first aiders and there was a pallet of water near to the sound system as well as a couple of tents closer to the gates.”

Mr Simon Cordell will states; “that a female who had just past her first aid test, who was an occupier of the land who was present, wearing a yellow hi vest jacket as it was cold and a load of yellow hi - vest jackets had been donated and he does remember everybody present talking about her doing so.”

Officer Aaron King States: I could see no obvious Toilet facilities nor shelter from what had been forecast as a stormy night. Inside the venue mostly just stood around in small groups were about 30 people, mostly teenagers.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that no police officers walked into the part of the building being occupied while he was present and that he remembers running water and toilets.”

Officer Aaron King States: “Mr Cordell stated he was an entrepreneur and was awaiting licenses from the council so that he would soon be legitimate.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was and still does intended to create a festival if this ASBO case stops darkening his name in turn stopping him from gaining a personal licence as well as permission to hold events.”

Officer Aaron King States: “When I explained all the "ingredients" for a rave were present Mr. Cordell began to try and argue his point that it was not a rave and that it was a private party. I spoke at length with Mr. Cordell explaining the legal situation and how by definition this was a rave and that ultimately there were too few people present at the time to stop police and so on this occasion I could act and close the rave.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that at no point of time did he take part in any form of

Anti-Social behaviour, nor did he organize the private birthday party or hire any equipment or was he attending a rave on the 9th June 2014 in regards to the allegations presented within the ASBO application, as he states he did attended a friends private birthday dinner party as a guest and no money was to be charge, as he did not pay himself.”

Officer Aaron King States; “Whilst on an industrial estate it was my opinion that such was the proximity to local housing and my knowledge of the volume music is played and the duration it is played for, often throughout the weekend that a rave would constitute serious disruption.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that Google Earth shows the closest house to Mill Marsh Lane the premises in question, to be one mile from the closest house.” (Exhibit)

Officer Aaron King States: “Mr. Cordell was clearly not happy but did not want his equipment seized so agreed to start packing up the sound equipment.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that as noted by officers and officer Aaron King Mr Cordell was present in a ford focus and with three empty welding cylinders, so he could not have been carrying any sound equipment as this would not have fitted into his vehicle. ”

Officer Aaron King States: “Whilst talking with Mr. Cordell there were small groups of teenagers arriving at the site and entering via a break in the fence, (the gates still being shut at this time). I got Ps Ames to get units to us to prevent further people trespassing on the land and to discourage people from attending the location and exited the venue to a wait.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he should not be accountable for other people(s) actions that he took no part in a negative manner, he was not a trespasser and was a visitor invited to visit his friends who was living under section 144 lasbo. For people to further be trespassing someone would have had to be arrested for trespass as it was a commercial dwelling, who is this person.”

19

516,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Officer Aaron King States: “Mr. Simon Cordell's exited with the sound equipment. Whilst waiting I radioed for the on-call Superintendent so I could get the various Rave legislation approved so that I could seize the sound equipment and enforce a rave cordon on Millmarsh Lane to prevent people entering.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that Inspector Aaron has been told this third party and he knows that he has stated the true facts in his statements of truth, and that Mr Simon Cordell was present in a car and would not have been able to carry such large sound equipment.

Officer Aaron King States: “Whilst stood by the venue a number of people began leaving, most were laughing but the odd one was blaming police for stopping the event. Suddenly there were a huge number of mainly teenagers walking towards me from the direction of Mollison Avenue. Apparently, this group had all arrived together from the nearby railway station. Straight away some of this group headed straight towards us saying they were going to storm the place. I had been joined by a few team officers and we advised them that the rave had been closed down and they would not be allowed to enter. There was some verbal confrontation but the large group which was up to 100 strong moved off round the comer with some overheard saying they would break in round the comer.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he take part in anyone else’s Anti-Social Behaviour and he did not cause Anti-social Behaviour.

Officer Aaron King States: “As they began to move off Mr. Cordell stood by the break in the fence and shouted words to the effect of, "Come on, there is more of you". And he quickly went up to Mr Cordell and told him to stop or he would arrest him to prevent a breach of the peace. At this Mr Cordell went back and stayed away.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point of time would he say this, and he would never in danger another person’s life in such a manner. Mr Simon Cordell will state that he would never encourage activities that would lead to incitement of a riot, and as there was more than 12 people present he know if this statement was true he would have been arrested under offences contrary to section’s 5, 4A, 4, of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 and or section 91.”

Officer Aaron King States: “The large group did indeed try to get into adjoining premises that they thought led to the rave venue but were stopped by officers and moved off back into Millmarsh lane, although one officer Pc Wale was injured during a struggle. T requested the attendance of as many units as possible including dogs and TSG as the group were becoming more hostile towards officers despite there being no music now and being informed of the closure. A short while later officers I had positioned at the junction radioed that there was now an even bigger crowd advancing on them. I arrived at the junction to see a very large number of people, now up to 200 walking with purpose towards officers stood in the road. Suddenly objects began to get thrown from the crowd towards police. I saw traffic cones; cone lights, bottles and stones begin to land near Officers so that they had to quickly move out of the way. I again heard phrases similar to "storm them". Fearing imminent violence, I drew and extended my baton as did my colleagues. I could hear shouts of "get back" but the crowd continued to throw items, some of which were landing on cars that had been temporarily stopped due to the group. We had been joined by two dog units who took the lead in dispersing the crowd. At this point there were two arrests to my left and along with the dogs this seemed to make the crowd withdraw. I told my officers and the dogs not to follow the crowd as they were now by the train station with nowhere to go as the barriers were down. There was a tense standoff for some time, but the group eventually got onto trains and left the area.”

Officer Aaron King states: “I could hear shouts”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not the person shouting or causing any Anti-Social Behaviour neither did he take part in the organisation of the private birthday party.”

Officer Aaron King States: “I was informed by another unit that Mr Cordell had also left with his equipment.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this proves police were told third party, but already new Mr Simon Cordell was in his car that was full because he was carrying cylinder bottles in accordance to the law of the carriage of dangers goods cdg.

Officer Aaron King States: “I tasked arriving TSG with local reassurance patrols but shortly after they started, I was advised that most of the group were wandering around near to Ponders End. I tasked TSG with following this group and was informed by their Inspector that their unmarked unit had overheard talk that the' rave was now going to be South West of the original location.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not involved in the organisation of any illegal rave or when he was arrested was he given the right to an interview or to speak to a solicitor neither was he charged for any offence or given a public warning.” I was aware that TSG subsequently saw Simon Cordell by the Crown lane Industrial Estate where he has held a rave before and had stopped the group from forcibly breaking into this location.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that this is two occupied building of 6 within a 2 mile radius, that were all being occupied in Enfield, within the same Local Borough that he has lived in a resided in since his Birth, and he does not think that it is right for police to say who he can and can’t have as friends or as associates.

Statement of Aaron King Dated 07/09/2014

Further to his statement dated 15/08/2014 Regarding Saturday 9th August 2014

Aaron King state’s: “Further to his statement Dated 15/08/2014 regarding an illegal rave on Saturday 9th August 2014

20

517,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

The version of events declared in the statement of Aaron King Dated 07/09/2014 and 15/08/ 14 are both in correct and misleading to each other as pointed out.

Aaron King states: I could see a male was using a chain to lock and secure the gates.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point was he this person, as there was no reason for me to have a key as he was just a visitor.”

Aaron King state’s: “I could see a male was using a chain and lock to secure the gates he then states, while stood at the gates I immediately noticed an ic3 male who I no to be Simon Cordell,

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that to which is true as he was sitting in the car index MA57LDY parked close to the gates, when approached from the street, as noted by Aaron king Near to the gate was a silver Ford Focus index MA57LDY, which he knew was Mr Cordell's. This statement was made 15/08/2014 seven days after the occurrence of accused events referred to on the 9th August 2014 then another statement was made to amendments of this statement dated 07/09/2014 stating they know it was Mr Simon Cordell locking the gate a mix ic3 male who they no to be himself. which is a contradiction of events that have been noted on two different dates by the same police officer leading to events within his and their witness statements, that Mr

Simon Cordell is being accused in that should not justified towards an Asbo application and should not have no effect on his way of life, by way off effecting his civil liberty’s human rights or acting as a bad marker in his name of reference, to which he feels punished for and now in turn has effected on his life.

Aaron King state’s: “I have been asked to clarify the role that Mr Simon Cordell had during the incident.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he does not see how any person can preserve his role off being an organizer, as he was only being helpful and polite and curites, in his friend’s place of residence towards the police, while being a invited in as a visitor. It was his friend’s birthday and he had been invited for dinner. At no point did he take part in any form of Anti-Social behaviour, nor did he organize or hire any equipment and he was not present to attend a rave on the 9th June 2014.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did attend a friend’s birthday dinner party as a guest.”

Aaron King states: “as a male quickly locked the gates upon apparently seeing my marked police vehicle. This male was Mr. Cordell

“Mr Simon Cordell will state that he could not have locked the gates as he was only a guest and at no point in time had the keys to the lock on the gates.

Aaron King states: “It was initially Mr. Cordell who said he could not entre and it was him who was very much in charge of deciding if police were going to be let in.”

21

518,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was asked by police if he would let them in to which he explained he was not the occupier and never had any keys. At this point in time one of the occupiers went of to get the keys and let the police in.”

Officer Aaron King States: “Finally after close to three hours later, the group dispersed, and I was informed that social media was indicating the rave would now be Epping Forest.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not go to Epping Forest on this date.

Officer Aaron King States: “The whole incident took a vast number of resources to police and there were two arrests for drugs possession and two for drunk and disorderly behaviour. One officer was injured with a deep cut to his elbow requiring first aid by the Police FME and emergency calls whilst answered were subject to delay.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that he is sorry to hear that any police officers had been hurt and understands the offenders faced criminal prosecution for the offences they had caused.

Statement of Jason Ames Police office 206011 Statement made 15/08/2014 Referring to date 09 August 2014 Millmarsh Lane

Officer Jason Ames States: “on the 9th August 2014 he was driving a marked police car in the company of A/IN SP King at 2221 hours.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “they were informed of CAD 9717 which relates to intelligence received that states there was likely to be an illegal open-air rave.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he attending the occupied premises to which he had been to before to visit a friends, who were living and residing on the premises at Millmarsh lane in an occupied building and out back tents who are an occupation, which is a collective of people. Mr Simon Cordell understands that they had been treating the premises as their home since around 16/05/2014, on the 15/02/2015.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he remembers this day clearly as he had been invited to a friend’s private birthday party who live on the private self-contained land in question along Millmarsh Lane.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he requests to see all information in regard to CAD9717 as he believes this contains evidence of his innocents in the events in question.

Officer Jason Ames States: “The intelligence received started that there was likely to be an open-Air rave.

22

519,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “Mill Mars Lane is a 20,000 Square feet self-contained land with 4 large commercial premises contained within. I have provided evidence supporting this and this location is in fact in (Private Air) as well as in (Open Air classed as a back garden) and was being lived in as accepted by police Under section 144 LASPO or Trespass would have taken place.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he cause Anti-Social Behaviour on this date and he did not organize or take part in an illegal open air rave, that was likely to take place, as stated by way of being accused in Officer Jason Aim’s statements. The occupiers who was living on the land were treating the premises as their home and was in private Air. The occupiers were living in accordance to the law, living in tents and the occupied attached building on the land.

The term open air rave was used by Jason aims, on stead of in private air while as defined by section 63 CDA.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was not arrested for any criminal offence or neither did any person take civil action against himself as he did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “the key elements are present for a rave, be accused occupiers.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “It could not be possible to create an illegal rave especially with no power supply being present.

Officer Jason Ames States: “The intelligence received stated that there was likely to be an illegal open-air rave.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point of time did he organize or take part in an illegal open-air rave that was likely to take place, as stated by way of being accused in.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He attended Millmarsh Lane at 2232 hours.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He could see small pockets of young people walking east along Millmarsh Lane. “Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point of time was he one of the people in question or did he organize the accused rave of being. He was invited to a birthday party.”

Aaron King Dated 15/08/2014 states; “it was a birthday party, which has stated by Mr Simon Cordell "He was invited to this private birthday party"

On the 9th august 2014 Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did not encouraged or neither did he invite other people or take part in actions that may have led to an open-air rave in the region of Millmarsh Lane.”

23

520,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Officer Jason Ames States: “We worked out these youths were making their way to an open-air rave. Mr Simon Cordell will state that this was a private birthday party to which he was invited and never believed to be an illegal rave until police notified him that the key elements were believed to be in place and stopped the private birthday party to which he had been invited to, this was on private land contained by security gates to the premises.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “This area appeared to be the ground on which a building used to stand. “There was an occupied building at the rear of the land. The land in question is a forecourt to the occupied building.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “It was fenced off and the front gates were chained shut with a motorcycle chain and padlock.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He could hear music coming from the venue.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that no sound could be played as there was no power, “The land was fenced off and the front, gates were chained shut with a motorcycle chain and padlock as in police statement made by Aaron King dated 15/08/2014 referring to the 9th August 2014 " I explained to Mr Cordell that he needed to come on the site to see what was going on for all he knew he could be damaging it or steeling from it. Mr Simon Cordell state at this time the occupiers of the land was present and had been from the start of police arrival, Mr Simon Cordell was a guest as explained on the 9th August 2014. Aaron King states: Eventually after promising he would not remove anyone squatting/ occupying the land that were treating it as their home under a section 144 Laspo. Aaron King and PC Ames could come in if they also treated it as the occupiers of the land do, as their private home of residence, as noted in statements provided there was no power or generator present to the self-contained private Land and premises. Any amplified music on the 9th June was coming from the next-door premises in fact from a car.

Officer Jason Ames States: “I could see small numbers inside and a couple of tents. Officer Jason Ames States: We exited our vehicle and approached the gates in order to speak with the organizer.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “Manning the gate was a mixed-race man I know to be Simon Cordell.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he remembers this day very clearly and what happened. It was a Saturday and he had been looking forward to this day as he was visiting a friend of his, at were his friend was living, Mr Cordell latter found out it was one of his friend birthdays and they were having a get together of friends and family . As he attend the premises in question on the 9th august it was about 8pm. he intended to stay and had some birthday cake and dinner, until the point of police arrival when in fact he was sitting in a car Index MA57LDY 200 yards from the gates within the self-contained land, he remembers this because, he had arrived because he had been invited and on

24

521,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

arrival the gates were unlocked by the occupiers, so that his vehicle and himself could gain access as a visitor, by the occupiers of the land.

Mr Simon Cordell will state; that as stated he had been invited to attend a friend’s birthday party not a illegal rave by a man who lived at Millmarsh Lane.

Officer Jason Ames States: “I was aware of a lot of intelligence on our indices that suggests Cordell is known to be the organizer of most of the raves that have been happening in the Enfield area.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he has never been arrested and charged and feels that this is slander of definition of character, and for such here say to be admissible as court evidence or reference of character is criminal and unjustified, no weight should be taken. As for fact he is a valid member of his community.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “We asked if we could come into the venue and speak to him. Cordell refused initially starting that there was no rave.”

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he was just a visitor and had no right without consent of the occupiers to unlock the gate, at no point did he have the key to the gate,

To which the occupiers use to unlock the gates to allow access for the police to come in.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He stated that it was a private "conference."

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that he did say he had also gone to have a conference with his friends in regard to get the empty c02 gas cylinders he was carrying to be re filled as well as to attend to see his friends.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He stated that there have been a few people camping on the land as they had been no were to go. The people were in fact the occupiers of the land and also occupying the building on the premises, who were at the gate on police arrival.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “He stated that they are having a few friends over for a private party.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “After persuasion Cordell allowed A/Insp King to gain entry to survey the area.”

Officer Jason Ames States: “Inside he could see around 20-30 people milling around, in small tents, a large set of speakers and sound system and a supply of bottled water.

AT no point did I take part or organise a birthday party or an illegal rave or bring any equipment leading to a large sound system on said premises as it would not fit in my car Index MA57LDY a ford focus as mentioned in police statement for me to be driving on the 9th June 2014.

25

522,

STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc

Officer Jason Ames States: Cordell was informed that the rave was going to be closed down and despite a slight resistance to this by him trying to quote legislation to us he agreed to pack up and leave. Yes, when asked to leave by police.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that he did get into index Ma57Ldy and go home to his fiat 109 Burncroft avenue Enfield to be he lives and reside every night.

Officer Jason Ames States: Cordell was informed that the rave was going to be closed down and despite a slight resistance to this by him trying to quote legislation to us he agreed to pack up and leave. "At no point would he go against police directions” Officer Jason Ames States: He was reluctant but co-operated at this stage.

Mr Simon Cordell will state that at no point would he go against police directions”

26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 29-02-2016 16-18

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 523,524,525,526,527,528

529,530,531,532,533,534

535,536,537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544,545,546

547

 

 

40.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 29-02-2016 16-18

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 523,524,525,526,527,528

529,530,531,532,533,534

535,536,537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544,545,546

547

--

523,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 04:17:55 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: witness statement

Attachments: STATEMENT OF WITNESS           

Done New 29.02.2016.doc

This is as far as I am going to go with all the statements, they are all done and accounted for. is it ok to go to josie once I have sorted the rest of the files need for her. I am going to create a pdf's files of my new bundle.

524,

Same as 29/02/2016 02:19:05 PM email!

525,526,527,528,529,530,531,532,533,534,535,536,537,538,539,540,541,542,543,544,545,546,547,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE What osey this one 29-02-2016 12-51

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 548

 

 

41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE What osey this one 29-02-2016 12-51

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 548

--

548,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 12:50:59 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: What you need to send Josey this one

Use this one Dear Josey

What you are saying in your emails is that the judge says in his letter that I have got to have an assessment, but this is not the case as part 3 of his letter states if the Appellant wishes to rely on any medical evidence as to his mental health, then any report dealing with such matters must be before the court on the 4th April 2016"

Which clearly states if I wish to rely on any mental health evidence then a report has to be in by the 04/04/2016, But this does not say I must rely on this, and I do not wish to rely on this.

Can you please take my case back to court so that my conditions can be defined, and also have a meeting once you get the letters you are waiting on so we can deal with the appeal.

Can you also please send me the notes from court from the public defender that was there for me please as I have not had these yet.

Also, the issue about the public order unit if they are not willing to give the information then they need to be summoned to court for the appeal.

Also, what is going to happen as to the missing CAD and the errors in the CAD Simon

 

 

 

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2

Asbo RE Medical Information 29-02-2016 17-48

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 549,550

 

42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2

Asbo RE Medical Information 29-02-2016 17-48

29/02/2016

/ Page Numbers: 549,550

--

549,

On 29 February 2016 at 15:00 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Dear Josey

What you are saying in your emails is that the judge says in his letter that I have got to have an assessment, but this is not the case as part 3 of his letter states if the Appellant wishes to rely on any medical evidence as to his mental health, then any report dealing with such matters must be before the court on the 4th April 2016"

Which clearly states; “if I wish to rely on any mental health evidence then a report has to be submitted by the 04/04/2016,” but this does not say I must rely on this, and I do not wish to rely on this.

Can you please take my case back to court so that my conditions can be defined, and also have a meeting once you get the letters you are waiting on from Superintendent Adrian Coombs so we can deal with the appeal.

Can you also please send me the notes from court from the public defender that was there for me please as I have not had these as of yet.

Also, the issue about the public order unit if they are not willing to give the information then they need to be summoned to court for the appeal.

Also, what is going to happen as to the missing CAD and the errors in the CAD

The case is that I organised illegal raves on page two of the applicants first bundle it clearly states I quote "The Defendant is involved in the

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 29/02/2016 05:47:50 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Medical Information

Dear Simon

Thank you for your email.

Simon please sign and return the authority form. If the Mental Health Team confirms there are no issues, we can progress matters.

I have spoken to the Public Defender and he would like a conference with you before the mention hearing on 4th April 2016 subject to the above being resolved. If you do not have the Mental Health Team's assessment or do not wish me to have sight of the assessment, then I can apply for funding so that you can be assessed.

Once the psychiatrist reports back that there are no issues then I have covered myself professionally, should there be any issues raised re your Mental Health at a later date. The Mental Health question has been raised and now needs to be formally addressed and dealt with. I know you are not happy about this and I do not mean to cause you distress by raising this. The quickest way would be by disclosing the recent Mental Health assessments but if I have to apply for funding to have you assessed then I will do this, assuming you in fact dispute the recent Mental Health findings. The decision is yours, but I need to resolve this question as soon as possible.

I will notify you as soon as Superintendent Coombes statement comes in which will hopefully arrive this week.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

550,

organisation and conduct of illegal raves. These primarily take place on disused or industrial land in London and cause alarm and distress to the local residents. These raves are licensing activity, cause significant noise pollution and directly lead to destruction of property and breaches of peace."

In defence to my case the 2nd line down clearly states The Defendant is involved in the organisation and conduct of illegal raves, I have sent you the licensing act 2003 apex 4 which states, house party’s and places of residents do not need a licence, which all the incidents in the applicants bundle are places of residence in contained fencing in private air. In the licensing act it states this includes gardens and private car parks. I have linked index page 4 off the licensing act 2003 within this document, which clearly states unless profit is being made, to which I am not being accused off, then there is no breach of the law, and they’re for not illegal.

For members of the public to have a moving in-house party is not a breach of law and there for not illegal.

The word rave clearly states the key element such as in open air must be present and when in private air trespass must be present.

So what law have I broken to make the case law abiding under reasonable doubt if I am not being accused of making profit it is not illegal to organize a private house party for any British citizen, as long as you have respect for the residence living in around the local area?

In regard to the statement off, “These primarily take place on disused or industrial land in London and cause alarm and distress to the local residents.” All locations are a place of fixed a bow and residence.

In reference to “These raves are licensing activity, cause significant noise pollution and directly lead to destruction of property and breaches of peace." No home is licensable, unless a breach of the 2003 licensing act has been made, to which contained within the applicants bundle their ins none.

I have a bundle of the laws that are relevant to my case that should be in my defence bundle, please will you help me go over them.

I would like to start trading my company as I have explained to you for months and keep asking you to take the case back to court to get my bail conditions defined, to which you have not to date even low Andy Lock states that I am right in my points of law and how it leaves me in a state of utter confusion to what I am aloud to do or not as the applicants case is based on illegal raves there for banning me from what is lawfully legal.

I cannot think of any jobs the conditions will not have an effect of that my professions are in, I cannot be a delivery driver, as most company deliver to industrial estates,

I cannot deliver parcels or goods to any person living under a section 144, this is not correct in law.

I am very concerned as the applicant’s case is for an ASBO in its civil manner, and the case is based on illegal activities, to which I have never had the right to defended my innocents in.

An ASBO on convection is when a person has committed criminal activities and has been found guilty and there is such a need to apply for a court to sit in its civil capacity to obtain such an order against any person, straight or therefore after.

I have a standalone ASBO which should be on the 3rd strike of a smaller criminal conviction, to which I have never been arrested for illegal raves is and in being granted is a breach of my human rights, a standalone ASBO put against myself with no criminal conviction is wrong in practice of law.

Thanks

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2

Asbo Re Josephine War medical check 01-03-2016 11-23

01/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 551,552

 

 

43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2

Asbo Re Josephine War medical check 01-03-2016 11-23

01/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 551,552

--

551,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 01/03/2016 11:22:42 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Josephine Ward wants me to have a medical check

Simon

Please attend my office Friday 4th March 2016 at 11am with any documentation from the Mental Health Team so that I can photocopy it.

I will have a meeting with you to discuss the areas identified by HHJ Pawlak in his letter.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

On 29 February 2016 at 22:48 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Josephine I am not will to sign any form giving you consent to my personnel records as no judge has ordered for you to do so, I would not be a free man if there was a chance of me being a danger to myself or the general public. As I am sure you would understand the Mental Health Team are trained in dealing with people in such cases under section 135, 136, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Mental Health Act 1983 & 2007 as amended 2016. I do in fact take offence in you questioning my ability to make decisions for myself and them decisions that I make I am making being of clear judgement towards the applicants case which contains false facts such as me being white and contained in side a warehouse surrounded by police, marked in the cads.

You know this not to be true for as long as two years.

For two years I have asked you and Michelle Carroll and co solicitors to write to the witness also the applicant and point out the true facts of law but most importantly make sure I have a fair trial.

Any person can get a calculator and see that the time stamps are in error as I have been emailing you and stating.

All I ask from you, is to have my best interest at heart and you refuse to see me for months now try to force me to see doctors when you have no legal obligation too.

I have a hard copy bundle of all the emails that have been sent to you from the start of this case and a list of the questions and guidance that I have been given I have taken the time to work out how many times and the dates, myself and my mother have had to asked you to deal with the same question(s) I am still asking to date 29/02/2016. to answer and the points of law that make my case illegal that I am supposed to have broken in fact how I have this standalone Asbo with no previous convictions of similar nature and it was not an Asbo on conviction granted.

I feel as if I have missed a whole interview and being charged for some think that clearly states that it is illegal in turn not having the right to defend myself.

I want the case taken back to court this week if possible as I want to start a night job driving and it involves me delivering to any possible address, can you please sort this.

Josephine, I have started to seek legal guidance as you will not give it to me, this is not right.

I will not wait till April for a pretrial hearing that will not go ahead as I cannot stand a fair trial, as I have explained I will bring a calculator to you and show you what I sent you in my drafted witness statement months ago asking you to defend me, in the fact that it would be impossible to stand a fair trial with us both knowing this.

The other day in your office you told me that I might lose my case knowing about the only evidence being that of the time stamps and the same people who created the application corrupting the time stamps then making statements about myself also that of me clearly pointing out the law and that I never done any think illegal and even you cannot explain to me how my case states it is illegal but I have not been arrested and in the understanding off section 63 inclusive of the licensing act as well as the warehouse becoming a place of residence when a section 144 is present.

As stated, I want to work can you bring this back to court please.

If you want, I will bring you the copy of the section 135 and that it has been signed now as void and you can see that I

552,

am still here.

If any think needs covering, it is what has not been done in this case already to date.

 

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Re R v Simon hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 10-32

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 553,554,555,556

 

44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 2

Asbo Fwd. Re R v Simon hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 10-32

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 553,554,555,556

--

553,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 10:31:50 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com;

Andrew.Morris@legalaid.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Attachments: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice.pdf

Dear Simon / Andrew

Please see Respondent's hearsay application forwarded.

Kindly acknowledge safe receipt.

Yours sincerely Josephine

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 02 March 2016 at 10:14

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

554,

555,

556,

 

 

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2

Asbo Re Fwd. Re R v Si hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 15-14

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 557

 

 

45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2

Asbo Re Fwd. Re R v Si hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 15-14

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 557

--

557,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 03:13:35 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Subject: Re: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Why did you type the message to Simon / Andrew as well, Its Simon Cordell. lol

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 10:31, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Dear Simon / Andrew

Please see Respondent's hearsay application forwarded.

Kindly acknowledge safe receipt.

Yours sincerely Josephine

Original Message       

From: Patrick Mc Elligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 02 March 2016 at 10:14

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

46.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2

Asbo Re Fwd. Re R v Si hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 15-40

04/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 558

 

 

46.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2

Asbo Re Fwd. Re R v Si hearsay Notice 02-03-2016 15-40

04/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 558

--

558,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 03:40:13 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Fwd.: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Simon

Sorry, this was a typo.

Josephine

On 02 March 2016 at 15:13 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Why did you type the message to Simon / Andrew as well, Its Simon Cordell. lol

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 10:31, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroNandco.com> wrote:

Dear Simon / Andrew

Please see Respondent's hearsay application forwarded.

Kindly acknowledge safe receipt.

Yours sincerely Josephine

Original Message       

From: Patrick McElligott <patrick@michaelcarrollandco.com>

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 02 March 2016 at 10:14

Subject: Re: R v Simon Cordell Hearsay Notice

Hi,

Please find attached.

Regards.

 

 

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2

Asbo Re Josephine War medical check 02-03-2016 12-42

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 559,560

 

 

47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2

Asbo Re Josephine War medical check 02-03-2016 12-42

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 559,560

--

559,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 12:41:55 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarToUandco.com>

Subject: Re: Josephine Ward wants me to have a medical check

Thank you. My internet has been down for a day or so, this is why my reply has taken so long.

On Tuesday, 1 March 2016, 11:22, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroNandco.com> wrote:

Simon

Please attend my office Friday 4th March 2016 at 11am with any documentation from the Mental Health Team so that I can photocopy it.

I will have a meeting with you to discuss the areas identified by HHJ Pawlak in his letter.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

On 29 February 2016 at 22:48 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Josephine I am not will to sign any form giving you consent to my personnel records as no judge has ordered for you to do so, I would not be a free man if there was a chance of me being a danger to myself or the general public. As I am sure you would understand the Mental Health Team are trained in dealing with people in such cases under section 135, 136, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Mental Health Act 1983 & 2007 as amended 2016. I do in fact take offence in you questioning my ability to make decisions for myself and them decisions that I make I am making being of clear judgement towards the applicants case which contains false facts such as me being white and contained in side a warehouse surrounded by police, marked in the cads.

You know this not to be true for as long as two years.

For two years I have asked you and Michelle Carroll and co solicitors to write to the witness also the applicant and point out the true facts of law but most importantly make sure I have a fair trial.

Any person can get a calculator and see that the time stamps are in error as I have been emailing you and stating.

All I ask from you, is to have my best interest at heart and you refuse to see me for months now try to force me to see doctors when you have no legal obligation too.

I have a hard copy bundle of all the emails that have been sent to you from the start of this case and a list of the questions and guidance that I have been given I have taken the time to work out how many times and the dates, myself and my mother have had to asked you to deal with the same question(s) I am still asking to date 29/02/2016. to answer and the points of law that make my case illegal that I am supposed to have broken in fact how I have this standalone Asbo with no previous convictions of similar nature and it was not an Asbo on conviction granted.

I feel as if I have missed a whole interview and being charged for some think that clearly states that it is illegal in turn not having the right to defend myself.

I want the case taken back to court this week if possible as I want to start a night job driving and it involves me delivering to any possible address, can you please sort this.

Josephine, I have started to seek legal guidance as you will not give it to me, this is not right.

I will not wait till April for a pretrial hearing that will not go ahead as I cannot stand a fair trial, as I have explained I will bring a calculator to you and show you what I sent you in my drafted witness statement months ago asking you to defend me, in the fact that it would be impossible to stand a fair trial with us both knowing this.

The other day in your office you told me that I might lose my case knowing about the only evidence being that of the time stamps and the same people who created the application corrupting the time stamps then making statements about myself also that of me clearly pointing out the law and that I never done any think illegal and even you cannot explain to me how my case states it is illegal but I have not been arrested and in the understanding off section 63 inclusive of the licensing act as well as the warehouse becoming a place of residence when

560,

a section 144 is present.

AS stated, I want to work can you bring this back to court please.

If you want, I will bring you the copy of the section 135 and that it has been signed now as void and you can see that I am still here.

If any think needs covering, it is what has not been done in this case already to date.

 

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 13-49

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 561,562

 

 

48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 13-49

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 561,562

--

561,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 01:49:13 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>; Andrew.Morris@legalaid.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for mention on 4th April 2016 at Wood Green Crown Court

Thank you for taking your time to do this, however I do have a question to ask, in the beginning of the court case leading up to the trial, I believed that the justice system would prove my innocents, but due to the District Judge finding me guilty under the applicants case of organising illegal raves, that is said to have cause< harm or distress to one or more over house hold, To which the barrister representing me at the time, having that of the same opinion about the law as myself, “the should not be illegal if there is no law or regulations to make it illegal or none that have been breached.”

I was not an organiser as trespass was not present neither have, I broke any conditions in the licensing act 2003. After the trial, I went home and applied for the a| stage as I knew that this was wrong, this also made me look into the case even further to notice the time stamps and so many over errors, My question to you is, “no the errors have been pointed out, how can we ask the police for more information such as the missing cads and hope that they do not fabricate more evidence m it so condemning that I would never stand a fair trial under article six.

(I am scared to ask for more evidence that should prove my innocents, as I believe the police will make it up, as we can prove happened all ready.)

Please can you explain this to me, before I agree for you to send any think?

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 10:11, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Simon

Can you please review the initial response to the Respondent's application to adduce the hearsay evidence. I have included some of the points that you take issue with. A full skeleton legal argument will be served addressing all points you wish raised following our meeting on Friday morning at 11am subject to you confirming that you can attend. I need a response to the email which I am proposing on sending over to the court so that our objection to the hearsay evidence is noted.

Please confirm in writing your specific instructions with regards to the email below and confirm your authorisation for me to send it, in addition to any amendments that you wish me to consider including. I need a response to this before 3pm today, 2nd March 2016 please.

Regards

Josephine

Dear Sir or Madam

We refer to the hearsay application dated 23rd February 2016, received in the DX at our office 1st March 2016.

We require all witnesses to attend as listed on page 5 - 66 to be cross examined.

We confirm that we object to the Respondent's application to adduce hearsay evidence contained in the CRIMINT reports pages 79 - 92, 109 - 121 of the Respondent bundles.

· CRIMINT - YERT00376728 - Aaron King is required to attend to be cross examined

· CRIMINT -YERT00376227 - PC Chandler is required to attend to be cross examined

· CRIMINT - YERT00376229 - PC Edgoose is required to attend to be cross examined.

· The Appellant also specifically requests disclosure of police checks made on the vehicle he was driving and the vehicle he was alleged to have been driving bumper to bumper to. The Appellant also requests specific confirmation in a statement from PC Edgoose the following: (a) why he was not arrested for any offences in relation to his driving as PC Edgoose makes specific reference to the driver he was following confirming that the Appellant had been driving in the same manner from YR. (b) Summons for any road traffic violations (c) CADS / communications concerning name checks

· CRIMINT -YERT00376024 - PS Skinner is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant seeks specific disclosure as to the vehicle checks carried out on PE52 UHW. Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in this vehicle in the past? Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in company with Elliot Laidler in the past? Why was the music system not seized? Full names of all other persons inside the premises to confirm the number of people present. Results of the search of the premises, in addition to the keys found at the premises. Whether any other persons were arrested, if so what for? Disclosure of CADS / statements / complaints regarding anti-social behaviour? Whether any allegations of criminal damage / commercial burglary were made? What enquiries were made from the owners of the building as to the premises being occupied?

· CRIS 1914855/14 - Statements from officers who attended the premises, confirming from whom the sound system was seized? Whether Simon Cordell was present at the event? Why was the sound system restored?

· CRIMINT - YERT00374531 - PC Shinnick is required to attend to be cross examined.

· CAD's re 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 Progress Way.

562,

The Appellant seeks full disclosure of all CADs linked to this CAD. The Intelligence report suggests that Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin set up and organised this rave. The Appellant requests a full detailed statement report as to the basis of this comment. The Appellant disputes ever being inside Progress Way premises on 7th June 2014. The Appellant disputes supplying equipment at this location. The Appellant disputes that he set up or organised this event. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all intelligence, names etc of persons present at this event. The Appellant specifically requests disclosure of all CADs from 6th June 2014 onwards in correct chronological, timed and dated order. The Appellant also seeks confirmation as to whether the complaints made with regards to anti- social behaviour were made in respect of Progress Way or Crown Road, the premises of which was subject to numerous complaints in the past by local residents etc. The Appellant also seeks specifically disclosure from the Public Order Unit whether they were provided with the names of other persons present, vehicles etc and whether the named persons have been known in the past for organising similar events.

The Appellant takes issue with the CADs in respect of this event and the manner in which they have been presented. The Appellant is raising issues with the timings of the CAD's and he instructs us to specifically challenge the accuracy and to question whether the CAD system was defective or manipulated by the Respondent's employees.

The Appellant also notes from the CAD's served that there are CAD's explicitly linked from 1st June 2014 and 2nd June 2014. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all CAD's as he contests that they will reveal who the organiser of this event on 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 was. The Appellant will state that he was not present on any occasion inside the premises of Progress Way and he will state that the Respondent is in possession of information which would reveal the real identity of the organisers of this event. The Appellant believes that the redacted CAD's are concealing the locations and complainants as the complainant's may be on duty police officers making complaints to bolster an application for an ASBO against the Appellant. The Appellant also believes that the CAD's may specifically be in relation to Crown Road, Southbury Road a distance of approximately one mile from Progress Way.

The Appellant will state that the officers who made the entries, reports etc should be called to give evidence as by not doing so it is disproportionate towards him as he is trying to establish a legitimate entertainment company. The Appellant alleges that the Respondent is deliberately exaggerating his involvement in the events cited in the ASBO application. An ASBO against his name will significantly tarnish his ability to conduct legitimate business. The Appellant also takes issue with the misleading press releases in relation to the original imposition of the ASBO in the Magistrates Court. The Appellant will state that the District Judge in delivering her judgement could not find any form of illegality, or that the events alleged were in fact "raves" as defined by the legislation. The Metropolitan police published this in local media to tarnish his reputation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 14-14

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 563,564

 

49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 14-14

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 563,564

--

563,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 02:14:25 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for mention on 4th April 2016 at Wood Green Crown Court

Simon

I think it is better if I speak to you tomorrow face to face as may be misinterpreting the tactical approach that I am taking. The email that I drafted and sent to you for approval has not been sent to the Respondent just to the Public Defender.

I will see you on Friday at 11am in my office.

Josephine

On 02 March 2016 at 13:49 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Thank you for taking your time to do this, however I do have a question to ask, in the beginning of the court case leading up to the trial, I believed the justice system would prove my innocents, but due to the District Judge finding me guilty under the applicants case of organising illegal raves, the is said to have caused alarm harm or distress to one or more over house hold, To which the barrister representing me at the time, having that of the same opinion about the law as myself, “that it should not be illegal if there is no law or regulations to make it illegal or none that have been breached.”

I was not an organiser as trespass was not present neither have, I broke any conditions in the licensing act 2003. After the trial, I went home and applied for the appeal stage as I knew that this was wrong, this also made me look into the case even further to notice the time stamps and so many over errors, My question to you is, “now that the errors have been pointed out, how can we ask the police for more information such as the missing cat and hope that they do not fabricate more evidence making it so condemning that I would never stand a fair trial under article six.

(I am scared to ask for more evidence that should prove my innocents, as I believe the police will make it up, as we can prove happened all ready.) Please can you explain this to me, before I agree for you to send any think?

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 10:11, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Simon

Can you please review the initial response to the Respondent's application to adduce the hearsay evidence. I have included some of the points that you take issue with. A full skeleton legal argument will be served addressing all points you wish raised following our meeting on Friday morning at 11am subject to you confirming that you can attend. I need a response to the email which I am proposing on sending over to the court so that our objection to the hearsay evidence is noted.

Please confirm in writing your specific instructions with regards to the email below and confirm your authorisation for me to send it, in addition to any amendments that you wish me to consider including. I need a response to this before 3pm today, 2nd March 2016 please.

Regards

Josephine

Dear Sir or Madam

We refer to the hearsay application dated 23rd February 2016, received in the DX at our office 1st March 2016.

We require all witnesses to attend as listed on page 5 - 66 to be cross examined.

We confirm that we object to the Respondent's application to adduce hearsay evidence contained in the CRIMINT reports pages 79 - 92, 109 - 121 of the Respondent bundles. CRIMINT - YERT00376728 - Aaron King is required to attend to be cross examined CRIMINT -YERT00376227 - PC Chandler is required to attend to be cross examined CRIMINT - YERT00376229 - PC Edgoose is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant also specifically requests disclosure of police checks made on the vehicle he was driving and the vehicle he was alleged to have been driving bumper to bumper to. The

564,

Appellant also requests specific confirmation in a statement from PC Edgoose the following: (a) why he was not arrested for any offences in relation to his driving as PC Edgoose makes specific reference to the driver he was following confirming that the Appellant had been driving in the same manner from YR. (b) Summons for any road traffic violations (c) CADS / communications concerning name checks CRIMINT -YERT00376024 - PS Skinner is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant seeks specific disclosure as to the vehicle checks carried out on PE52 UHW. Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in this vehicle in the past? Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in company with Elliot Laidler in the past? Why was the music system not seized? Full names of all other persons inside the premises to confirm the number of people present. Results of the search of the premises, in addition to the keys found at the premises. Whether any other persons were arrested, if so what for? Disclosure of CADS / statements / complaints regarding anti-social behaviour? Whether any allegations of criminal damage / commercial burglary were made? What enquiries were made from the owners of the building as to the premises being occupied?

CRIS 1914855/14 - Statements from officers who attended the premises, confirming from whom the sound system was seized? Whether Simon Cordell was present at the event? Why was the sound system restored?

CRIMINT - YERT00374531 - PC Shinnick is required to attend to be cross examined. CAD's re 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 Progress Way.

The Appellant seeks full disclosure of all CADs linked to this CAD. The Intelligence report suggests that Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin set up and organised this rave. The Appellant requests a full detailed statement report as to the basis of this comment. The Appellant disputes ever being inside Progress Way premises on 7th June 2014. The Appellant disputes supplying equipment at this location. The Appellant disputes that he set up or organised this event. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all intelligence, names etc of persons present at this event. The Appellant specifically requests disclosure of all CADs from 6th June 2014 onwards in correct chronological, timed and dated order. The Appellant also seeks confirmation as to whether the complaints made with regards to anti­social behaviour were made in respect of Progress Way or Crown Road, the premises of which was subject to numerous complaints in the past by local residents etc. The Appellant also seeks specifically disclosure from the Public Order Unit whether they were provided with the names of other persons present, vehicles etc and whether the named persons have been known in the past for organising similar events.

The Appellant takes issue with the CADs in respect of this event and the manner in which they have been presented. The Appellant is raising issues with the timings of the CAD's and he instructs us to specifically challenge the accuracy and to question whether the CAD system was defective or manipulated by the Respondent's employees.

The Appellant also notes from the CAD's served that there are CAD's explicitly linked from 1st June 2014 and 2nd June 2014. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all CAD's as he contests that they will reveal who the organiser of this event on 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 was. The Appellant will state that he was not present on any occasion inside the premises of Progress Way and he will state that the Respondent is in possession of information which would reveal the real identity of the organisers of this event. The Appellant believes that the redacted CAD's are concealing the locations and complainants as the complainant's may be on duty police officers making complaints to bolster an application for an ASBO against the Appellant. The Appellant also believes that the CAD's may specifically be in relation to Crown Road, Southbury Road a distance of approximately one mile from Progress Way.

The Appellant will state that the officers who made the entries, reports etc should be called to give evidence as by not doing so it is disproportionate towards him as he is trying to establish a legitimate entertainment company. The Appellant alleges that the Respondent is deliberately exaggerating his involvement in the events cited in the ASBO application.

An ASBO against his name will significantly tarnish his ability to conduct legitimate business. The Appellant also takes issue with the misleading press releases in relation to the original imposition of the ASBO in the Magistrates Court. The Appellant will state that the District Judge in delivering her judgement could not find any form of illegality, or that the events alleged were in fact "raves" as defined by the legislation. The Metropolitan police published this in local media to tarnish his reputation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 14-19

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 565,566,567

 

 

50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell’s for mention 02-03-2016 14-19

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 565,566,567

--

565,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 02:19:15 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for mention on 4th April 2016 at Wood Green Crown Court

See you then.

Thanks

Simon. C

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 14:14, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroNandco.com> wrote:

Simon

I think it is better if I speak to you tomorrow face to face as may be misinterpreting the tactical approach that I am taking.

The email that I drafted and sent to you for approval has not been sent to the Respondent just to the Public Defender.

I will see you on Friday at 11am in my office.

Josephine

On 02 March 2016 at 13:49 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Thank you for taking your time to do this, however I do have a question to ask, in the beginning of the court case leading up to the trial, I believed that the justice system would prove my innocents, but due to the District Judge finding me guilty under the applicants case of organising illegal raves, that is said to have caused alarm harm or distress to one or more over house hold, To which the barrister representing me at the time, having that of the same opinion about the law as myself, “that it should not be illegal if there is no law or regulations to make it illegal or none that have been breached.”

I was not an organiser as trespass was not present neither have, I broke any conditions in the licensing act 2003. After the trial, I went home and applied for the appeal stage as I knew that this was wrong, this also made me look into the case even further to notice the time stamps and so many over errors, My question to you is, “now that the errors have been pointed out, how can we ask the police for more information such as the missing cads and hope that they do not fabricate more evidence making it so condemning that I would never stand a fair trial under article six.

(I am scared to ask for more evidence that should prove my innocents, as I believe the police will make it up, as we can prove happened all ready.)

Please can you explain this to me, before I agree for you to send any think?

On Wednesday, 2 March 2016, 10:11, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Simon

Can you please review the initial response to the Respondent's application to adduce the hearsay evidence. I have included some of the points that you take issue with. A full skeleton legal argument will be served addressing all points you wish raised following our meeting on Friday morning at 11am subject to you confirming that you can attend. I need a response to the email which I am proposing on sending over to the court so that our objection to the hearsay evidence is noted.

Please confirm in writing your specific instructions with regards to the email below and confirm your authorisation for me to send it, in addition to any amendments that you wish me to consider including. I need a response to this before 3pm today, 2nd March 2016 please.

Regards

Josephine

Dear Sir or Madam

We refer to the hearsay application dated 23rd February 2016, received in the DX at our office 1st March 2016.

We require all witnesses to attend as listed on page 5 - 66 to be cross examined.

We confirm that we object to the Respondent's application to adduce hearsay evidence contained in the CRIMINT reports pages 79 - 92, 109 - 121 of the

566,

Respondent bundles.

CRIMINT - YERT00376728 - Aaron King is required to attend to be cross examined

CRIMINT -YERT00376227 - PC Chandler is required to attend to be cross examined

CRIMINT - YERT00376229 - PC Edgoose is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant also specifically requests disclosure of police checks made on the vehicle he was driving and the vehicle he was alleged to have been driving bumper to bumper to. The Appellant also requests specific confirmation in a statement from PC Edgoose the following: (a) why he was not arrested for any offences in relation to his driving as PC Edgoose makes specific reference to the driver he was following confirming that the Appellant had been driving in the same manner from YR. (b) Summons for any road traffic violations (c) CADS / communications concerning name checks

CRIMINT -YERT00376024 - PS Skinner is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant seeks specific disclosure as to the vehicle checks carried out on PE52 UHW. Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in this vehicle in the past? Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in company with Elliot Laidler in the past? Why was the music system not seized? Full names of all other persons inside the premises to confirm the number of people present.

Results of the search of the premises, in addition to the keys found at the premises. Whether any other persons were arrested, if so what for? Disclosure of CADS / statements / complaints regarding anti-social behaviour? Whether any allegations of criminal damage / commercial burglary were made? What enquiries were made from the owners of the building as to the premises being occupied? CRIS 1914855/14 - Statements from officers who attended the premises, confirming from whom the sound system was seized? Whether Simon Cordell was present at the event? Why was the sound system restored?

CRIMINT - YERT00374531 - PC Shinnick is required to attend to be cross examined.

CAD's re 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 Progress Way.

The Appellant seeks full disclosure of all CADs linked to this CAD. The Intelligence report suggests that Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin set up and organised this rave. The Appellant requests a full detailed statement report as to the basis of this comment. The Appellant disputes ever being inside Progress Way premises on 7th June 2014. The Appellant disputes supplying equipment at this location. The Appellant disputes that he set up or organised this event. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all intelligence, names etc of persons present at this event. The Appellant specifically requests disclosure of all CADs from 6th June 2014 onwards in correct chronological, timed and dated order. The Appellant also seeks confirmation as to whether the complaints made with regards to anti- social behaviour were made in respect of Progress Way or Crown Road, the premises of which was subject to numerous complaints in the past by local residents etc. The Appellant also seeks specifically disclosure from the Public Order Unit whether they were provided with the names of other persons present, vehicles etc and whether the named persons have been known in the past for organising similar events.

The Appellant takes issue with the CADs in respect of this event and the manner in which they have been presented. The Appellant is raising issues with the timings of the CAD's and he instructs us to specifically challenge the accuracy and to question whether the CAD system was defective or manipulated by the Respondent's employees.

The Appellant also notes from the CAD's served that there are CAD's explicitly linked from 1st June 2014 and 2nd June 2014. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all CAD's as he contests that they will reveal who the organiser of this event on 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 was. The Appellant will state that he was not present on any occasion inside the premises of Progress Way and he will state that the Respondent is in possession of information which would reveal the real identity of the organisers of this event. The Appellant believes that the redacted CAD's are concealing the locations and complainants as the complainant's may be on duty police officers making complaints to bolster an application for an ASBO against the Appellant. The Appellant also believes that the CAD's may specifically be in relation to Crown Road, Southbury Road a distance of approximately one mile from Progress Way.

567,

The Appellant will state that the officers who made the entries, reports etc should be called to give evidence as by not doing so it is disproportionate towards him as he is trying to establish a legitimate entertainment company. The Appellant alleges that the Respondent is deliberately exaggerating his involvement in the events cited in the ASBO application. An ASBO against his name will significantly tarnish his ability to conduct legitimate business. The Appellant also takes issue with the misleading press releases in relation to the original imposition of the ASBO in the Magistrates Court. The Appellant will state that the District Judge in delivering her judgement could not find any form of illegality, or that the events alleged were in fact "raves" as defined by the legislation. The Metropolitan police published this in local media to tarnish his reputation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell vs. for mention 02-03-2016 10-11

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 568,569

 

51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell vs. for mention 02-03-2016 10-11

02/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 568,569

--

568,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 02/03/2016 10:11:01 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com;

Andrew.Morris@legalaid.gsi.gov.uk

Subject: Simon Cordell v. The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for mention on 4th April 2016 at Wood Green Crown Court

Simon

Can you please review the initial response to the Respondent's application to adduce the hearsay evidence. I have included some of the points that you take issue with. A full skeleton legal argument will be served addressing all points you wish raised following our meeting on Friday morning at 11am subject to you confirming that you can attend. I need a response to the email which I am proposing on sending over to the court so that our objection to the hearsay evidence is noted.

Please confirm in writing your specific instructions with regards to the email below and confirm your authorisation for me to send it, in addition to any amendments that you wish me to consider including. I need a response to this before 3pm today, 2nd March 2016 please.

Regards

Josephine

Dear Sir or Madam

We refer to the hearsay application dated 23rd February 2016, received in the DX at our office 1st March 2016.

We require all witnesses to attend as listed on page 5 - 66 to be cross examined.

We confirm that we object to the Respondent's application to adduce hearsay evidence contained in the CRIMINT reports pages 79 - 92, 109 - 121 of the Respondent bundles.

CRIMINT - YERT00376728 - Aaron King is required to attend to be cross examined CRIMINT -YERT00376227 - PC Chandler is required to attend to be cross examined

CRIMINT - YERT00376229 - PC Edgoose is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant also specifically requests disclosure of police checks made on the vehicle he was driving and the vehicle he was alleged to have been driving bumper to bumper to. The Appellant also requests specific confirmation in a statement from PC Edgoose the following: (a) why he was not arrested for any offences in relation to his driving as PC Edgoose makes specific reference to the driver he was following confirming that the Appellant had been driving in the same manner from YR. (b) Summons for any road traffic violations (c) CADS / communications concerning name checks

CRIMINT -YERT00376024 - PS Skinner is required to attend to be cross examined. The Appellant seeks specific disclosure as to the vehicle checks carried out on PE52 UHW. Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in this vehicle in the past? Whether Simon Cordell was ever stopped in company with Elliot Laidler in the past? Why was the music system not seized? Full names of all other persons inside the premises to confirm the number of people present. Results of the search of the premises, in addition to the keys found at the premises. Whether any other persons were arrested, if so what for? Disclosure of CADS / statements / complaints regarding anti-social behaviour? Whether any allegations of criminal damage / commercial burglary were made? What enquiries were made from the owners of the building as to the premises being occupied?

CRIS 1914855/14 - Statements from officers who attended the premises, confirming from whom the sound system was seized?

569,

Whether Simon Cordell was present at the event? Why was the sound system restored?

CRIMINT - YERT00374531 - PC Shinnick is required to attend to be cross examined.

CAD's re 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 Progress Way.

The Appellant seeks full disclosure of all CADs linked to this CAD. The Intelligence report suggests that Simon Cordell and Tyrone Benjamin set up and organised this rave. The Appellant requests a full detailed statement report as to the basis of this comment. The Appellant disputes ever being inside Progress Way premises on 7th June 2014. The Appellant disputes supplying equipment at this location. The Appellant disputes that he set up or organised this event. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all intelligence, names etc of persons present at this event. The Appellant specifically requests disclosure of all CADs from 6th June 2014 onwards in correct chronological, timed and dated order. The Appellant also seeks confirmation as to whether the complaints made with regards to anti- social behaviour were made in respect of Progress Way or Crown Road, the premises of which was subject to numerous complaints in the past by local residents etc. The Appellant also seeks specifically disclosure from the Public Order Unit whether they were provided with the names of other persons present, vehicles etc and whether the named persons have been known in the past for organising similar events.

The Appellant takes issue with the CADs in respect of this event and the manner in which they have been presented. The Appellant is raising issues with the timings of the CAD's and he instructs us to specifically challenge the accuracy and to question whether the CAD system was defective or manipulated by the Respondent's employees.

The Appellant also notes from the CAD's served that there are CAD's explicitly linked from 1st June 2014 and 2nd June 2014. The Appellant seeks disclosure of all CAD's as he contests that they will reveal who the organiser of this event on 6th, 7th and 8th June 2014 was. The Appellant will state that he was not present on any occasion inside the premises of Progress Way and he will state that the Respondent is in possession of information which would reveal the real identity of the organisers of this event. The Appellant believes that the redacted CAD's are concealing the locations and complainants as the complainant's may be on duty police officers making complaints to bolster an application for an ASBO against the Appellant. The Appellant also believes that the CAD's may specifically be in relation to Crown Road, Southbury Road a distance of approximately one mile from Progress Way.

The Appellant will state that the officers who made the entries, reports etc should be called to give evidence as by not doing so it is disproportionate towards him as he is trying to establish a legitimate entertainment company. The Appellant alleges that the Respondent is deliberately exaggerating his involvement in the events cited in the ASBO application. An ASBO against his name will significantly tarnish his ability to conduct legitimate business. The Appellant also takes issue with the misleading press releases in relation to the original imposition of the ASBO in the Magistrates Court. The Appellant will state that the District Judge in delivering her judgement could not find any form of illegality, or that the events alleged were in fact "raves" as defined by the legislation. The Metropolitan police published this in local media to tarnish his reputation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2

Asbo -Re Meeting 0403t your office 03-03-2016 14-44

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 570

 

52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2

Asbo -Re Meeting 0403t your office 03-03-2016 14-44

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 570

--

570,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time:03/03/2016 02:44:00 PM

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Subject: Re: Meeting 04/03/2016 at your office

Josie

Really sorry to do this at short notice but the meeting that was set for 04/03/2016 at 11am can this be put off to early next week as I got no way to get there I just called mum and she got to go hospital tomorrow and I was hoping she would take me in her car.

Can you let me know please.

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

53. 1. 2

Asbo Re Meeting 04032t your office 03-03-2016 15-09

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 571

 

53.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

53. 1. 2

Asbo Re Meeting 04032t your office 03-03-2016 15-09

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 571

--

571,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com>

Sent time: 03/03/2016 03:08:42 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Meeting 04/03/2016 at your office

Simon

That is okay.

Next week Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday I am tied up with legal visit to various prisons, also on Thursday morning.

I am available either Saturday or Sunday of this weekend but again subject to call outs. I would prefer to get your statement and specific instructions on HHJ Pawlaks' letter. I want to schedule a meeting between you and the Public Defender preferably Tuesday afternoon.

I await hearing from you but tomorrow morning's meeting has been cancelled at your request.

Josephine

On 03 March 2016 at 14:44 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Josie

Really sorry to do this at short notice but the meeting that was set for 04/03/2016 at 11am can this be put off to early next week as I got no way to get there I just called mum and she got to go hospital tomorrow and I was hoping she would take me in her car.

Can you let me know please.

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

 

54.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2

Asbo Re Meeting 04032t your office 03-03-2016 15-36

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 572

 

54.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2

Asbo Re Meeting 04032t your office 03-03-2016 15-36

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 572

--

572,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 03/03/2016 03:35:34 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Subject: Re: Meeting 04/03/2016 at your office

Josie

Thank you so much and sorry for the short notice Sunday would be fine just let me know what time.

Simon

On Thursday, 3 March 2016, 15:08, Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarrollandco.com> wrote:

Simon That is okay.

Next week Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday I am tied up with legal visit to various prisons, also on Thursday morning.

I am available either Saturday or Sunday of this weekend but again subject to call outs. I would prefer to get your statement and specific instructions on HHJ Pawlaks' letter. I want to schedule a meeting between you and the Public Defender preferably Tuesday afternoon.

I await hearing from you but tomorrow morning's meeting has been cancelled at your request.

Josephine

On 03 March 2016 at 14:44 Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Josie

Really sorry to do this at short notice but the meeting that was set for 04/03/2016 at 11am can this be put off to early next week as I got no way to get there I just called mum and she got to go hospital tomorrow and I was hoping she would take me in her car.

Can you let me know please.

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

 

55.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-03-2016 11-48

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 573,574

 

 

55.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-03-2016 11-48

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 573,574

--

573,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/03/2016 11:48:12 AM

To: Josephine Ward <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Please reply

I have a few questions I have to ask off you that have built up and I know that I have been asking since the start of my court case, that I do feel have not been addressed correctly? So please can you answer each question individually and bulletined in the same format, so I can understand my case, with your legal guidance.

· Why have I not ever been arrested, for some think that clearly states that it is illegal?

· Is it wrong for my Asbo case to be sitting in its civil capacity at court when it states in the applicant’s case I am being accused of the organisation of illegal raves with no previous convictions?

· Why did the distract Jude in the magistrates court say to me which can be checked in the court transcripts which has been provided to you that private air and open air are the same in turn stating that it is illegal to listen to music without licensing to which myself and barrister clearly state otherwise? And am I Wong in believing that the district Jude was wrong in stating this to be a true fact of law?

· I ask you my solicitor Josephine ward to check my pnc recorded provided within the applicants bundle to see that off me not having any similar convictions under the criminal justice act 1998 before the incident(s) dates that I am being accused of relating to the organisation of illegal raves and to confirm this in a company headed letter with the rest of the answers regarding your guidance in the points of law to each specific questions contained within this letter addressed to yourself who is my acting solicitor representing me in the ongoing of the applicants case towards an ASBO application? I ask of you to do this before our next needed meeting that has been agreed.

· I ask you for your guidance in the question of “How can I get the blame for being the company named ever decibel matters, when I have provided a company head letter with the company number listed at company house, off the director that I have managed to acquire due to the ongoing Asbo application? To which explains that I was not involved in the date in question also that being of the court transcripts stating of office Pc Elsmore that he has done no further investigation in to the allegations he has accused myself off on the dates relating to mill marsh lane in reference to every decibel matters?

· Please can you reply to this question, How can I stand a fair trial in 2016 with my up and coming appeal date, with the evidence the applicant rests it case on being of backward time stamps relating to the incident numbers and previous correspondents.? To which I would like you to confirm is more than likely to be in error form the list of correspondents I have provided you with so far relating to the management of national standards for incident recording NSIR and collection and recording of police procedure (Command and Control) and Emergency services command and control?

· I ask you my acting solicitor the question of “Why has the applicant not removed cases that when the Asbo application was in development was clearly added incorrectly due to the other whelming fact that I Mr Simon Cordell clearly could have not committed such offence as dated the 19th August 2013, which does in fact relate to cad 10635 19th July 2014 page 294 to which a member of the public made a emergency 999 call in relation to “all white males and females entering a premises, to which the cad continues to explain that members of the met police attended the location to contain the people who were in fact occupiers of the Land within their home, also listing all name and vehicles of the occupiers contained in the building to which I am none of the listed?

· My next question I require you to help give your legal guidance in is “What was the need for the applicant to updated their incident reports also named as (information Reports) at such a later date(s) after the information had already been created after the event date, in turn creating such lengthy time periods between the initial event date contained within the national police computer to the entry of the police statements intelligence, Is that incorrect in police procedure?

· I ask you to take reference to all blocked out att locations that are relating to other house parties that was within a two minute distance from the location in question On the 6th 7th 8th June 2014, otherwise known and named as the old man building adjourned to Crown Road, to which officer Pc Elsmore states at trial under oath that he was sure that there was no other house party's on the same date that are contained within the applicants bundle and that all incident that are contained relate to (progress way on the 7th June 2014) The officer's statement can be checked by the transcripts of the day of my trial that has been provided to yourself of him clearly stating to the district Jude to obtain a guilty plea against my self-inaccuracies when being questioned by the representing barrister in relation to the statement that I just quoted. Please can you confirm that I am correct in stating this?

· Can you also reply to the question of why has the applicant not reduced the evidence that it submitted in the first bundle that is of the issue relating to blocked out locations of cads otherwise known as incident numbers that I have been accused of that members of the Met police have in development of the application inputted and submitted incorrectly that do in fact relate to wide spread geological location off the incidents that occurred on the same date of the incident I am being wrongfully accused of and that being of the developers of the application blocking out the att locations and not blocking out the grid reference numbers making it possible to prove my innocents gratefully, also errors like land marks such as A&J cars which is a cab station across the road from crown road not the private house party that I am being questioned for. I would not have been able to prove the truth. My question to you in regard to this issue can I stand a fair trial with the applicant not addressing the issues as we highlighted and raise them?

· The definition of the legal term of (Raves) defines outdoor (in open space) to which none of the applicant’s cases are in fact outdoors (in open space). As defined by section 63 what does also state that trespass must be present inside a premise of residence to which I have never been accused off. I ask you is this correct in law.

574,

· I ask you to reply to the question of is it true to believe in accordance of the united kingdom laws and regulations that house party(s) that are in a places of residence are not illegal to hold, when holding such private events in accordance of the licensing act 2003 to which states in such incidents unless proof of profit has being made when providing entertainment it shall not be regulated under the licensing act 2003 to which the applicant does not mention money?

· In reference to the ADR bill relating to the carriage of dangerous goods, is it against the law to carry nitro's oxide or any co2 gas when having the correct signage on the vehicle transporting the cylinders?

· I ask is it against the law for an Asbo application to made when there is a conflict of work under the crime and disorder act 1998, in such incidents were the defendant has been working for the Local council authority who the police have asked to be in support of the application?

· Has Adrian coombs contacted you or do you have a date in mind that you will have the notes that I have asked of you to request of him?

· my questions is that of their being so many inconsistencies contained within the police statements, by recognising so may irregularities that I know I have not had the right to challenge I feel the need to defend myself against such illegal statements made by police officers the same as I would if made by a member of the public for allegations such as (organising illegal raves) So this brought me to the basics of law civil and criminal, I learnt and believe in the understanding of criminal cases were some think is alleged to be illegal the correct Police procedure is that a crime will be created under the crime and disorder act 1998 by way of a victim or witness making a report then members of the police will be allocated to the incident and start investigations depending on the matter of relevance to the initial report to the resources available at the time. The investigations may lead to an arrest what will lead the detainee to his or her statuary legal rights. In the early 1980's the police did have the power to take cases to court without the decision of without the decision of any other governing body, but now in 2016 the burden relays solely on the cps who are in calibration with Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who is independent but subject to the superintendence of the Attorney General that is accountable to members of Parliament that do work for the prosecution services. If charged any person’s rights are gained under section 24 and 25 which does relate to the rights of any person charged and the minimum standards of criminal procedure. But my case seems to sit in its civil capacity at court with none of the above regulations and my rights being carried out in accordance of the United Kingdom laws; please can you explain this to me?

Thank you, Josephine Simon.

 

 

 

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-03-2016 15-40

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 575,576

 

56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-03-2016 15-40

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 575,576

--

575,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/03/2016 03:40:19 PM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephmewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Please reply

I would like you to deal with the issues I have raised before we go any further as I feel it is un fair for you not to address them as they are to with my case and I have asked the same questions to yourself time and time again will you do this for me p[lease in a headed company l please reply.

On Tuesday, 8 March 2016, 14:23, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

Please confirm you can attend my office this Thursday at 6pm so that I can deal with the relevant aspects of your appeal and the questions raised by HHJ Pawlak.

Many thanks Josephine

On 8 Mar 2016 11:48, "Rewired " <re wired@vmail.com> wrote:

I have a few questions I have to ask off you that have built up and I know that I have been asking since the start of my court case, that I do feel have not been addressed correctly? So please can you answer each question individually and bulletined in the same format, so I can understand my case, with your legal guidance.

· Why have I not ever been arrested, for some think that clearly states that it is illegal?

· Is it wrong for my Asbo case to be sitting in its civil capacity at court when it states in the applicant’s case I am being accused of the organisation of illegal raves with no previous convictions?

· Why did the distract Jude in the magistrates court say to me which can be checked in the court transcripts which has been provided to you that private air and open air are the same in turn stating that it is illegal to listen to music without licensing to which myself and barrister clearly state otherwise? And am I Wong in believing that the district Jude was wrong in stating this to be a true fact of law?

· I ask you my solicitor Josephine ward to check my PNC recorded provided within the applicants bundle to see that off me not having any similar convictions under the criminal justice act 1998 before the incident(s) dates that I am being accused of relating to the organisation of illegal raves and to confirm this in a company headed letter with the rest of the answers regarding your guidance in the points of law to each specific questions contained within this letter addressed to yourself who is my acting solicitor representing me in the ongoing of the applicants case towards an ASBO application? I ask of you to do this before our next needed meeting that has been agreed.

· I ask you for your guidance in the question of “How can I get the blame for being the company named ever decibel matters, when I have provided a company head letter with the company number listed at company house, off the director that I have managed to acquire due to the ongoing Asbo application? To which explains that I was not involved in the date in question also that being of the court transcripts stating of office Pc Elsmore that he has done no further investigation in to the allegations he has accused myself off on the dates relating to mill marsh lane in reference to every decibel matters?

· Please can you reply to this question, How can I stand a fair trial in 2016 with my up and coming appeal date, with the evidence the applicant rests it case on being of backward time stamps relating to the incident numbers and previous correspondents.? To which I would like you to confirm is more than likely to be in error form the list of correspondents I have provided you with so far relating to the management of national standards for incident recording NSIR and collection and recording of police procedure (Command and Control) and Emergency services command and control?

· I ask you my acting solicitor the question of “Why has the applicant not removed cases that when the Asbo application was in development was clearly added incorrectly due to the other whelming fact that I Mr Simon Cordell clearly could have not committed such offence as dated the 19th August 2013, which does in fact relate to cad 10635 19th July 2014 page 294 to which a member of the public made an emergency 999 call in relation to “all white males and females entering a premises, to which the cad continues to explain that members of the met police attended the location to contain the people who were in fact occupiers of the Land within their home, also listing all name and vehicles of the occupiers contained in the building to which I am none of the listed?

· My next question I require you to help give your legal guidance in is “What was the need for the applicant to updated their incident reports also named as (information Reports) at such a later date(s) after the information had already been created after the event date, in turn creating such lengthy time periods between the initial event date contained within the national police computer to the entry of the police statements intelligence, Is that incorrect in police procedure?

· I ask you to take reference to all blocked out ATT, locations that are relating to other house parties that was within a two minute distance from the location in question On the 6th 7th 8th June 2014, otherwise known and named as the old man building adjourned to Crown Road, to which officer Pc Elsmore states at trial under oath that he was sure that there was no other house party's on the same date that are contained within the applicants bundle and that all incident that are contained relate

576,

to (progress way on the 7th June 2014) The officer's statement can be checked by the transcripts of the day of my trial that has been provided to yourself of him clearly stating to the district Jude to obtain a guilty plea against my self-inaccuracies when being questioned by the representing barrister in relation to the statement that I just quoted. Please can you confirm that I am correct in stating this?

• Can you also reply to the question of why has the applicant not reduced the evidence that it submitted in the first bundle that is of the issue relating to blocked out locations of cads otherwise known as incident numbers that I have been accused of that members of the Met police have in development of the application inputted and submitted incorrectly that do in fact relate to wide spread geological location off the incidents that occurred on the same date of the incident I am being wrongfully accused of and that being of the developers of the application blocking out the ATT, locations and not blocking out the grid reference numbers making it possible to prove my innocents gratefully, also errors like land marks such as A&J cars which is a cab station across the road from crown road not the private house party that I am being questioned for. I would not have been able to prove the truth. My question to you in regard to this issue can I stand a fair trial with the applicant not addressing the issues as we highlighted and raise them?

• The definition of the legal term of (Raves) defines outdoor (in open space) to which none of the applicant’s cases are in fact outdoors (in open space). As defined by section 63 what does also state that trespass must be present inside a premise of residence to which I have never been accused off. I ask you is this correct in law.

· I ask you to reply to the question of is it true to believe in accordance of the united kingdom laws and regulations that house party(s) that are in a places of residence are not illegal to hold, when holding such private events in accordance of the licensing act 2003 to which states in such incidents unless proof of profit has being made when providing entertainment it shall not be regulated under the licensing act 2003 to which the applicant does not mention money?

· In reference to the ADR bill relating to the carriage of dangerous goods, is it against the law to carry nitro's oxide or any co2 gas when having the correct signage on the vehicle transporting the cylinders?

· I ask is it against the law for an Asbo application to made when there is a conflict of work under the crime and disorder act 1998, in such incidents were the defendant has been working for the Local council authority who the police have asked to be in support of the application?

· Has Adrian coombs contacted you or do you have a date in mind that you will have the notes that I have asked of you to request of him?

· my questions is that of their being so many inconsistencies contained within the police statements, by recognising so may irregularities that I know I have not had the right to challenge I feel the need to defend myself against such illegal statements made by police officers the same as I would if made by a member of the public for allegations such as (organising illegal raves) So this brought me to the basics of law civil and criminal, I learnt and believe in the understanding of criminal cases were some think is alleged to be illegal the correct Police procedure is that a crime will be created under the crime and disorder act 1998 by way of a victim or witness making a report then members of the police will be allocated to the incident and start investigations depending on the matter of relevance to the initial report to the resources available at the time. The investigations may lead to an arrest what will lead the detainee to his or her statuary legal rights. In the early 1980's the police did have the power to take cases to court without the decision of without the decision of any other governing body, but now in 2016 the burden relays solely on the cps who are in calibration with Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who is independent but subject to the superintendence of the Attorney General that is accountable to members of Parliament that do work for the prosecution services. If charged any person’s rights are gained under section 24 and 25 which does relate to the rights of any person charged and the minimum standards of criminal procedure. But my case seems to sit in its civil capacity at court with none of the above regulations and my rights being carried out in accordance of the United Kingdom laws; please can you explain this to me?

Thank you, Josephine Simon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie -08-03-2016 15-51

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 577,578

 

57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie -08-03-2016 15-51

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 577,578

--

577,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/03/2016 03:51:23 PM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephmewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Please reply

If you will not reply to my questions, I will be forced to go to the legal omblishman and legal aid department as well as seek legal advice in the public domain to weather, you should or not.

I have asked you the same questions over and over again and you steer away from them making me feel as if you are holding me hostage to laws that you no should never be imposed upon myself as I clearly keep pointing out the points of law and the barrister clearly agrees with me in the submissions as does anyone else I ask for their legal opinion please can you reply back to my questions in the emails I have sent about my case before we go any further I have been locked in my house for two years telling you the same think asking the same questions and still am not any of the wiser.

On Tuesday, 8 March 2016, 15:40, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I would like you to deal with the issues I have raised before we go any further as I feel it is un fair for you not to address them as they are to do with my case and I have asked the same questions to yourself time and time again will you do this for me p[lease in a headed company letter. please reply.

On Tuesday, 8 March 2016, 14:23, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

Please confirm you can attend my office this Thursday at 6pm so that I can deal with the relevant aspects of your appeal and the questions raised by HHJ Pawlak.

Many thanks Josephine

On 8 Mar 2016 11:48, "Rewired " <re wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I have a few questions I have to ask off you that have built up and I know that I have been asking since the start of my court case, that I do feel have not been addressed correctly? So please can you answer each question individually and bulletined in the same format, so I can understand my case, with your legal guidance.

· Why have I not ever been arrested, for some think that clearly states that it is illegal?

· Is it wrong for my Asbo case to be sitting in its civil capacity at court when it states in the applicant’s case I am being accused of the organisation of illegal raves with no previous convictions?

· Why did the distract Jude in the magistrates court say to me which can be checked in the court transcripts which has been provided to you that private air and open air are the same in turn stating that it is illegal to listen to music without licensing to which myself and barrister clearly state otherwise? And am I Wong in believing that the district Jude was wrong in stating this to be a true fact of law?

· I ask you my solicitor Josephine ward to check my PNC recorded provided within the applicants bundle to see that off me not having any similar convictions under the criminal justice act 1998 before the incident(s) dates that I am being accused of relating to the organisation of illegal raves and to confirm this in a company headed letter with the rest of the answers regarding your guidance in the points of law to each specific questions contained within this letter addressed to yourself who is my acting solicitor representing me in the ongoing of the applicants case towards an ASBO application? I ask of you to do this before our next needed meeting that has been agreed.

· I ask you for your guidance in the question of “How can I get the blame for being the company named ever decibel matters, when I have provided a company head letter with the company number listed at company house, off the director that I have managed to acquire due to the ongoing Asbo application? To which explains that I was not involved in the date in question also that being of the court transcripts stating of office Pc Elsmore that he has done no further investigation in to the allegations he has accused myself off on the dates relating to mill marsh lane in reference to every decibel matters?

· Please can you reply to this question, How can I stand a fair trial in 2016 with my up and coming appeal date, with the evidence the applicant rests it case on being of backward time stamps relating to the incident numbers and previous correspondents.? To which I would like you to confirm is more than likely to be in error form the list of correspondents I have provided you with so far relating to the management of national standards for incident recording NSIR and collection and recording of police procedure (Command and Control) and Emergency services command and control?

· I ask you my acting solicitor the question of “Why has the applicant not removed cases that when the Asbo application was in development was clearly added incorrectly due to the other whelming fact that I Mr Simon Cordell clearly could have not committed such offence as dated the 19th August 2013, which does in fact relate to cad

578,

10635 19th July 2014 page 294 to which a member of the public made a emergency 999 call in relation to “all white males and females entering a premises, to which the cad continues to explain that members of the met police attended the location to contain the people who were in fact occupiers of the Land within their home, also listing all name and vehicles of the occupiers contained in the building to which I am none of the listed?

• My next question I require you to help give your legal guidance in is “What was the need for the applicant to updated their incident reports also named as (information Reports) at such a later date(s) after the information had already been created after the event date, in turn creating such lengthy time periods between the initial event date contained within the national police computer to the entry of the police statements intelligence, Is that incorrect in police procedure?

• I ask you to take reference to all blocked out ATT, locations that are relating to other house parties that was within a two minute distance from the location in question On the 6th 7th 8th June 2014, otherwise known and named as the old man building adjourned to Crown Road, to which officer Pc Elsmore states at trial under oath that he was sure that there was no other house party's on the same date that are contained within the applicants bundle and that all incident that are contained relate to (progress way on the 7th June 2014) The officer's statement can be checked by the transcripts of the day of my trial that has been provided to yourself of him clearly stating to the district Jude to obtain a guilty plea against my self-inaccuracies when being questioned by the representing barrister in relation to the statement that I just quoted. Please can you confirm that I am correct in stating this?

• Can you also reply to the question of why has the applicant not reduced the evidence that it submitted in the first bundle that is of the issue relating to blocked out locations of cads otherwise known as incident numbers that I have been accused of that members of the Met police have in development of the application inputted and submitted incorrectly that do in fact relate to wide spread geological location off the incidents that occurred on the same date of the incident I am being wrongfully accused of and that being of the developers of the application blocking out the ATT, locations and not blocking out the grid reference numbers making it possible to prove my innocents gratefully, also errors like land marks such as A&J cars which is a cab station across the road from crown road not the private house party that I am being questioned for. I would not have been able to prove the truth. My question to you in regard to this issue can I stand a fair trial with the applicant not addressing the issues as we highlighted and raise them?

• The definition of the legal term of (Raves) defines outdoor (in open space) to which none of the applicant’s cases are in fact outdoors (in open space). As defined by section 63 what does also state that trespass must be present inside a premise of residence to which I have never been accused off. I ask you is this correct in law.

• I ask you to reply to the question of is it true to believe in accordance of the united kingdom laws and regulations that house party(s) that are in a places of residence are not illegal to hold, when holding such private events in accordance of the licensing act 2003 to which states in such incidents unless proof of profit has being made when providing entertainment it shall not be regulated under the licensing act 2003 to which the applicant does not mention money?

• In reference to the ADR bill relating to the carriage of dangerous goods, is it against the law to carry nitro's oxide or any co2 gas when having the correct signage on the vehicle transporting the cylinders?

• I ask is it against the law for an Asbo application to made when there is a conflict of work under the crime and disorder act 1998, in such incidents were the defendant has been working for the Local council authority who the police have asked to be in support of the application?

• Has Adrian coombs contacted you or do you have a date in mind that you will have the notes that I have asked of you to request of him?

• my questions is that of their being so many inconsistencies contained within the police statements, by recognising so may irregularities that I know I have not had the right to challenge I feel the need to defend myself against such illegal statements made by police officers the same as I would if made by a member of the public for allegations such as (organising illegal raves) So this brought me to the basics of law civil and criminal, I learnt and believe in the understanding of criminal cases were some think is alleged to be illegal the correct Police procedure is that a crime will be created under the crime and disorder act 1998 by way of a victim or witness making a report then members of the police will be allocated to the incident and start investigations depending on the matter of relevance to the initial report to the resources available at the time. The investigations may lead to an arrest what will lead the detainee to his or her statuary legal rights. In the early 1980's the police did have the power to take cases to court without the decision of without the decision of any other governing body, but now in 2016 the burden relays solely on the cps who are in calibration with Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who is independent but subject to the superintendence of the Attorney General that is accountable to members of Parliament that do work for the prosecution services. If charged any person’s rights are gained under section 24 and 25 which does relate to the rights of any person charged and the minimum standards of criminal procedure. But my case seems to sit in its civil capacity at court with none of the above regulations and my rights being carried out in accordance of the United Kingdom laws; please can you explain this to me?

Thank you, Josephine Simon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

58.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2

Asbo Re Please reply 08-03-2016 14-23

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 579,580

 

58.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2

Asbo Re Please reply 08-03-2016 14-23

08/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 579,580

--

579,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 08/03/2016 02:23:07 PM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Please reply

Simon

Please confirm you can attend my office this Thursday at 6pm so that I can deal with the relevant aspects of your appeal and the questions raised by HHJ Pawlak.

Many thanks

Josephine

On 8 Mar 2016 11:48, "Rewired " <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I have a few questions I have to ask off you that have built up and I know that I have been asking since the start of my court case, that I do feel have not been addressed correctly? So please can you answer each question individually and bulletined in the same format, so I can understand my case, with your legal guidance.

· Why have I not ever been arrested, for some think that clearly states that it is illegal?

· Is it wrong for my Asbo case to be sitting in its civil capacity at court when it states in the applicant’s case I am being accused of the organisation of illegal raves with no previous convictions?

· Why did the distract Jude in the magistrates court say to me which can be checked in the court transcripts which has been provided to you that private air and open air are the same in turn stating that it is illegal to listen to music without licensing to which myself and barrister clearly state otherwise? And am I Wong in believing that the district Jude was wrong in stating this to be a true fact of law?

· I ask you my solicitor Josephine ward to check my PNC recorded provided within the applicants bundle to see that off me not having any similar convictions under the criminal justice act 1998 before the incident(s) dates that I am being accused of relating to the organisation of illegal raves and to confirm this in a company headed letter with the rest of the answers regarding your guidance in the points of law to each specific questions contained within this letter addressed to yourself who is my acting solicitor representing me in the ongoing of the applicants case towards an ASBO application? I ask of you to do this before our next needed meeting that has been agreed.

· I ask you for your guidance in the question of “How can I get the blame for being the company named ever decibel matters, when I have provided a company head letter with the company number listed at company house, off the director that I have managed to acquire due to the ongoing Asbo application? To which explains that I was not involved in the date in question also that being of the court transcripts stating of office Pc Elsmore that he has done no further investigation in to the allegations he has accused myself off on the dates relating to mill marsh lane in reference to every decibel matters?

· Please can you reply to this question, How can I stand a fair trial in 2016 with my up and coming appeal date, with the evidence the applicant rests it case on being of backward time stamps relating to the incident numbers and previous correspondents.? To which I would like you to confirm is more than likely to be in error form the list of correspondents I have provided you with so far relating to the management of national standards for incident recording NSIR and collection and recording of police procedure (Command and Control) and Emergency services command and control?

· I ask you my acting solicitor the question of “Why has the applicant not removed cases that when the Asbo application was in development was clearly added incorrectly due to the other whelming fact that I Mr Simon Cordell clearly could have not committed such offence as dated the 19th August 2013, which does in fact relate to cad 10635 19th July 2014 page 294 to which a member of the public made a emergency 999 call in relation to “all white males and females entering a premises, to which the cad continues to explain that members of the met police attended the location to contain the people who were in fact occupiers of the Land within their home, also listing all name and vehicles of the occupiers contained in the building to which I am none of the listed?

· My next question I require you to help give your legal guidance in is “What was the need for the applicant to updated their incident reports also named as (information Reports) at such a later date(s) after the information had already been created after the event date, in turn creating such lengthy time periods between the initial event date contained within the national police computer to the entry of the police statements intelligence, Is that incorrect in police procedure?

· I ask you to take reference to all blocked out ATT, locations that are relating to other house parties that was within a two minute distance from the location in question On the 6th 7th 8th June 2014, otherwise known and named as the old man building adjourned to Crown Road, to which officer Pc Elsmore states at trial under oath that he was sure that there was no other house party's on the same date that are contained within the applicants bundle and that all incident that are contained relate to (progress way on the 7th June 2014)

The officer's statement can be checked by the transcripts of the day of my trial that has been provided to yourself of him clearly stating to the district Jude to obtain a guilty plea against my self-inaccuracies when being questioned by the representing barrister in relation to the statement that I just quoted. Please can you confirm that I am correct in stating this?

· Can you also reply to the question of why the applicant has not reduced the evidence that it submitted in the first bundle that is of the

580,

issue relating to blocked out locations of cads otherwise known as incident numbers that I have been accused of that members of the Met police have in development of the application inputted and submitted incorrectly that do in fact relate to wide spread geological location off the incidents that occurred on the same date of the incident I am being wrongfully accused of and that being of the developers of the application blocking out the ATT, locations and not blocking out the grid reference numbers making it possible to prove my innocents gratefully, also errors like land marks such as A&J cars which is a cab station across the road from crown road not the private house party that I am being questioned for. I would not have been able to prove the truth. My question to you in regard to this issue can I stand a fair trial with the applicant not addressing the issues as we highlighted and raise them?

· The definition of the legal term of (Raves) defines outdoor (in open space) to which none of the applicant’s cases are in fact outdoors (in open space). As defined by section 63 what does also state that trespass must be present inside a premise of residence to which I have never been accused off. I ask you is this correct in law.

· I ask you to reply to the question of is it true to believe in accordance of the united kingdom laws and regulations that house party(s) that are in a places of residence are not illegal to hold, when holding such private events in accordance of the licensing act 2003 to which states in such incidents unless proof of profit has being made when providing entertainment it shall not be regulated under the licensing act 2003 to which the applicant does not mention money?

· In reference to the ADR bill relating to the carriage of dangerous goods, is it against the law to carry nitro's oxide or any co2 gas when having the correct signage on the vehicle transporting the cylinders?

· I ask is it against the law for an Asbo application to made when there is a conflict of work under the crime and disorder act 1998, in such incidents were the defendant has been working for the Local council authority who the police have asked to be in support of the application?

· Has Adrian coombs contacted you or do you have a date in mind that you will have the notes that I have asked of you to request of him?

• my questions are that of their being so many inconsistencies contained within the police statements, by recognising so may

irregularities that I know I have not had the right to challenge I feel the need to defend myself against such illegal statements made by police officers the same as I would if made by a member of the public for allegations such as (organising illegal raves) So this brought me to the basics of law civil and criminal, I learnt and believe in the understanding of criminal cases were some think is alleged to be illegal the correct Police procedure is that a crime will be created under the crime and disorder act 1998 by way of a victim or witness making a report then members of the police will be allocated to the incident and start investigations depending on the matter of relevance to the initial report to the resources available at the time. The investigations may lead to an arrest what will lead the detainee to his or her statuary legal rights. In the early 1980's the police did have the power to take cases to court without the decision of without the decision of any other governing body, but now in 2016 the burden relays solely on the cps who are in calibration with Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who is independent but subject to the superintendence of the Attorney General that is accountable to members of Parliament that do work for the prosecution services. If charged any person’s rights are gained under section 24 and 25 which does relate to the rights of any person charged and the minimum standards of criminal procedure. But my case seems to sit in its civil capacity at court with none of the above regulations and my rights being carried out in accordance of the United Kingdom laws; please can you explain this to me?

Thank you, Josephine Simon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment 10-03-2016 11-14

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 581

 

59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2

Asbo Office appointment 10-03-2016 11-14

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 581

--

581,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 10/03/2016 11:14:29 AM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Office appointment

Simon

I need to do the following on your case before Monday 14th March 2016:

· Take your instructions on the specific issues raised in HHJ Pawlak's letter

· Book a conference with the Public Defender so that the mention hearing can progress in April 2016.

I will be working on Saturday and Sunday of this weekend subject to call outs.

It is imperative that you attend so that I can progress these matters.

I am leaving Michael Carroll & Co's employment and my last day of work is 2nd June 2016 so I would very much like to have your appeal ready before then. I need your co-operation in order to do this. If you do not want to co-operate with me then I will have to list the case for mention for non-co-operation. I do not want to do this.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 12-15

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 582

 

60.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 12-15

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 582

--

582,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/03/2016 01:40:12 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Office appointment

Josie

I will be there on Sunday I did send you an email to confirm this. I will be there at 11:30 with mum.

If you need to change the time due to call outs just let mum know please as she is the one taking me as I got no other way to get there. Simon

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 13:11, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

The decision has to do with a lot of issues. It is not appropriate to get into the reasons. I am not authorised to disclose that I am leaving and have only done so, so I can sort your case before I leave.

I would appreciate if you can attend the office Sunday so that I can have your case ready for hand over on 2nd June 2016.

Thanks

Josephine

On 10 Mar 2016 12:15, "Rewired " <re wired@vmail.com> wrote:

I just see your email. I do care about you a lot. Why would you leave the office?

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 11:28, JOSEPHINE WARD <iosephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I need to do the following on your case before Monday 14th March 2016:

· Take your instructions on the specific issues raised in HHJ Pawlak's letter

· Book a conference with the Public Defender so that the mention hearing can progress in April 2016.

I will be working on Saturday and Sunday of this weekend subject to call outs.

It is imperative that you attend so that I can progress these matters.

I am leaving Michael Carroll & Co's employment and my last day of work is 2nd June 2016 so I would very much like to have your appeal ready before then. I need your co-operation in order to do this. If you do not want to co-operate with me then I will have to list the case for mention for non-co-operation. I do not want to do this.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

61.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-11

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 583

 

61.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-11

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 583

--

583,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 10/03/2016 01:11:22 PM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Office appointment

Simon

The decision has to do with a lot of issues. It is not appropriate to get into the reasons. I am not authorised to disclose that I am leaving and have only done so, so I can sort your case before I leave.

I would appreciate if you can attend the office Sunday so that I can have your case ready for hand over on 2nd June 2016.

Thanks

Josephine

On 10 Mar 2016 12:15, "Rewired " <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

I just see your email. I do care about you a lot. Why would you leave the office?

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 11:28, JOSEPHINE WARD <iosephinewardsolicitor@amail.com> wrote:

Simon

I need to do the following on your case before Monday 14th March 2016:

· Take your instructions on the specific issues raised in HHJ Pawlak's letter

· Book a conference with the Public Defender so that the mention hearing can progress in April 2016.

I will be working on Saturday and Sunday of this weekend subject to call outs.

It is imperative that you attend so that I can progress these matters.

I am leaving Michael Carroll & Co's employment and my last day of work is 2nd June 2016 so I would very much like to have your appeal ready before then. I need your co-operation in order to do this. If you do not want to co-operate with me then I will have to list the case for mention for non-co-operation. I do not want to do this.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

62. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-40

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 584

 

62.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

62. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-40

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 584

--

584,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/03/2016 01:40:12 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Office appointment

Josie

I will be there on Sunday I did send you an email to confirm this. I will be there at 11:30 with mum.

If you need to change the time due to call outs just let mum know please as she is the one taking me as I got no other way to get there. Simon

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 13:11, JOSEPHINE WARD josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com wrote:

Simon

The decision has to do with a lot of issues. It is not appropriate to get into the reasons. I am not authorised to disclose that I am leaving and have only done so, so I can sort your case before I leave.

I would appreciate if you can attend the office Sunday so that I can have your case ready for hand over on 2nd June 2016.

Thanks

Josephine

On 10 Mar 2016 12:15, "Rewired " <re wired@vmail.com> wrote:

I just see your email. I do care about you a lot. Why would you leave the office?

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 11:28, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I need to do the following on your case before Monday 14th March 2016:

· Take your instructions on the specific issues raised in HHJ Pawlak's letter

· Book a conference with the Public Defender so that the mention hearing can progress in April 2016.

I will be working on Saturday and Sunday of this weekend subject to call outs.

It is imperative that you attend so that I can progress these matters.

I am leaving Michael Carroll & Co's employment and my last day of work is 2nd June 2016 so I would very much like to have your appeal ready before then. I need your co-operation in order to do this. If you do not want to co-operate with me then I will have to list the case for mention for non-co-operation. I do not want to do this.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

 

 

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-50

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 585

 

63.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 2

Asbo Re Office appointment 10-03-2016 13-50

10/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 585

--

585,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/03/2016 01:50:12 PM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephmewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Office appointment

Josie

I will be there on Sunday I did send you an email to confirm this. I will be there at 11:30 with mum.

If you need to change the time due to call outs just let mum know please as she is the one taking me as I got no other way to get there. Simon

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 13:11, JOSEPHINE WARD

josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com wrote:

Simon

The decision has to do with a lot of issues. It is not appropriate to get into the reasons. I am not authorised to disclose that I am leaving and have only done so, so I can sort your case before I leave.

I would appreciate if you can attend the office Sunday so that I can have your case ready for hand over on 2nd June 2016.

Thanks

Josephine

On 10 Mar 2016 12:15, "Rewired " <re wired@vmail.com> wrote:

I just see your email. I do care about you a lot. Why would you leave the office?

On Thursday, 10 March 2016, 11:28, JOSEPHINE WARD <iosephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I need to do the following on your case before Monday 14th March 2016:

· Take your instructions on the specific issues raised in HHJ Pawlak's letter

· Book a conference with the Public Defender so that the mention hearing can progress in April 2016.

I will be working on Saturday and Sunday of this weekend subject to call outs.

It is imperative that you attend so that I can progress these matters.

I am leaving Michael Carroll & Co's employment and my last day of work is 2nd June 2016 so I would very much like to have your appeal ready before then. I need your co-operation in order to do this. If you do not want to co-operate with me then I will have to list the case for mention for non-co-operation. I do not want to do this.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine

 

 

 

 

     

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 12-03-2016 18-38

12/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623

 

 

64.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 12-03-2016 18-38

12/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623

--

586,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/03/2016 06:37:31 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: some files

working on SIMON CORDELL APPELLANT RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new.doc fair trial article

Attachments:

' 6 Si-Information-Part-Edite.doc 1st OF INDEXED REQUESTS AND SUPPORTED EVIERDAINCE THAT IS

Some files that I have made that need to be gone over with josie I have all the backbone points of law in the file ready as well can you check them please.

587,

Already documented!

588,

Already documented!

589,

Already documented!

590,591,592,593,594,

595,596,597,598,599,600,

601,602,603,604,605,606,

607,608,609,610,611,612,

613,614,615,616,617,618,

619,620,621,622,623,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE some files 12-03-2016 23-39

12/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650

 

 

65.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE some files 12-03-2016 23-39

12/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650

--

624,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 12/03/2016 11:38:57 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: some files

Attachments: STATEMENT OF WITNESS new new-01.doc

Simon please see attached I wrote in red where I am up to. but I have read more and Simon there is so many things that are wrong. you are putting yourself more in this then needs and sorry you are getting really carried away with yourself. in this statement and are going to get the ASBO if this goes in like this.

down to you really you send me files to look at then just have a go at me for what I say when I say something is wrong.

Yes, I changed bits up to where I am but hell you got the one you wrote and if you really want to keep that then that’s down to you.

From: Rewired [mailto:re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 12 March 2016 18:38

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: some files

Some files that I have made that need to be gone over with josie I have all the backbone points of law in the file ready as well can you check them please.

625,

Already documented!

626,

Already documented!

627,

Already documented!

628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2

Asbo R v Simon Cordell Crown Court 03-04-2016 01-11

03/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658

 

66.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2

Asbo R v Simon Cordell Crown Court 03-04-2016 01-11

03/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658

--

651,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 03/04/2016 01:10:33 AM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: R v Simon Cordell - for mention at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016

Attachments: RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

Simon

Please see attached the document that I have drafted for Monday's hearing.

Can you indicate any amendments you want included.

The points that you take issue with will be put to the officers giving live evidence.

I will confirm the time of the hearing by separate email.

Regards

Josephine

652,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK'S LETTER DATED 22NDFEBRUARY 2016

· WHAT INVOLVEMENT IN EACH EVENT (RAVE) RELIED ON BY THE RESPONDENT, THE APPELLANT ADMITS TO HAVING HAD.

(A) 25.05.2014 - 5 ST GEORGES INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, WHITE HART LANE

the Appellant relies on his previous statement served.

The Appellant will state that he was delivering food to some homeless people.

The Appellant will state that there was no rave, no sound equipment, lights, generators etc in his van.

The Appellant will state that there was no rave in progress and no intention for any event to take place.

The Appellant will state that there was a section 144 LAPSO notice clearly displayed by the occupants who were treating the premises as their home.

The Appellant will state that he had empty speaker cases in his van. The van was used to store the speakers. The Appellant will state that he specifically requested that the officers who attended note down the fact that he had only speakers inside his van and no other component parts for a sound system.

The Appellant will state that he did not commit any criminal offences on 25th May 2014. The Appellant will state that the premises were not broken into as alleged but were being legally squatted. The Appellant will state that the occupation was legal by virtue of section 144 LAPSO notice being clearly displayed and this was within the law.

The Appellant will state that no Licensing authorisation was required as there was no music being played or intended to be played.

The Appellant will state that he did not engage in any acts of Anti-social behaviour as defined by section 1 of the Act.

The Appellant requests disclosure of the CCTV of the persons breaking into the premises, the CRIS and details of any persons arrested for criminal damage / burglary.

The Appellant will state that he did not break any laws on 25th May 2014nor did he engage in any acts of anti-social behaviour.

653,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The Appellant will state that the description of events on this day has been altered and recorded in a biased way towards him.

The Appellant requests full details of the original intelligence report inputted on 25th May 2014 and also reasons why there was a need to update this report on 19th June 2014. The Intelligence report should not be allowed in evidence under the hearsay rules as it is prejudicial to him. The report has been amended.

(A) PROGRESS WAY 6th, 7th AND 8th JUNE 2014

The Appellant disputes any involvement whatsoever in the event at Progress Way.

The Appellant accepts that he approached the gates with a view to dropping off house keys to a friend. The Appellant did not enter the premises / venue at Progress Way.

The Appellant did not provide any sound equipment, speakers, generators to any person inside Progress Way.

The Appellant will state that he is being wrongly accused of organising this rave/ event. The Appellant will state his brother is also wrongly named as being involved. The Appellant will state that his brother was severely disabled at the time and in a wheelchair following a very serious road traffic accident.

The Appellant questions the accuracy and truthfulness of the statements, CADS etc served in support of the above. The Appellant questions why some of the CAD reports have been redacted. The Appellant believes that the CAD's may well confirm the names of the real organisers, vehicle registrations etc that will confirm no vehicle belonging to the Appellant being inside the venue. The Appellant also questions the chronological sequence of the CAD messages.

The Appellant believes that some of the complainants are police officers and no civilians. The Appellant believes that some of the CADs may relate to completely different areas but are being added in to and wrongly linked to Progress Way.

In the interests of a fair hearing the Appellant requests all CAD's cross linked and referred to should be served in unedited. Any CAD's that refer to a different location should be removed from the Respondent's bundle as they are too prejudicial.

The Appellant will state that this is yet another example of the police manipulating the evidence to paint him in a bad light. The Appellant strongly believes that the police are presenting their evidence to persuade the court that he was an organiser of this event.

654,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The statements presented are unreliable and prejudicial. The Appellant will state that he cannot possibly have a fair hearing and as a result his Human Right to having a fair hearing will be violated due to the way the Respondent is selecting and presenting CAD's. The Appellant specifically requests that the redacted CADS be served unedited or excluded from the Respondent's bundle as he cannot challenge the content.

The Appellant will state that he is being deliberately targeted by the police as is his younger brother. Neither organised or attended and participated in Progress Way.

The Appellant specifically asks the Respondent to confirm why the event was not closed down, if it was in fact a rave. The Appellant asks why the sound systems were not seized under section 63 of the CJPOA.

The Appellant seeks clarification as whether a section 144 LAPSO notice was on display. If it was then this event could not be classed as an illegal rave.

The Appellant also questions why the Respondent has not supplied any CADs from 6th June 2014, the date when this event started.

For the purposes of clarity, the Appellant denies being an organiser. He denies providing any sound system equipment to the organisers of this event. He denies entering the venue but accepts that he approached to deliver keys. The Appellant did not commit any criminal offences. The Appellant did not engage in any anti-social behaviour.

· FALCON PARK 20TH JUNE 2014

The Appellant was not present at this event.

The Appellant accepts that he hired out his sound equipment in good faith for what he believed to be a house party.

The Appellant will state that he was at home when he was contacted by the hirer to come to collect his equipment which was then seized by police. The Appellant will state that his equipment was restored to him by the police.

The Appellant will state that he did not commit any criminal offences, nor did he engage in any acts of anti-social behaviour.

The Appellant will state that he was not an organiser and merely hired out his equipment in good faith.

· CARPET RIGHT 19th JULY 2014

The Appellant denies organising or supplying equipment for the above event.

655,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The Appellant never entered the premises Carpet Right. The Appellant will state that the true organisers were inside the premises and the police ought to be in possession of their details. This has never been disclosed to the Appellant.

The Appellant will state that none of his vehicles were inside the premises.

The Appellant notes from the Respondent's bundle there was no rave /event, no sound recording equipment inside the premises and therefore no rave was taking place.

· ALMA ROAD - 24th JULY 2014

The Appellant disputes the conversation with PC Edgoose regarding raves.

The Appellant will state that he did discuss with PC Edgoose his entertainment company and his dream of hosting a local festival at Picketts Lock for the benefit of the community. He will also say that he discussed other charitable events that he had participated in and events in the pipeline.

The Appellant will state that this date should be struck from the Respondent's bundle as there was no rave. The Appellant did not supply any sound recording equipment.

The admission of this disputed conversation is extremely prejudicial to the Appellant. The Appellant finds it bizarre that he was not arrested for any criminal offences bearing in mind the manner of driving described. The Appellant will state that he did not engage in any anti-social behaviour on this date. The Appellant will also state that he was in his private motor vehicle.

· MILLMARSH LANE- 9th AUGUST 2014

The Appellant will state that he was invited to a private birthday party by one of the persons occupying the premises at Millmarsh Lane.

The Appellant will state that there was a section 144 LAPSO notice displayed and the building was being treated as a home. The Appellant will state that he was an invited guest and not a trespasser.

The Appellant will state that there was no rave as the location was not open air and by virtue of him being invited by one of the occupiers who had established a section 144 LAPSO notice he was not a trespasser so the legal definition of a rave could not be made out.

656,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The Appellant was a guest at the location and not an organiser. He attended the location in his private motor vehicle. He did not provide any audio or sound equipment.

The second event at Millmarsh Lane the Appellant disputes that he was an organiser. He disputes that he was operating the gate.

The Appellant will state that this was not an illegal rave but a private party that he attended as a guest and not as an organiser.

The Appellant will state that there were no residential areas close by.

· WHETHER THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT THE INVOLVEMENT HE ADMITS, WASIN FACT WITHIN THE LAW, IF SO WHY

Please see above.

· WHETHER THE APPELLANT AGREES THAT ANY OF THE RAVES DIDOR COULD HAVE CAUSED DISTRESS TO LOCAL RESIDENTS BY WAY OF NOISE OR MOVEMENT OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING IN RAVES

The Appellant can only comment on his own behaviour and he refers the court to the fact that he himself has not acted in an anti-social manner. He has not been arrested for any criminal offences.

The Appellant accepts that such events could cause noise nuisance, but he is adamant that he did not organise or supply equipment for any of the events cited in the Respondent's application.

· WHETHER THE APPELLANT AGREES THAT A PREMISES LICENCE WAS REQUIRED FOR EACH RAVE

The Appellant will state that he believes that no licence was required for Millmarsh Lane as the premises were being occupied and treated as a home due to a section 144 LAPSO notice being displayed. The building was being used as a home and not as a commercial building. The Appellant will also state that as the building was being occupied as a home then no licence was required for a private house party and also no money was charged for persons entering.

· WHETHER THE APPELLANT CONCEDES THAT FOR ANY OF THE RAVES IN WHICH HE WAS INVOLVED, WHETHERBY HELPING TO ARRANGE OR BY PROVIDING SOUND EQUIPMENT HE BELIEVED THE EVENT TO BE A LICENSED EVENT AND THEREFORE WAS AN INNOCENT SUPPLIER OF EQUIPMENT,AND IF SOFOR WHICH RAVE OR RAVES IN PARTICULAR.

657,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The Appellant will state that he supplied equipment on one occasion only, in good faith to what he believed to be a private party. He did not attend the premises beforehand and therefore did not know the equipment would be used at a different place. The Appellant will state that his equipment was restored to him by police after they concluded he had no part in the event and had innocently hired out his equipment. The event the Appellant is referring to is Falcon Road.

The Appellant on no occasions cited in the Respondent's bundle hired out any sound equipment, audio equipment or organised any rave in the London Borough of Enfield on the dates cited in the original application.

PROPORTIONALITY:

The Appellant will state that the current ASBO was imposed by the District Judge after the police had failed to establish that the Appellant had engaged in any acts of anti-social behaviour.

The Appellant will also argue that the Respondent could not establish that the Appellant engaged in any illegal acts. The Appellant will state that the Respondent could not establish that any of the events cited came within the definition of an illegal rave as defined under section 63 of the CJPOA 1994.

The Appellant will state that the ASBO has significantly impacted his ability to run his Entertainment Company and also his future plans to hold an open-air festival. The ASBO would significantly prevent his ability to apply for licences to run out-door festival events. No other entertainments company is subject to the same due diligence when hiring out equipment.

The Appellant will argue that the terms of the ASBO are too restrictive and the geographical restriction too broad.

The Court did not take into consideration the fact that the Appellant was made subject an interim ASBO and the duration was not reduced accordingly.

The Appellant will argue that the court was wrong in principle in granting the original ASBO application as the Respondent made the original application based on the Applicant being involved in illegal raves. The Respondent did not establish this at the initial hearing and the District Judge erred in granting this ASBO.

658,

RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK.docx

The Appellant will state that he has attempted to engage in legitimate business activities, and he has been spurned at all attempts by the Police.

The Appellant has designed a business plan, created a website, researched and developed a proposal for an open-air licensed festival.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v Crown Court 03-04-2016 01-18

03/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 659

 

67.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v Crown Court 03-04-2016 01-18

03/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 659

--

659,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 03/04/2016 01:18:10 AM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>; Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Simon Cordell v. Commissioner of the Metropolis Police at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016

Dear Simon /Lorraine

Your mention hearing is listed on Monday 4th April 2016 at 2pm. Please attend court for1. 30pm.The case will be listed in court 1.

Simon can you review and confirm by email that you approve the document that I sent to you so that I can forward onto the barrister please email me any suggested amendments /additions.

Many thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v. Crown Court 03-04-2016 18-37

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 660

 

68.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v Crown Court 03-04-2016 18-37

03/03/2016

/ Page Numbers: 660

--

660,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 03/04/2016 06:37:03 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell v. Metropolis Police Commissioner for mention at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016

Simon

I have forwarded the document to the advocate who will be representing you tomorrow.

Can you please email across any additions /amendments before 9pm tonight so that I can forward on to the advocate. Please email me to josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com so that I can forward before I board my flight.

Many thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

69. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 04-04-2016 11-58

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 661

 

69.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

69. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 04-04-2016 11-58

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 661

--

661,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 04/04/2016 11:57:32 AM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner for mention at 2pm at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2

josie@michaelcarroNandco.com this one

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:56, JOSEPHINE WARD

josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com wrote:

Simon

Which email address did you send it to?

Josephine

On 4 Apr 2016 11:55, "Rewired " <re wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Hi Josie

I sent the last one over last night but I will resend it now. I will also bring copies to court with me.

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:47, JOSEPHINE WARD

Josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com wrote:

Simon

I refer to the above.

Can you please send across any further documents so that I can forward to the barrister.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

70. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 11-55

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671

 

70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

70. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 11-55

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671

--

662,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 04/04/2016 11:55:21 AM

To: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner for mention at 2pm at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016.

Attachments:   RESPONSE TO HHJ PAWLAK (6).docx

Hi Josie

I sent the last one over last night but I will resend it now. I will also bring copies to court with me.

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:47, JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com> wrote:

Simon

I refer to the above.

Can you please send across any further documents so that I can forward to the barrister.

Thanks

Josephine

663,

Already Documented!

664,

Already Documented!

665,666,667,668,669,670,671,

 

 

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 11-56

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 672

 

71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 11-56

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 672

--

672,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 04/04/2016 11:56:12 AM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner for mention at 2pm at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016.

Simon

Which email address did you send it to?

Josephine

On 4 Apr 2016 11:55, "Rewired " <re wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Hi Josie

I sent the last one over last night but I will resend it now. I will also bring copies to court with me.

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:47, JOSEPHINE WARD <Josephinewardsolicitor@amail.com> wrote:

Simon

I refer to the above.

Can you please send across any further documents so that I can forward to the barrister.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 12-04

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 673

 

72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2

Asbo Re Simon Cordell for mention 04-04-2016 12-04

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 673

--

673,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 04/04/2016 12:03:42 PM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner for mention at 2pm at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th Apr

Simon

I did not receive. Please send again.

Thanks

Josephine

On 4 Apr 2016 11:57, "Rewired " <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

josie@michaelcarroNandco.com this one

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:56, JOSEPHINE WARD <Josephinewardsolicitor@amail.com> wrote:

Simon

Which email address did you send it to?

Josephine

On 4 Apr 2016 11:55, "Rewired " <re wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Hi Josie

I sent the last one over last night but I will resend it now. I will also bring copies to court with me.

On Monday, 4 April 2016, 11:47, JOSEPHINE WARD <Josephinewardsolicitor@amail.com> wrote:

Simon

I refer to the above.

Can you please send across any further documents so that I can forward to the barrister.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v. Commissioner 04-04-2016 11-48

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 674

 

73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v. Commissioner 04-04-2016 11-48

04/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 674

--

674,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 04/04/2016 11:47:42 AM

To: too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner for mention at 2pm at Wood Green Crown Court on 4th April 2016.

Simon

I refer to the above.

Can you please send across any further documents so that I can forward to the barrister.

Thanks

Josephine

 

 

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 12-04-2016 17-30

12/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 675

 

74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 12-04-2016 17-30

12/04/2016

/ Page Numbers: 675

--

675,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/04/2016 05:29:32 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: can we do something please

hi josie

Is there any update about taking this to court to get the conditions defined I can’t take no more of not knowing what I am allowed to do and what I am not.

Simon

On Friday, 8 April 2016, 21:03, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

hi Josie

please Josie can we do something to define these conditions please. I can't stand no more Josie not knowing what I can and can't do.

Please can you get back to me.

 

 

 

 

75.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

75. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 13-04-2016 16-32

13/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 676

 

75.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

75. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 13-04-2016 16-32

13/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 676

--

676,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 13/04/2016 04:31:55 PM

To: Josephine Ward <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: can we do something please

Hi Josie

can you please let me have an update as to getting these ASBO conditions defined please.

Also can you give me the notes from court on the 04/04/2016 and why did the Judge give them until the 01/09/2016 to hand over the information this does not give us any time to go over anything I think this should have been handed over earlier so we had time. can you explain it to me please.

Simon

On Tuesday, 12 April 2016, 17:29, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

hi josie

Is there any update about taking this to court to get the conditions defined I can’t take no more of not knowing what I am allowed to do and what I am not.

Simon

On Friday, 8 April 2016, 21:03, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

hi Josie

please Josie can we do something to define these conditions please. I can't stand no more Josie not knowing what I can and can't do.

Please can you get back to me.

 

 

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

76. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2016 14-15

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 677

 

76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

76. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2016 14-15

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 677

--

677,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/05/2016 02:14:33 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Can you take a look at this please and tell me what you think about sending it

05/05/2016

Dear Josephine

How are you I hope all is well? I would appreciate it if you can reply to my questions below. In the understanding of the on goings that did occur at the court mentioning at wood green crown court on the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016, when on that date mentioned the company, who you are acting for that is representing myself Mr. Simon Cordell, that is named Michael Carroll & co solicitors, that you do or did represent a contract with till the 2nd June 2016.

Before the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016 when giving your legal guidance to such accusations of incidents, referring to the organisation of illegal raves, that said in my defence this is inclusive of the understanding to the ongoing of the case, that is being brought by the commission of the metropolitan police, that being of a standalone Anti-Social Behaviour Order 2003, an Act to make further provision in relation to criminal justice and disorder act 1994, itis being said that you did in fact explain before the date of the hearing, that being of information regarding to the past representing barrister Mr. Andy Lock, relating to that of Intel stating that he would not be able to attended due to being on leave and this being of the only issue raised by yourself said to be regarding myself, but on the date of the hearing another barrister did apply the judge in aid of my acting solicitors yourself, so to be sure of that you have to no longer represent me due to a breach in communication between our self's, the judge ruled that Michael Carroll and co.’s must act till the conclusion of the case, the Point is the judge has ordered the company to act for myself and in that understanding I ask and request for you to direct for my case to be carried out in such a manner, if legal to do so? I request that being of; at the day of my trial to act litigant with my mother as a McKenzie friend and for a barrister we select together to b< instructed to represent myself on the days of court, also I ask of you to set up a meeting within one month of this dated letter, between who will be taking on the case after you leave your office with the acting barrister chosen. I believe and understand that this is within the constraints of the law I take my guidance from https://www.gov.uk/represent-yourself-in-court/overview I also request that you call for questioning the following officers;

I ask again am I correct in believing that this is my rights and I can still have Michael Carroll and co solicitors represent me if I do so?

 

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

77. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2016 16-25

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 678

679,680,681,682,683

 

77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

77. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2016 16-25

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 678

679,680,681,682,683

--

678,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/05/2016 04:25:17 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: hhh

05/05/2016

Dear Josephine

How are you I hope all is well? I would appreciate it if you can reply to my questions below. In the understanding of the on goings that did occur at the court mentioning at wood green crown court on the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016, when on that date mentioned the company, who you are acting for that is representing myself Mr. Simon Cordell, that is named Michael Carroll & co solicitors, that you do or did represent a contract with till the 2nd June 2016.

Before the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016 when giving your legal guidance to such accusations of incidents, referring to the organisation of illegal raves, that said in my defence this is inclusive of the understanding to the ongoing of the case, that is being brought by the commissioner of the metropolitan police, that being of a standalone Anti-Social Behaviour Order 2003, an Act to make further provision in relation to criminal justice and disorder act 1994, it is being said that you did in fact explain before the date of the hearing, that being of information regarding to the past representing barrister Mr. Andy Lock, relating to that of Intel stating that he would not be able to attended due to being on leave and this being of the only issue raised by yourself said to be regarding myself, but on the date of the hearing another barrister did apply to the judge in aid of my acting solicitors yourself, so to be sure of that you have to no longer represent me due to a breach in communication between our self's, the judge ruled that Michael Carroll and co.’s must act till the conclusion of the case, the Point is the judge has ordered the company to act for myself and in that understanding I ask and request for you to direct for my case to be carried out in such a manner, if legal to do so? I request that being of; at the day of my trial to act litigant with my mother as a McKenzie friend and for a barrister we select together to be instructed to represent myself on the days of court, also I ask of you to set up a meeting within one month of this dated letter, between who will be taking on the case after you leave your office with the acting barrister chosen. I believe and understand that this is within the constraints of the law I take my guidance from https://www.gov.uk/represent-yourself-in-court/overview I also request that you call for questioning the following officers;

I have also made the basics of a police complaint as documented here.

Met Police Complaint 1

1of 3

created

on

date

06/00/2014

cad

number

00

Met Police Complaint 2

2of 3

created

on

date

16/04/2016

cad

number

00

Met Police Complaint 3

3of 3

created

on

date

17/04/2016

cad

number

00

In reference to Met Police complaint 3 of 3 that is in relation to an Anti-Social Behaviour order under the criminal and public order act 1994 in order of the commissioner of the metropolitan police.

I am Simon Cordell; my date of birth is 25th January 1981. My home address is as stated above. I am making this official complaint further to my appeal dated 00/09 2016 in response to the police and local authority's application for an Asbo order, to which, the case against my self is one of an hearing of application, against the organising illegal raves, that has said too have been proven as a guilty verdict, this is said to be against myself Mr. Simon Cordell, to which I intend to prove that this is not correct. I was not found guilty under the applicants case alongside many other issues of concern as listed, The day of the courting was held at Highbury Corner Magistrate’s Court, to which I intended to prove my innocents at, the next and earliest appeal hearing date has now been set for Sep 2016 to my disappointment, as I have been proving my innocents since 13th August 2014 when first accused and before this application I had been on string Lent bail conditions that had been imposed for other ongoing Met police procedures, to which I proved my innocents in start date 00/00/00 end date 00/00/00.

Substance off the complaint made by Mr. Simon Cordell is;

Listing:

Issues:

(I) Whether Mr. Simon Cordell has between the dates of January 2013 to the last date being 10 August 2014 in the Borough of Enfield acted in an anti-social manner likely to cause harassment alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself.

Mr Simon Cordell is accused of being involved in the organisation of illegal raves. These take place on disused warehouses or industrial land. These raves are said to be licensable activities.

Mr. Simon Cordell case is that he has not acted in an anti-social manner on the dates in question.

and that he has not organised or supplied any equipment for any the events cited in the Respondent’s application.

Mr. Simon Cordell has and still is in the legal framework as he challenges and disputes the evidence presented that he

were an organiser.

1. It is Mr. Simon Cordell case that this ASBO was imposed upon him unlawfully for the following reasons:

· He was never consulted / or warned prior to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner applying for an ASBO and this is in breach of the Guidance.

· The imposition of the ASBO was wrong in law because nowhere in the Respondent’s case has the Respondent proved that Mr. Simon Cordell engaged in any acts of anti-social behaviour as defined under section 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The dates as cited in the Respondent’s application dating from 12th January 2013 up to 19th July 2014 do not specifically refer to any acts of anti-social behaviour. Mr. Simon Cordell was and has not been arrested for any offences on the dates in question, also supporting the fact being that of the respondent’s case stating and being that of

679,

“The organisation of illegal raves” under section 63 which is a criminal Act and that of the word illegal being used when there is no breach under the licensing act 2003 this leads to a clear breach of police enforcement of their police codes of conduct of power regarding residences private homes of issues concerning “private house party’s” under the Licensing act 2003 as in apex 4 of the 2003 licensing act it clearly state as printed below “

(c) that on the 12/07/14 at time 09:53 a police officer of rank pc surname Elsmore first name Steve badge number 711243 YE was logged into the police national computer and did in development of such an application for the commissioner of England and Wales, did fabricate and manufacture such evidence alongside with other listed officers, this was done by way of conspiring and concealing true facts and if not for grid numbers not being retracted alongside other information that has been retracted creating such forgery by officers, which could only lead a judge to gain a guilty verdict at trial, this was also done while creating and editing statements of truth, which can be proven by the associated unique Urn numbers attached to police officers intelligence information reports running consecutively with maybe a few minor adjustments, but still very clear to see and understand as most do start with urn 000378829 then urn 000378829, urn 000378830 and so on “as when police officers were logged into the police national computer each report was created one after the over but with falsified created date’s” a clear breach of police procedures, falsifying this information could only be done to help aid in wrongful claims, to in fact gain a guilty verdict against the defending applicant Mr. Simon Cordell. while reciting and seeking for issue of wrongful jurisdiction of law as for fact section 63 crime and disorder act 1998 regards outdoor events as omitted unless trespass has taken place, no incidents that Mr. Simon Cordell is being accused of is in fact on open air land and trespass did not take place neither do the police provided any evidence supporting such claims also that being of the fact relating to the chronological sequence of the CAD reports due to the time stamps as clearly listed here;

CAD

Numb

Date

Time

Page

CAD

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

680,

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

The Appellant will state that this ASBO is disproportionate and it prevents him from engaging in lawful business. The ASBO will prevent the Appellant from applying for licences to hold events. The Appellant will state that whilst he is subject to an ASBO he will be prohibited from applying for any entertainment licence and any licence application will automatically fail and therefore this is disproportionate.

The Appellant has designed a business plan, a festival plan and community event that sets out clearly the plans for events including marketing, safety, stalls etc and also specifically refers to co­operating with the police. The ASBO prevents any applications from being successful.

The Appellant will state that he has never been involved in the organisation of an illegal rave as defined under section 63 of the CJPOA 1994.

Mr Simon Cordell State’s: “that he was not rude to police, but he did feel like he cannot even go out for the day with some of his friends, without getting stopped and searched by members of the police.

Mr Simon Cordell State’s This Asbo application was created in the understanding that by pc Steve Elsmore and other acting officers acting in such a manner of the claims listed within this document and or by allowing other officers to use his id logging to gain such wrongful and illegal convections did do so upon oath to the legal services, new Scotland yard London sw1h OBG Reference number L/107087/sag and stated that he was sure that the defendant Mr. Simon Cordell was responsible for the acts to which particulars had been given, in respect to the complaints made and developed by them self's which are all concealed within the Asbo application, in turn knowingly and deliberately while intentionally misusing his and their powers of conduct, while and with complete disregard of regulations such as the NSIR national standards incident report 2011, to aid in a manner to which was reckless and caused extreme disregard for my and other human life's creating a breach of many human rights as listed below with the relevant issues of concern in regards to each set of human rights that have been breached.

• Article 2 Right to life

Article 2 requires that the Government take steps to safeguard the lives of everyone within the U K's jurisdiction inclusive of myself Mr. Simon Cordell:

· by having effective criminal legislation (i.e. by making murder and manslaughter an offence so that to be sure that no person has the right to kill any other human being this clearly is inclusive of attempted manslaughter or attempted murder) and properly enforcing it;

· by requiring the police to take reasonable steps to protect an individual’s life if they know or ought to know that there is a real and immediate risk to a person’s life - although this should not impose an impossible or disproportionate burden on the authorities; and

· by requiring the State to take appropriate steps to prevent accidental deaths by having a legal and administrative framework in place to provide effective deterrence against threats to the right to life.

I Mr. Simon Cordell have attached to this document and have that of video evidence supporting the fact of members of the metropolitan police who were in attendance at my home address after I had made an emergency 999 call in regards to myself being a victim to a threat to my life by way of two gentlemen pulling a gun on myself out side of my home in regards to an illegal rave that had taken place in a warehouse that they stated was their own and that they had seen the intelligence in the metropolitan police website that had been published about similar offences, making them believe I had some think or that I may have been connected to do with their incident, the information in the police website was wrong in law and in danger my life and was not pulled down

· Article 3 Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment

I Mr. Simon Cordell have suffered a servicer breach in regards to the prohibitions relating to article three of my human rights leaving me with memories of torture and inhuman treatment while being treated in a degrading manner by way of being punished for allegations of a criminal offence and then having such information published in the public domain; a punishment that was and should have never been justified as there was no breach of the United Kingdom Laws and such intelligence that does in fact create the bases of evidence to support such claims is manufactured

It is an absolute right that in no circumstances will it ever be justifiable for an officer of the state use his powers to torture any tenant, resident person living in the United Kingdom

· Inhuman acts will amount to torture when used to deliberately cause serious and cruel suffering.

· Treatment will be considered inhuman when it causes intense physical or mental suffering.

· Treatment or punishment will be degrading if it humiliates and debases a person beyond that which is usual from punishment.

• Article 5 Right to liberty and security

I Mr. Simon Cordell understand that my human rights regarding my own liberty and security have been subject to a server breaches due to members of the metropolitan police perjuring evidence in turn creating miss gross miss conduct leading to myself being deprived of my liberty's and security. I have been subject to gross corrupt police practice in the understanding of a multitude of cads contained within the

681,

applicant’s application towards an Anti-Social behaviour order that I Mr. Simon Cordell is being wrongfully accused of being that of falsely created and audited evidence. Provided below and contained within this document is a summary of the incidents co siding with official dates that is also inclusive of cad numbers and relevant supported evidence being referred too.

13th August 2014

The Asbo application was created by Steve Elsmore

13th August 2014

A meeting was held with Steve Hodgson who is a representative for Enfield Local Authority Council and Jane Johnson on behalf of the Metropolitan police alongside others.

12th September 2014

A bundle is said to have been served on Mr Simon Cordell at 109 Burncroft Avenue, to which he disputes. In reference to police complaint 1 of 3 contained at the top of the document.

06/10/2014

Mr Simon Cordell was meant to have a hearing for an interim Order, but legal aid had not been granted.

Michael Carroll acting solicitor came to court, the judge overturned and granted legal aid. The application for the Interim hearing the judge would not hear.

22/10/2014

Interim hearing but could not go ahead due to Andy Locke Acting Barrister had a flood at his home address.

05/11/2014

Interim hearing and the order were granted.

02/12/2014

Mr Simon Cordell’s mother has a note on her mobile phone, stating he was in court at Highbury Corner not sure what they were for.

09th 10th 11th 03/2015

Meant to have been set for trial but the court only booked 1-day hearing, this was then put off until the 03rd and 04th Aug 2015

03rd 4th 08/2015

Highbury Corner trial case part proven on the 04th 08/2015

26/10/2015

1st hearing at Wood Green Crown to see if case was ready for appeal on the

09/11/2015

Was 1st appeal date which was set for a 1-hour hearing

22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016

Set for appeal at the crown court.

It is said that Mr Cordell had been found guilty on the 3rd 4th August 2015, to which he disputes to be correct, evidence of Mr. Simon Cordell Barristers submissions inclusive of the court transcripts of the day of trial. The respondent’s case is that Mr Simon Cordell has been accused of being integrally involved in the organisation of illegal raves in Enfield.

Part of the Barrister submissions that represented Simon Cordell, had been that the allegations were that he was involved in the organizing of illegal raves, but the applicant hadn’t adduced evidence, of trespass or evidence of breach of the licensing Act 2003 which is a requirement for proving, that an indoor rave was illegal. The Deputy District Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality, - all the needed to prove was he had acted in an anti-social manner. In the view of the barrister this was a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus, Simon being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

It should be agreed with the barrister statement as when dealing with this case Mr Simon Cordell was addressing the applicant’s case to prove that he had not been involved in organizing illegal raves, as this is what the application against him was.

In total to date 19/04/2016 the Asbo application has been brought before the courts inclusive of magistrates and crown a total of 9 times the 10th to be in September 2016 to which I still do not understand how any person could stand a fair trial with such questions as has been referred to regarding article 5.2 of my continental human rights as for the fact of the supported application being that of myself Mr. Simon Cordell being legally deprived of such rights as

Article 5(2) requires that anyone arrested must be promptly informed as to why he or she has been arrested and what the charge against them is.

This must be conveyed to them in a language which he or she understands.

The defendant questions the facts that of himself not being arrested for allegations of a criminal offence that do clearly state that they are of an

682,

illegal nature such as “the organisation of illegal raves” and that of how a court can be sitting in its civil capacity sitting a criminal case under section 63 of the crime and pubic disorder act 1998 as a standalone Asbo dated 00//00/2014 and associated to the laws of this date as for a CBO Asbo application existed and still does and states

The criminal behaviour order (CBO) will replace the ASBO on conviction and the DBO on conviction and will be available in the Crown Court, magistrates' courts, or the youth court. The CBO will be available for the most seriously anti-social individuals and could be applied for on conviction for any criminal offence in any criminal court. The CBO can only be made on the application of the prosecutor (in most cases the Crown Prosecution Service, either at their own initiative or at the request of the police or local authority).

of as permitted under Article 5(2) which clearly states the purpose of this requirement is to enable the person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest.

This requirement is not only limited to criminal context.

Also that of their being so many inconsistencies contained within the police statements as has been submitted in the response from the defendant Mr. Simon Cordell in receipt to the applicant dated 00/00/2016 which clearly shows that of mutable geological locations of wide spread incidents on the same date and same time as the one incident that Mr. Simon Cordell has been accused of on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 which does in fact have all the locations blocked out by members of the metropolitan police force and if it was not for the grid numbers not being blocked out no person other than the developers of the application would have known the true facts as just explained.

Once checked and recognised by any other person in response to the claims I have just quoted, I believe that any other body would also notice many of the irregularities that I have shown to be fact and come to the same conclusion, so in the understanding of the statements just made and the understanding that Mr. Simon Cordell is and was an innocent man from the start of on goings of the Asbo application and knows that he has not committed nor has he had the right to challenge such allegations under the criminal justice acts that represent the United kingdom Laws and European Treaties. As from the start of the application Mr Simon Cordell feels the need to defend his legal right’s against such allegations of illegal statements made by police officers against himself the same as he would if the allegations were made by any member(s) off the public to which no members of the public have mentioned him or a description of his person or any associated company or business names relating to the incidents of such offences creating the bases of a legal conviction of (organising illegal raves) In the understanding of civil and criminal law, Mr Simon Cordell has learnt in the understanding off all criminal cases were some think is alleged to have taken place that is said to have been illegal the correct Police procedure in them circumstances is that a crime will be created under the crime and disorder act 1998 by way of a victim or witness making a report then members of the police will be allocated to the incident and start investigations depending on the matter of relevance to the initial report to the resources available at the time. The investigations may lead to an arrest what will lead the detainee to his or her statuary legal rights. In the early 1980’s the police did have the power to take cases to court without the decision of any other governing body, but now in 2016 the burden relays solely on the cps who are in calibration with Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who is independent but subject to the superintendence of the Attorney General that is accountable to members of Parliament that do work for the prosecution services. If charged any person’s rights are gained under section 24 and 25 which does relate to the rights of any person charged and the minimum standards of criminal procedure. But my case seems to sit in its civil capacity at court with none of the above regulations and my rights being carried out in accordance of the United Kingdom laws; please can you explain this to me? As I have no previous convictions of similar nature neither was the Asbo application a CBO or Asbo on conviction it is in fact a standalone Asbo and the legal guidance is for the application not to be based upon

At the appeal date that had been set for Feb 22nd 23rd 24th 2016 Legal aid was re granted on the 00/00/2015

On the 2nd appeal date set Mr Simon Cordell’s acting solicitor explained to him that she could not arrange a barrister till April 2016, due to the past acting barrister being on leave.

Mr. Simon Cordell had many concerns with the applicants case put towards him and had prepared a computer typed copy of an article six that does in fact raise some of the issues of concern that he had with the on goings of the application being put towards himself “a attached file of a copy of what was handed to the judge has been attached as (Exhibit 2 that being of this document being off Exhibit 1)”, this was given to the Judge HHJ Pawlaks who refused to read and take note to such human continental rights and ordered that I the applicant Mr. Simon Cordell answer 5 questions A to E by a pre hearing date of the 4th April 2016 the questions asked and answered are in another attached file(Exhibit 3) in numeric order to this complaint. On the same day of 22nd /4/2016 I again asked in a written letter handed to the judge requesting for the right to a fair trial and in that letter I believed I had proven to him more than beyond reasonable doubt that the developers such as officer pc Steve Elsmore in the making of the Asbo application had manufactured and fabricated such evidence of claims of evidence, I supported this by drawing a table contained within my hand written letter to the right to a fair trial I know this shows the errors in the time stamps too be corrupt, I also explained that I had been held under my free will, as the laws that do represent “the organisation of illegal raves” relating to such a section as section 63 does not account to an indoor private house parties unless trespass has taken place and that on the 00/00/0014 at the day of trial at the magistrates court I was not found guilty of such crimes or offences as stated in the transcripts of the day at court and in the barristers submissions to my acting solicitor, also the fact that being of under the licensing act2003 there is no breach of law when holding such private events in private air when no profit is being made to which the applicant has not adduced any evidence supporting claims of money equalling to profit, the incidents Mr. Simon Cordell is and have been accused of was in fact in private place of residence

It was explained to the judge that by not paying attention to the true facts of the case and not putting the police officer under investigation would in fact in danger my life Mr. Simon Cordell as I had been explaining to every person of interest relevant to the ongoing of my accused case load from the start of the case as I felt and still do feel intimidated and at threat, off the police office being given time to edit more evidence in the case to manipulate the truth and take disregard to rules and regulation to avoid a complaint of investigation pending against himself in turn avoiding by method of prolonging disciplinary action in turn taking away my own security off walking down my own home streets for a period of this case to date 19/04/2016 equalling to the time length of start date of application said to have been served in accordance to the united kingdom laws to which an official police complaint was raisin as listed in the first chapter of this document is 12th September 2014 total days are 00000000 The judge once again asked

held hostage to corrupt officers allegations It was written by myself as I felt I have been if granted by the Jude this would in fact set the new appeal date to be two months after the already agreed appeal date of Feb 22nd, if the court aggress to such a date, contained within the time

683,

scale of April 2016 and not any time after, due to the court diary already being pre booked.

Points of concern leading to a breach of article 5 of Mr. Simon Cordell human rights.

· Police complaints procedure being that of a bios manner to aid officers from rightful investigation that would lead to rightful tribunal action being taken against such officer’s wrongful claims.

· L

· Article 6 Right to a fair trial

As referred to in the previous articles of this official complaint I would like to again take reference to any person's contravental human rights article six

· Article 7 No punishment without law

· Article 8 Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence

· Article 9 Freedom of thought, belief and religion

· Article 10 Freedom of expression

· Article 11 Freedom of assembly and association

· Article 12 Right to marry and start a family

· Article 14 Protection from discrimination in respect of these rights and freedoms

• Protocol 1, Article 1 Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property

 

 

 

 

 

 

78.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2 Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2

016 16-27

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 684

685,686,687,688,689

 

78.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2 Asbo Me to Josie 05-05-2

016 16-27

05/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 684

685,686,687,688,689

--

684,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/05/2016 04:27:27 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: hhh

05/05/2016

Dear Josephine

How are you I hope all is well? I would appreciate it if you can reply to my questions below. In the understanding of the on goings that did occur at the court mentioning at wood green crown court on the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016, when on that date mentioned the company, who you are acting for that is representing myself Mr. Simon Cordell, that is named Michael Carroll & co solicitors, that you do or did represent a contract with till the 2nd June 2016.

Before the 22nd 23rd and 24th 02/2016 when giving your legal guidance to such accusations of incidents, referring to the organisation of illegal raves, that said in my defence this is inclusive of the understanding to the ongoing of the case, that is being brought by the commissioner of the metropolitan police, that being of a standalone Anti-Social Behaviour Order 2003, an Act to make further provision in relation to criminal justice and disorder act 1994, it is being said that you did in fact explain before the date of the hearing, that being of information regarding to the past representing barrister Mr. Andy Lock, relating to that of Intel stating that he would not be able to attended due to being on leave and this being of the only issue raised by yourself said to be regarding myself, but on the date of the hearing another barrister did apply to the judge in aid of my acting solicitors yourself, so to be sure of that you have to no longer represent me due to a breach in communication between our self's, the judge ruled that Michael Carroll and co.’s must act till the conclusion of the case, the Point is the judge has ordered the company to act for myself and in that understanding I ask and request for you to direct for my case to be carried out in such a manner, if legal to do so? I request that being of; at the day of my trial to act litigant with my mother as a McKenzie friend and for a barrister we select together to be instructed to represent myself on the days of court, also I ask of you to set up a meeting within one month of this dated letter, between who will be taking on the case after you leave your office with the acting barrister chosen. I believe and understand that this is within the constraints of the law I take my guidance from https://www.gov.uk/represent-yourself-in-court/overview I also request that you call for questioning the following officers;

I have also made the basics     of a police        complaint as documented here.

Met Police Complaint 1

1of 3

created

on

date

06/00/2014

cad

number

00

Met Police Complaint 2

2of 3

created

on

date

16/04/2016

cad

number

00

Met Police Complaint 3

3of 3

created

on

date

17/04/2016

cad

number

00

In reference to Metropolitan Police complaint 3 of 3 that is in relation to an Anti-Social Behaviour order under the criminal and public order act 1994 in order of the commissioner of the metropolitan police.

I am Simon Cordell; my date of birth is 25th January 1981. My home address is as stated above. I am making this official complaint further to my appeal dated 00/09 2016 in response to the police and local authority's application for an Asbo order, to which, the case against my self is one of an hearing of application, against the organising illegal raves, that has said too have been proven as a guilty verdict, this is said to be against myself Mr. Simon Cordell, to which I intend to prove that this is not correct. I was not found guilty under the applicants case alongside many other issues of concern as listed, The day of the courting was held at Highbury Corner Magistrate’s Court, to which I intended to prove my innocents at, the next and earliest appeal hearing date has now been set for Sep 2016 to my disappointment, as I have been proving my innocents since 13th August 2014 when first accused and before this application I had been on string Lent bail conditions that had been imposed for other ongoing Met police procedures, to which I proved my innocents in start date 00/00/00 end date 00/00/00.

Substance off the complaint made by Mr. Simon Cordell is;

Listing:

Issues:

(I) Whether Mr. Simon Cordell has between the dates of January 2013 to the last date being 10 August 2014 in the Borough of Enfield acted in an anti-social manner likely to cause harassment alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself.

Mr Simon Cordell is accused of being involved in the organisation of illegal raves. These take place on disused warehouses or industrial land. These raves are said to be licensable activities.

Mr. Simon Cordell case is that he has not acted in an anti-social manner on the dates in question.

and that he has not organised or supplied any equipment for any the events cited in the Respondent’s application.

Mr. Simon Cordell has and still is in the legal framework as he challenges and disputes the evidence presented that he

were an organiser.

1. It is Mr. Simon Cordell case that this ASBO was imposed upon him unlawfully for the following reasons:

· He was never consulted / or warned prior to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner applying for an ASBO and this is in breach of the Guidance.

· The imposition of the ASBO was wrong in law because nowhere in the Respondent’s case has the Respondent proved that Mr. Simon Cordell engaged in any acts of anti-social behaviour as defined under section 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The dates as cited in the Respondent’s application dating from 12th January 2013 up to 19th July 2014 do not specifically refer to any acts of anti-social behaviour. Mr. Simon Cordell was and has not been arrested for any offences on the dates in question, also supporting the fact being that of the respondent’s case stating and being that of

685,

Already Documented!

686,687,688,689,

 

 

 

 

 

 

79.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 18-05-2016 14-14

18/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 690

 

79.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 18-05-2016 14-14

18/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 690

--

690,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 18/05/2016 02:14:19 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Here

Thank you.

On Wednesday, 18 May 2016, 13:51, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: here is the file I started bbbbb and the one you sent me.

at this time working on an email for josie to found out what is going to happen it should be ready later today but I want to make sure I get the point across that's needs to be in one email. I will send that when it is ready

I have also ordered the chips now

Mum

 

 

 

 

 

80.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re Email for Josie 22-05-2016 15-48

22/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 691,692,693

 

80.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re Email for Josie 22-05-2016 15-48

22/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 691,692,693

--

691,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 22/05/2016 03:48:15 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Email for Josie

Attachments: case_asbo_letter_where_i_stand_22-05-2016.doc

Simon

Please see attached letter and read all at end I written in red for you to del before it sent when sending send to both Josie emails

692,

Hi Josie

Would it please be possible for you to send me the barrister's notes for the last hearing please and a copy of his submission that he wrote I know it was not handed in but would like a copy of it please. Also, the date on my appeal I know it is in Sep 2016 at some point.

There was something’s I did want to ask and that was why did the Judge give them until the 01/09/2016 to hand over anything that was needed and what the judge himself asked to be given, as that will gave us very little time in order to go over anything they hand to us and the court. Why did no one say anything about that date as it is so close to the appeal?

I would also like to know where I stand; I know you are leaving Michael Carroll & Co on the 03/06/2016. So, would like to know the person that will be taking my case over at Michael Carroll’s & CO after you leave, is someone actually taking over my case at the office?

The worry I have is when I spoke to Michael Carroll at the office and he then went down and spoke to my mother he said he will not do anything more on my case that to much money had already be spent. So, to me he is only worried about money and not someone’s life.

But I do feel the reason so much more has been spent on this Appeal is due to things that I asked for and my mother asked for to be dealt with for the trial was never done, if it had been done it would never have taken up so much time for the Appeal hearing as it would have already been done, so this has now needed to be addressed for the Appeal and this work has then been added to the appeal costs, and I feel that this has caused the cost to go up due to this so this is not my fault. As if it was done before the trial when we were asking over and over again, the cost would have been added to the trial costs and not the appeal costs. But it seems I get the blame for this when I should not as it should have been addressed for the trial.

I believe since you have looked into what was being asked to be done for the trial you have seen the reason why we

wanted this addressed before the trial as it is real points that should have been dealt with at the trial, you

can see yourself that parts of their main case in their file is totally not correct and the timelines are out and other

important parts which was never dealt with and the police was allowed to pass this off at trial as being

correct when clearly it was not correct. And this is an important part of this case for me to get a fair trial which I never

got at trial.

Could I also be forwarded the trial cost invoice for legal aid so I can see it please?

I have spoken to Michael Carroll on the phone the other day also and he is not willing to do any other work on this case, and states that the case is ready for appeal, how can it be ready when there is still information to come from the CPS not later than the 01/09/2016 ordered by the Judge?

So where am I left with this no acting solicitor to act on my behalf to deal with my appeal as Michael Carroll clearly does not want to do anything and only says to me to talk to you, but I know you are leaving the company so where does this leave me? And I feel I will never get a fair appeal why because of costs, because things were not done which I asked to be done and my mother asked for them to be done, why do I feel the way I do about this case and the worry I have had to suffer?

There are real big issues I know that Michael Carroll & Co does not wish to deal with this Appeal is this due to the mess up due to things not being addressed at trial? I know Michael and you want to get broken away from this appeal and the judge never allowed this to happen, yet when you leave will Michael Carroll asked for this again?

How am I to know anything how am I not meant to worry?

This is my life and I have asked time and time again and so has my mother since this case started for the conditions to be defined, for this to be taken back to court and get them defined no one has done this in the case.

Even at trial Andy Locke tried to get this dealt with and the judge would not deal with this. Why can’t these conditions be defined by the court why have I got to suffer not going out in fear the police will arrest me due to these conditions when I don’t understand the conditions and how they were put in place? Surely you yourself can see the conditions are wrong in law?

693,

I am left on conditions that have never been defined that are a beach to my human rights and nothing has been done, yet we have asked over and over again for this to be addressed.

I could say a lot more in this email but time and time again things have been asked and I never get a reason or reply.

But I would like the above issues addressed before you leave the company on the 03/06/2016 so I know where I stand for the appeal please.

Simon

If you think other points needs adding then add them but Simon you need to keep this short and to point or you will not get anywhere and you won’t get replied to any points that need to be replied to and these are the most important points at this time once we get a reply to these we can ask more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

81.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 2

Asbo Court Transcripts Lower Court -23-05-2016 03-31

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701

 

81.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 2

Asbo Court Transcripts Lower Court -23-05-2016 03-31

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701

--

694,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/05/2016 03:31:31 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Letter

Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

R v Cordell 1

695,

Already Documented!

696,

Already Documented!

697,698,699,700,701,

 

 

 

 

 

 

82.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 23-05-2016 03-18

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 702

703,704

 

82.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 23-05-2016 03-18

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 702

703,704

--

702,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/05/2016 03:18:21 AM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter

Dear Josephine.

How are you, I hope all is well? After all, things considered, I will get straight into business, this letter is, furthermore, towards our conversations, however I would appreciate it if you can reply to my questions below, as soon as practically possible and with due time before you finish your contract and leave office, so that we can conclude the case files and agreed activities, such as taking the case to court, so that to be sure that the conditions are imposed and defined within accordance of jurisdiction of the law, as you have already agreed to do so, this is also inclusive of all information ready for the next representative of Michael Carroll's office, who will be the new case handler, so that he or she can be prepared to instruct any barrister for any court herrings, as per-listed.

Some of the questions are in relation to the understanding of the on goings that did occur, at and in the court mentioning at wood green crown court, on the 22nd 23rd this is also inclusive of the 24th 02/2016.

On that date mentioned the company, who you are acting for, that is, representing myself Mr. Simon Cordell, and further named as Michael Carroll & co solicitors, that you do or did represent a contract with till the 2nd June 2016,

This information was also inclusive of the understanding of the solicitor firms running objectives towards the ongoing of this case, that in this instance is being brought against myself Mr. Simon Cordell by the commissioner of the metropolitan police and his acting officers, this is also inclusive of any other local authorities governing bodies, one mentioned as Enfield council.

This being quoted being of an application representing a standalone Anti-Social Behaviour Order 2003, an Act to make further provision in relation to criminal justice and disorder act 1994.

It is being said that Miss Josephine Ward, at a point of time before the date of the said trial hearing at Court, that was postponed and did not go ahead, that she undoubtedly mentioned, when giving her legal guidance too, such accusations of incidents, that does refer to the organisation of illegal raves, that still said "acting in my defence."

It is being said that you did in fact explain before the date of the hearing, I quote; explain being of information regarding to the past representing barrister a Mr. Andy Lock, relating to that of Intel stating that he would not be able to attend court and act for myself as he did previously at the magistrates court, due to being away on leave and this being off the only issue raised by yourself, said to be regarded myself of your concern.

On the date of the hearing another barrister did apply to the judge, in aid of my acting solicitors yourself, so to be sure, that of you, having to no longer represent me in the court proceedings, due to a breakdown in communication between our self's, the judge ruled that Michael Carroll and co.’s solicitors, must act till the conclusion of the case, the overall Point I am highlighting as referred to is that the judge, "on the whole" has ordered the company to act for myself Mr. Simon Cordell.

First Question and request is.

In that understanding, I ask and request for you to direct the case to be carried out in such a manner, if what is being request is legal to do so. I request that being off; at the day of my trial, to act litigant with my mother as a McKenzie friend and for a barrister that we do select together, to represent me inclusive, so for he or she to be well instructed to represent myself (in the background" on the days of court.

Second Question is.

I also ask of you to set up a meeting and for this request to be inserted within one month of this dated letter, this meeting will and should be between who will be taking on the case, after you leave your office, alongside with the acting barrister chosen. I believe and understand that this is within the constraints of the law; I take my guidance from; https://www.gov.uk/represent-yourself-in- court/overview Second Request is;

I also request that you call for questioning the following officers and civilians.

· Josher Holyfield

· Superintendent Jane Johnson dated 30/ October 2014

· Steve Hodgson Dated 30th October 2014

· Dc Steve Elsmore Dated

· A/PS Charles Miles Dated 2nd August 2014

· A/Inspector Hamill Dated 6th August 2014

· Pc Donald McMillan Dated 14th August 2014 and 19th August 2014^ A/Inspector Douglas Skinner Dated 15th August 2014 and 9th September 2014

· A/PS Jason Ames Dated 15th August 2014

· Pc Aaron King Dated 1 5th August 2014 and 7th September 2014

· Pc Jhon Anderson Dated 19th August 2014

· Pc Eric Baker Dated 19th August 2014

· Pc Edgoose Dated 31 August 2014

· Hugh Giles, Director of Legal Services Metropolitan Police Director of legal services.

· Sally Gilchrist Legal Executive

703,

Third question is.

Would it, please be possible for you to send me the barrister's notes, submission that he wrote for the last hearing also inclusive of a copy of the submission he prepared for myself in regards to the admittance of hearsay in the ongoing of the respondent's, case.

Forth question is.

I also request the date of my up and coming appeal, I know it is in Sep 2016 at some point in time, but I am not sure what date.

Fifth question is.

There is the fact of the matter, which leads me to the concern of the Judge at Wood Green Crown Court giving the respondent, until the 01/09/2016 to hand over anything that was needed and what the judge himself asked to be given, as this date set will give me and the representatives of Michael carol and co solicitors, very little time in order to go over anything that will be handed over to us and the court.

The question is why did no one say anything about that date as it is so close to the appeal?

Sixth question is.

As has already been mentioned, I would like to know where I stand; I know you are leaving Michael Carroll & Co on the 03/06/2016. So, I would like to know the person that will be taking my case over at Michael Carroll's & CO after you leave, I ask is someone actually taking over my case at the office?

The worry I have is when I spoke to Michael Carroll at the office, when meeting you Miss Josephine Ward, is that Mr. Carroll then went downstairs "Outside of his office" and then spoke to my mother, there confiscation was.

Mr. Carroll said he will not do anything more on my case, because too much money had already been spent. So, to me he is only worried about money and not someone's life he is acting for.

I have asked repeatedly for many issues to be addressed from the start of the on goings of the case which has never been done to date, issues such as defining the conditions that were wrongfully imposed, as in fact it is clearly omitted in section 63 of the Crime and public disorder act 1994, That stating section 63 is for outdoor events unless trespass has taken place and all incidents being referred to are indoors, also that being of the fact trespass clearly never happened.

The representing barrister clearly states in his submissions to you in paragraph (11) of his notes, "Quoted "that I was not found guilty under the respondent's case".

If such issues of concern had been addressed as listed in all of the copies of correspondence of emails as asked then I feel it would never have taken up so much of any person's time as listed in date 22nd May 2016, inclusive of the new up and coming Appeal hearing, as for sure my case would have already been rectified

I also believe I would not be feeling deprived of justice and not with an even further risk of a further date than the new set appeal date of September 2016.

I do believe you understand from the barrister submissions, which were sent after the hearing at Wood Green Crown Court to Michael carols office, this is also to be inclusive of all the emails that I and my mother have previously sent to Miss Josephine Ward in regards to my case, that being said in reference to myself handing to the judge on two different occasions, a copy of an article six containing evidence of police corruption in the development of the application you represent towards myself.

The issues listed and many other concerns previously listed have now piled up that must be addressed for myself to stand a fair and speedy trial, this work has then been added to the appeal costs and I feel that this has caused the cost to go up due to no fault of my own as I was never found guilty and the conditions were imposed wrongfully. As if surely my concerns were managed before the start of the trial, when I and my mother were asked over and over again, the cost would have been added to the initial trial costs and not to the appeal costs. But it seems that I get the blame for this when I should not.

I believe since you have looked more into the case and what was being asked of you to be done for the trial, you have seen and noticed the reason(s) and even further to that why we wanted this addressed before the trial as it is real points that should have been dealt with at the trial, you or any person

can see that parts of the respondents case inclusive of the jurisdiction of the law is imposed wrong, there file is totally incorrect and the timelines are not correspondent to their articles, sort after many other important parts which was never dealt with correctly, as for fact the police was allowed to pass such evidence off at the trial as being correct when clearly it was not correct.

Just listed are many important facts of this case, which should and will aid in myself to get a fair trial," which I never got at trial."

· Seventh question is.

Could I also be forwarded the trial cost invoice for legal aid so I can see it please?

· Eighth question is.

I have spoken to Michael Carroll on the phone the other day and he is also not willing to do any other work on this case, and states that the case is ready for appeal, how can it be ready when there is still information to come from the CPS not later than the 01/09/2016 ordered by the Judge?

704,

· Ninth question is.

So where am I left with this no acting solicitor to act on my behalf to deal with my appeal as Michael Carroll clearly does not want to do anything and only says to me to talk to you, but I know you are leaving the company so where does this leave me? And I feel I will never get a fair appeal why because of costs, because things were not done, which I asked to be done and my mother asked for them to be done, why do I feel the way I do about this case and the worry I have had to suffer?

· Tenth question is.

There are real big issues, I know that Michael Carroll & Co does not wish to deal with this Appeal is this due to the mess up due to things not being addressed at trial? I know Michael and you want to get broken away from this appeal and the judge never allowed this to happen, yet when you leave will Michael Carroll asked for this again?

How am I to know anything how am I not meant to worry?

This is my life and I have asked time and time again and so has my mother since this case started for the conditions to be defined, for this to be taken back to court and get them defined no one has done this in the case.

Even at trial Andy Locke tried to get this dealt with and the judge would not deal with this. Why can't these conditions be defined by the court why have I got to suffer not going out in fear the police will arrest me due to these conditions an avoiding tribunal and disciplinary action.

· Eleventh question is.

I keep explaining that I do not understand the conditions also that being of how they were legally put in place, so I ask you, if you yourself can see the conditions are wrong in law and if so why?

· Twelfth question is.

I have also attached a copy of the court transcripts of the day at Highbury Magistrates Court and request that you verify them to be true articles and submit them to the respondent, in support of the evidence of my trial, and confirm so?

I am left on conditions that have never been defined that are a beach to my human rights and nothing has been done, yet we have asked over and over again for this to be addressed.

I would like the above issues addressed before you leave the company on the 03/06/2016 so I know where I stand for the appeal please.

Yours fifthly Mr. Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

83.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2

Asbo Please see a cop listed below 23-05-2016 03-32

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712

 

83.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2

Asbo Please see a cop listed below 23-05-2016 03-32

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712

--

705,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/05/2016 03:31:31 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Letter

Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

R v Cordell 1

Def

Mother of D in court + potentially giving evidence.

Met

Police - No objections.

Probably case will go over till tomorrow.

· Witness of facts.

1. Officer in the case.

To be 6 witness + 22 case statements.

Def

Just gave possession of new info on face book, not in bundles before court, but should be. Shows info suggesting never organised but other people did, nothing to do with w/d.

DJ

Interim ASBO made case by been well? nan?

DEF

This evidence shows that Rave on 6th 7th 8th June 2014 was nothing to do with w/d.

Miss Cordell mother has carried out her own investigations as she was not happy with results of investigating officer / so/s.

This is a large bundle to get through this late.

If the material can be vied by the DJ and then if (Possible metered) then DJ can decide on admissibility of the evidence.

DJ

Producing material, however relevant, 10 minutes before a trial is not acceptable.

Met Police 1st Statement DEF.

Has made a application for an ASBO Order.

Inspector Hamill to lead....

Witness 1 - Inspector Hamill - 11.15am Statement contained in tab 9-lead DEF XEX

Intel would be by open source, checked by an officer but was not done by me.

The rave was taking place indoors.

I have not personal spoken to the owners of the venue.

I only see the D on the Saturday on the evening of the 7th Saturday.

I did not go inside; the gates were closed.

I did not see any vehicles.

D'S Van registration is known to the police, but I would not personally know.

There were vehicles parked but I did not notice whether defendants van was there.

He was not aware of people squatting in that building at that time.

R v Cordell 2

Hearsay of officers continues.

D @ venue but officer does not present here today.

There was a rave on an adjourning RD but not on that day.

Phone calls received were not relating to Crown Rd Rave on that day.

On the day in question phone calls related to this particular rave. (Progress Way.)

Met Police RE-XE

My understanding is the door staff @ gate presented D as the event organiser, referring to page 184 Info re: caller reporting incident.

DJ

Was? SH? opp raised previously.

DEF

No.

Witness 2 Pc Miles - RO - 11:45 Am EIC

Attended venue on the 7th alone - did look @ Intel before attending.

Officer did not speak to any of the owners.

Did not know D was with Tyrone Benjamin.

WINTNESS 3 - PC Skinner - Bundle Tabs 12 of 13 Lead Statement 1 Tab 13

On the 7th Duty officer + walked into Estate and saw a van but did not recognise van.

He saw D however who admitted he was the organiser of the rave.

Statement 2 Tab 12

Youths were committing shop lifting out of the petrol station.

I had to call for reserve intervention.

I arrested D and people dispersed and D was realised.

Rave did not take place.

No doght the rave would have continued had he not arrested D.

DEF XEX.

1 9th July event @ Carpet right company building was occupied.

Saw speakers - Intel were loading equipment indoors.

706,

Details of van taken but was not D.

Carpet right was padlock round metal barrier.

Other car park had a front entrance.

I was senior officer attending the venue.

Later on I instructed the sergeant to contact the owners.

I latter see the defendant getting out the van.

I can't remember that, I may have updated others in relation to D getting out of van. But I may or may not have updated the system. On the 7th June D made admissions to me not aware of squatters.

Met XEX

Refers to statement on page 76

Witness Pc Edgoose - R.O 12:14pm EIC Read

Statement 21

Incident of 24th July:

I was in a vehicle that stopped D's Vehicle.

No threat to break defendant's window (ok)

It was all about drug issues.

Witness VI - Pc King 12:28pm EIC Tab 15/16

RVCORDELL 3

Statement Page 41

Officer has only met D once before.

D has all ways been polite.

Has never had any problem with the defendant.

D was relying eloquent of clearly knows the how.

Witness Pc Ames - Acting sergeant - R.O -12:46 Pm EIC DEF XEX

Event was outdoors.

Saw sound equipment substance speaker’s box.

Approximately the size of witness box but could not remember really as he was distracted by people.

No further questions.

Witness - Pc Elsmore - R.O - 14:10 EIC Tab 6 - pg DEF XEX

The Council is confused that of the PNC info of the statements, Council adds no probationary value of info Re: Witness being “afraid of D” Which he puts down to the way he worded, but he meant that people actually are afraid of possibly giving evidence in court.

DEF

Counsel argues that officer’s statement is designed to cause on evidence reaction of this of no value and speculatory in nature.

DJ

How many calls from public did police receive?

Witness

In excess of 15 calls - how many to the same venue and not other address.

Officer does not know the number of callers in relation to each of these occasions.

On page 15 - Allegations re: Mill marsh Lane, evidence from officer not first-hand - relied on cads and another Intel.

Query Re:”3 massive nitrous tanks”

DJ

Where did you get such info officer

Witness

From Page 65 - sergeant King - Crimit's Re reports, other Intel but not from people at the venue.

COUNSEL

Officer you signed a statement of truth ===to other witness statements.

DJ

We all know that on ASBO apps hearsay is allowed.

Counsel

Why did officer no and rely on Pc Kings Statements later than on the Crimit's reported.

R V CORDELL 4

Officer no and involved in taking info from Pc King.

Confesses he did it.

Did not, notice the discrepancy on statements.

Have heard of Every Decibel Matters - They were advertising and I believe the D knows a member of the above company.

No evidence D is involved in running their operations.

No attempt has been made to speak to directors of company.

No reason to why you didn't /contact the company.

I think from memory have met D once @ Edmonton police station.

At Page 16 1st paragraph - not consistent to fact that he met him on the 7/6/2014

All notes with cad number were listed from reports not officers’ own words - same applies from Cads that had not input.

Has not made any attempts to contact owners of premises.

Officers unable to assist courts in relation to why statements were not signed on notebooks profiles.

Another example of doings put in statements to blacken Mr Cordell's evidence in statement @ point 12, No convictions that of class A drugs unlike what's written in

Statements - another example of untrue cut and paste.

DJ

Ill ignore because no convections of class A drugs or supplying.

707,

Counsel

You cannot assist with witness reliability of info contained, can you?

Can Intel be wrongfully inaccurate? No Officer

On that particular re post, it appears to be right.

I did not speak to Parcell he is force @ 7 boroughs.

I believe he was not included in the email, because Intel (text missing) Email sent to LDE only.

Searched (text missing) for info on Cordell's convections.

Moving on to statement on Page 30

Does PO investigating unit have more info than it is letting on?

Officer

No

Are you aware that Miss Cordell has spoken to other officers Re: Rave?

Suggests that you do not want DS Tanner to be examined on these proceedings because she has information Re knowledge of raves and them not being connected to W/D

Spoke to Pc Tanner but not written what - spoke to (text missing) this year.

You have no recorded that you emailed her but then spoken to her.

Emails have been deleted and no copies keep on record.

Met police

XEX OF Witness vii

Done oath seductions:

Nothing in the contents of this report is inaccurate to my knowledge.

DEF

Hopefully the 2 witnesses on behalf of D should be able to give evidence tomorrow.

Witness viii

Miss Cordell ATT - 16:05 - EIC

RVCORDELL 5

D (her son) lives separately from me but I have been trying to help him sort out inaccuracies with both his PNC and other police matters.

Police is still popping around to his house - Simon tells me and also, I physically get to his flat before police have left.

He is being harassed by police.

DJ

Are 6 officers not reliant - on witness statement - there for putting a line though RD.?

DEF

Material deters with PNC that was included by Met - Therefore right to challenge. Plus, PNC in evidence does not correct.

DJ

Very little weight will be given to PNC.

DJ

Miss Cordell Met XEX

Bottom of Page 8 - Leaving party for Dwayne Edwards.

I got there at 7:30PM and left about 9:30 Pm 6th - 8thJune - D was also with Dwayne the days of Saturday and Sunday as well.

He was at my house for a 1 hour and half on Saturday and 1 hour on Sunday during the day. I agree I did not include it in my statement.

On Sunday it was around midday.

· was not with D from about 2AM on Sunday, no I was not.

Nor at 2AM on Saturday either.

On the 7th June I did see my son and so did all my family members that were at the party.

At Page 14

“Police did not have 101 books “

· and 3 paragraphs

Accepts that was told to me by DS Chapman.

DS Tanner called me on 11th or 12th. I believe they have a lot more information.

I am aware of full (text missing) Alleged involvement but not raves.

I do believe that met have a vendetta against my whole family including Tyrone - Harassment: pull them out for no reason, I would not say from every officer.

Miss Cordell continues

I am saying that there may be some truth but allegations of my son organising raves is horrendous.

Been scribbled out?

About medical statements of info has not been contained re question: D had been stabbed and was in hospital Been scribbled out?

20th June couldn't give evidence as to D were about but believe he had been arrested on the 19th 20th July does not witness him - did not give detailed route in statement because did not think it was relevant.

Problems with service of docs with police and would not take bundle because (text missing) with police, he panics and rings me every time he is stopped.

I have so (text missing) and right down all encounters with police all low not in the bundle.

DEF XEX

R V CORDELL 6

I accept involvement of police - they interact with her son and family.

You said Met police have a lot of info of you said “accepted involvement but not raves “

I have involvement with police of lots of data practically with Simon, but not in regard to raves, issues other than raves. I don't accept he is involved in organisation of raves.

Case Continues Tomorrow.

R V CORDELL 2/2 DAYS 1

Witness XEX

So, you are not yet Charity registered “Too Smooth”

Company were young eutrepures can advertise their Business. Page 77

708,

Retail brunches relating to music, sound equipment and co involved in provision of sound equipment.

Never took profit money from company.

Page 87

Deposit of Ł700-.00 daily rate is Ł100.

It is my signature at the end of this (text missing) the figures have not been edited - Page 88

All deposits are non-returnable under any circumstances on this mandatory if the equipment got confiscated, I did not make any profit, and I just did it to get to no people.

Non-profit it is just a hobby.

Statement from Page 2 - Bottom of Page:

You state that I accept, and aim was to rent equipment.

Its being suggested to you that the business you was designed was to make a profit.

DJ

As you own entertainment equipment - Yes -

I was not renting out equipment - being it a lot suggested that primary aim was to make a profit.

Renting him out sound equipment,” no I was not at all.”

Are you aware that music is a licensed activity and beliefs need a licence to play music?

I need a licence for both premises -Yes - I would not check if lending equipment to a private party.

Too Smooth Is registered but not trading because of the ASBO including Interim Order, my reputation has been ruined.

Interim App on 18th 2014 so before then June 2014? 4th? September Were any business transaction conducted during them periods.

I sold Business transactions.

I have lent to councils but not for business transactions, as a friend only.

It's incorrect that I was setting up raves.

Page 50 - bundle tab 9 - Inspector Hamill

I walked from Great Cambridge Rd towards them, it would be, impossible for door staff to get me for I was on the other side of Rd, never on the premises.

“Yes” it is incorrect.

RVCORDELL

7

“Yes” POs mistaken.

Page 38 - Tab 13 - Detective Skinner 2 events Page 75 - Tab 24

D denies knowing people alleged to have worked for him on the night - either Pc or person mentioned in statement is wrong.

Reason why you're found in these raves is because you help organise them.

Page 141

Vehicle was owned by me but was sold and now brought back.

Statement Page 3 Page 104

I was not with Holly Field on that day.

Page 99

Accept I was there in the van inside the unit.

The report is wrong; I had 2 boxes in the van - No speakers - I was not in the premises.

Did not help organise Rave and sound equipment was not mine.

I have tried to hire equipment but organisation of event - Birthday party nothing to do with me.

Is Pc Chandlers report wrong as well? “Yes”

9 / 10 - August 2014 Bottom Page 7 (Statement)

Accept I attended venue - for Birthday dinner - I was invited 200 People turning up had nothing to do with me.

With social networking it is easy for some one to have 200friends.

I had cylinders in my vehicle, requires legal authorisations, I have them on my car, for welding - I do welding continuously. I do it as a hobby.

I was not at the location for a large rave.

I do remember many people turning up.

I remember police being in attendance.

I would never shout @ crowd - to busy talking to the police.

Pc statements are wrong.

There's a possibility that I did say to police that it was a private conference.

DJ

Do you know that 20 people is the maximum - Yes Def XEX

Was Pc Edgoose out of car? - I know two of them come out of car and approached me.

24th May Incident - Do you remember speaking with Pc Jackson? Do not remember names.

Paragraph of T and C'S Re Falcon Park (Statement)

Deposit does go back unless damage or loss stopping due to breach of agreement.

Amount = No Fee

NFO

DEF

Additional witness not here, statement can be read but less weight because witness not here.

Witness 2 can be here in 1 half hours Half evidence

R V CORDELL

8

13:30pm DEF

N.F Witness.

Case closing subs.

Statutory test key:

· Whether D has acted in an Anti-Social Manner: Alarm / Distress.

· Astonishing of council to make that whole 11 officers were wrong.

· D's evidence is also not merit and neither his witness statements.

709,

· D's Mothers evidence - totally irrelevant - her evidence is based on conspiracy police have against her family.

· 7th June Witness Inspector Hamill and SO, Miles witness, Cordell (D). Inspector Hamill miles points, to D being the organiser.

· Disruption and concern Rave caused that is outlined by Cad Reports and officers’ statements.

· 19th July Inspector Skinner describes a rave and Cordell being organiser, another statement as far as D is concerned, which is totally wrong,

· Crimit's reports show D as organiser, of large raves according to officer's statements.

· Test mode out of submissions above.

· Consistent Patten of behaviour as by of D concerned.

1. Test of Public Nuisance? Does not (text missing) delaminates? Of fact, but from Cad's Re: alarm distress etc. Shows this has happened.

The impact this has on police resources looking @ noise levels and potentially speculating out of control. - Disorder due to shutting events down.

2. Pc Elsmore: Description (of crime) levels after the D was subject to order has reduced - only 3 - when D was active was significant more.

3. The order is necessary, and attention drawn to carefully word interim order.

Def Closing subs

1) Test to be passed can the allegations be proven? Deceived that alleged it may be illegal, it does not need to cause Alarm harm or Distress. Page 2 and 3,

Hearsay from Steve Elsmore is a copy and paste job.

Pc Parcel does not correct to file evidence, of Crimit's, which contained incorrect evidence that cannot be backed up, of D known for class A drugs and or supply - info is widely inaccurate.

Totality of evidence is hearsay as well as reports at Cannery Wharf.

No proof this was an illegal rave, as S.63 CJO 1994, No proof of Tress Pass - determination not proved to Criminal Legal Standards.

I did XEX Officer of @ no time did he indicate where info had come from, 24/05/2014.

2nd Allegations - Application relies on Hearsay again and Crimit's Pages 104 - 107, noted from evidence.

2nd Could hearsay from Josher Holyfield, who allegedly confessed that was looking to set up raves --­(A large section of court transcripts are missing)

Crimit's, “steward not her again.”

RVCORDELL 8

Page 98-100 - hearsay - from a Pc again - all in 3rd person, no indication that Pc attended himself.

No evidence that it was illegal rave.

Show determination in view of illegal rave and no proof has been submitted or covers witness as victim.

No allegations where app. Produced 1st hand evidence.

The particulars of allegations states illegal rave and no proof of the required standards has been submitted, nothing adduced.

It may be unlikely for presumption that given but it's possible.

In XEX.

App (text missing) del failed to Enfield Council, who did not pursue.

Does it show the organiser or just someone getting involved in things he shouldn't.

Hearsay be (text missing) Grounds are not here.

No evidence police confirmed D to be organiser.

D spoke to police; he gives reasonable Intel, calming he can't keep his mouth shut.

A man who state's his someone else's lawyer.

This is a rave said to have lasted 3 days, but evidence is weak.

Tyrone's presence was untrue, due to life threatening injuries. No competent evidence.

Police had Intel, Re: Every Decibel Matters, with no further line of investigation.

Additional hearsay, only evidence is a van of equipment hired equipment for free.

19/07/2014

Carpet Right - Inspector Skinners evidence - the indoor test of legality is proof of trespass and nothing adducted.

Mystery why no statement was taken from owner of keys? Also, whether or not consultation's had been given to access the premises.

On another occasion: Mr Cordell gave explanations to his presents.

24/07/14

“D does not accept he organised”, Pc Edgoose Page 50 - statement said he “did organise illegal raves” Admissions alleged from evidence, Entirely of conversations of others, not clear.

27/07/14

Same on Mill marsh Lane, hearsay evidence of a number of Pc's, who were called and gave evidence.

Interesting that someone other than D, (lost text) has supported evidence of people living and potentially others on the land treating it as home. Further evidence inaccurate regards shoplifters.

9/10 August

Evidence of Pc officers, does not match up with allegations in the application - on his duties, odd their being squatters, also did not try to contact owner while on duty suggesting D there at private party - due to lack of suitable equipment, evidence D was attending a private party.

Councillor.

General credibility of witnesses was errors, because hearsay of Crimit's of no prominence taking into account weight of statement.

Page 32? day and event 2.

Inconsistencies that are bios of officers to include evidence that favours the application by being unreadable.

R V CORDELL -09-

Allegation of 15 to10 boys (text missing) to talk unrelative of conduct.

Fear of reprisals.

LTC when given evidence was to prove sound organisation possibly which D accepts.

If? D was polite on his case.

Investigation not performed with measurements as it should have been.

Vendetta families highlighted.

Inconsistence's between start of Crimit's, a complete absinth of follow up, “is simply worrying”.

What other info is wrong, that we have not been able to check?

DJ

Mr Justio?? Pitions??? - sum ???? and????

Test of???? - Not related to police resources.

Was ASBO serious and persistent?

Decrease in activity - “huge decrees since Interim ASBO “but no indication of trends: before - after and previous years.

710,

Pc Elsmore, couldn't say, why there was a decrease in raves.

Correspondence of consultation - so far this relies wrongfully on weak evidence.

Met on points of how then the statutory test, in relation to raves and into what is required.

DJ

Delivery of judgment @ 15:32pm

Satisfied so that she is sure, that the D acted, during the dates in a manner so for the ABSBO to be Granted.

Order necessary for reasons:

· Nature of conduct of these parties’

· Noise of ????/? of ?????? civil

· Police officers have to attend in large numbers.

· Since interim order there has been a decrease in this type of activity.

· Satisfied D has acted in as manner, of such conduct, that he caused harassment alarm, distress.

· Conduct is necessary to protect residents of Enfield, from anti-social acts, from Simon Cordell.

DJ

Need to ensure probations are precise to award.

DEF

D's attendance at raves is not an issue and places unreasonable burden on him for attending parties when 20 people attended and what appears to be illegal then turns out to be legal, also places D in a difficult position if false steps are made to legality of parties, ASBO must be prevelitive

DJ

D can carry out legitimate and licensed business.

Point D; “or local authority addition”

DJ “To a period of 5 years”

Propitiations are precise and plain.

Terms of the Order.

D to upset then left room but lawyer present.

Terms need adding

END OF THE COPY OF THE Highbury Magistrates Court Transcripts.

On Monday, 23 May 2016, 3:18, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Dear Josephine.

How are you, I hope all is well? After all, things considered, I will get straight into business, this letter is, furthermore, towards our conversations, however I would appreciate it if you can reply to my questions below, as soon as practically possible and with due time before you finish your contract and leave office, so that we can conclude the case files and agreed activities, such as taking the case to court, so that to be sure that the conditions are imposed and defined within accordance of jurisdiction of the law, as you have already agreed to do so, this is also inclusive of all information ready for the next representative of Michael Carroll's office, who will be the new case handler, so that he or she can be prepared to instruct any barrister for any court herrings, as per-listed.

Some of the questions are in relation to the understanding of the on goings that did occur, at and in the court mentioning at wood green crown court, on the 22nd 23rd this is also inclusive of the 24th 02/2016.

On that date mentioned the company, who you are acting for, that is, representing myself Mr. Simon Cordell, and further named as Michael Carroll & co solicitors, that you do or did represent a contract with till the 2nd June 2016,

This information was also inclusive of the understanding of the solicitor firms running objectives towards the ongoing of this case, that in this instance is being brought against myself Mr. Simon Cordell by the commissioner of the metropolitan police and his acting officers, this is also inclusive of any other local authorities governing bodies, one mentioned as Enfield council. This being quoted being of an application representing a standalone Anti-Social Behaviour Order 2003, an Act to make further provision in relation to criminal justice and disorder act 1994.

It is being said that Miss Josephine Ward, at a point of time before the date of the said trial hearing at Court, that was postponed and did not go ahead, that she undoubtedly mentioned, when giving her legal guidance too, such accusations of incidents, that does refer to the organisation of illegal raves, that still said "acting in my defence."

It is being said that you did in fact explain before the date of the hearing, I quote; explain being of information regarding to the past representing barrister a Mr. Andy Lock, relating to that of Intel stating that he would not be able to attend court and act for myself as he did previously at the magistrates court, due to being away on leave and this being off the only issue raised by yourself, said to be regarded myself of your concern.

On the date of the hearing another barrister did apply to the judge, in aid of my acting solicitors yourself, so to be sure, that of you, having to no longer represent me in the court proceedings, due to a breakdown in communication between our self's, the judge ruled that Michael Carroll and co.’s solicitors, must act till the conclusion of the case, the overall Point I am highlighting as referred to is that the judge, "on the whole" has ordered the company to act for myself Mr. Simon Cordell.

First Question and request is.

In that understanding, I ask and request for you to direct the case to be carried out in such a manner, if what is being request is legal to do so. I request that being off; at the day of my trial, to act litigant with my mother as a McKenzie friend and for a barrister that we do select together, to represent me inclusive, so for he or she to be well instructed to represent myself (in

711,

the background" on the days of court.

Second Question is.

I also ask of you to set up a meeting and for this request to be inserted within one month of this dated letter, this meeting will and should be between who will be taking on the case, after you leave your office, alongside with the acting barrister chosen. I believe and understand that this is within the constraints of the law; I take my guidance from; https://www.gov.uk/represent-yourself-in-court/overview Second Request is;

I also request that you call for questioning the following officers and civilians.

· Josher Holyfield

· Superintendent Jane Johnson dated 30/ October 2014

· Steve Hodgson Dated 30th October 2014

· Dc Steve Elsmore Dated

· A/PS Charles Miles Dated 2nd August 2014

· A/Inspector Hamill Dated 6th August 2014

· Pc Donald McMillan Dated 14th August 2014 and 19th August 2014^ A/Inspector Douglas Skinner Dated 15th August 2014 and 9th September 2014

· A/PS Jason Ames Dated 15th August 2014

· Pc Aaron King Dated 15th August 2014 and 7th September 2014

· Pc Jhon Anderson Dated 19th August 2014

· Pc Eric Baker Dated 19th August 2014

· Pc Edgoose Dated 31 August 2014

· Hugh Giles, Director of Legal Services Metropolitan Police Director of legal services.

· Sally Gilchrist Legal Executive

Third question is.

Would it, please be possible for you to send me the barrister's notes, submission that he wrote for the last hearing also inclusive of a copy of the submission he prepared for myself in regards to the admittance of hearsay in the ongoing of the respondent's, case.

Forth question is.

I also request the date of my up and coming appeal, I know it is in Sep 2016 at some point in time but I am not sure what date.

Fifth question is.

There is the fact of the matter, which leads me to the concern of the Judge at Wood Green Crown Court giving the respondent, until the 01/09/2016 to hand over anything that was needed and what the judge himself asked to be given, as this date set will give me and the representatives of Michael carol and co solicitors, very little time in order to go over anything that will be handed over to us and the court.

The question is why did no one say anything about that date as it is so close to the appeal?

Sixth question is.

As has already been mentioned, I would like to know where I stand; I know you are leaving Michael Carroll & Co on the 03/06/2016. So, I would like to know the person that will be taking my case over at Michael Carroll's & CO after you leave, I ask is someone actually taking over my case at the office?

The worry I have is when I spoke to Michael Carroll at the office, when meeting you Miss Josephine Ward, is that Mr. Carroll then went downstairs "Outside of his office" and then spoke to my mother, there confiscation was.

Mr. Carroll said he will not do anything more on my case, because too much money had already been spent. So, to me he is only worried about money and not someone's life he is acting for.

I have asked repeatedly for many issues to be addressed from the start of the on goings of the case which has never been done to date, issues such as defining the conditions that were wrongfully imposed, as in fact it is clearly omitted in section 63 of the Crime and public disorder act 1994, That stating section 63 is for outdoor events unless trespass has taken place and all incidents being referred to are indoors, also that being of the fact trespass clearly never happened.

The representing barrister clearly states in his submissions to you in paragraph (11) of his notes, "Quoted "that I was not found guilty under the respondent's case".

If such issues of concern had been addressed as listed in all of the copies of correspondence of emails as asked then I feel it would never have taken up so much of any person's time as listed in date 22nd May 2016, inclusive of the new up and coming Appeal hearing, as for sure my case would have already been rectified

I also believe I would not be feeling deprived of justice and not with an even further risk of a further date than the new set appeal date of September 2016.

I do believe you understand from the barrister submissions, which were sent after the hearing at Wood Green Crown Court to Michael carols office, this is also to be inclusive of all the emails that I and my mother have previously sent to Miss Josephine Ward in regards to my case, that being said in reference to myself handing to the judge on two different

712,    

occasions, a copy of an article six containing evidence of police corruption in the development of the application you represent towards myself.

The issues listed and many other concerns previously listed have now piled up that must be addressed for myself to stand a fair and speedy trial, this work has then been added to the appeal costs and I feel that this has caused the cost to go up due to no fault of my own as I was never found guilty and the conditions were imposed wrongfully.

As if surely my concerns were managed before the start of the trial, when I and my mother were asked over and over again, the cost would have been added to the initial trial costs and not to the appeal costs. But it seems that I get the blame for this when I should not.

I believe since you have looked more into the case and what was being asked of you to be done for the trial, you have seen and noticed the reason(s) and even further to that why we wanted this addressed before the trial as it is real points that should have been dealt with at the trial, you or any person

can see that parts of the respondents case inclusive of the jurisdiction of the law is imposed wrong, there file is totally incorrect and the timelines are not correspondent to their articles, sort after many other important parts which was never dealt with correctly, as for fact the police was allowed to pass such evidence off at the trial as being correct when clearly it was not correct.

Just listed are many important facts of this case, which should and will aid in myself to get a fair trial," which I never got at trial."

· Seventh question is.

Could I also be forwarded the trial cost invoice for legal aid so I can see it please?

· Eighth question is.

I have spoken to Michael Carroll on the phone the other day and he is also not willing to do any other work on this case, and states that the case is ready for appeal, how can it be ready when there is still information to come from the CPS not later than the 01/09/2016 ordered by the Judge?

· Ninth question is.

So where am I left with this no acting solicitor to act on my behalf to deal with my appeal as Michael Carroll clearly does not want to do anything and only says to me to talk to you, but I know you are leaving the company so where does this leave me? And I feel I will never get a fair appeal why because of costs, because things were not done, which I asked to be done and my mother asked for them to be done, why do I feel the way I do about this case and the worry I have had to suffer?

· Tenth question is.

There are real big issues, I know that Michael Carroll & Co does not wish to deal with this Appeal is this due to the mess up due to things not being addressed at trial? I know Michael and you want to get broken away from this appeal and the judge never allowed this to happen, yet when you leave will Michael Carroll asked for this again?

How am I to know anything how am I not meant to worry?

This is my life and I have asked time and time again and so has my mother since this case started for the conditions to be defined, for this to be taken back to court and get them defined no one has done this in the case.

Even at trial Andy Locke tried to get this dealt with and the judge would not deal with this. Why can't these conditions be defined by the court why have I got to suffer not going out in fear the police will arrest me due to these conditions an avoiding tribunal and disciplinary action.

· Eleventh question is.

I keep explaining that I do not understand the conditions also that being of how they were legally put in place, so I ask you, if you yourself can see the conditions are wrong in law and if so why?

· Twelfth question is.

I have also attached a copy of the court transcripts of the day at Highbury Magistrates Court and request that you verify them to be true articles and submit them to the respondent, in support of the evidence of my trial, and confirm so?

I am left on conditions that have never been defined that are a beach to my human rights and nothing has been done, yet we have asked over and over again for this to be addressed.

I would like the above issues addressed before you leave the company on the 03/06/2016 so I know where I stand for the appeal please.

Yours fifthly Mr. Simon Cordell

 

 

 

     

 

84.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2

Asbo Re Letter 23-05-2016 03-32

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

 

84.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2

Asbo Re Letter 23-05-2016 03-32

23/05/2016

/ Page Numbers: 713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

--

713,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/05/2016 03:31:31 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Letter

Please see a copy of the court transcripts as listed below.

R v Cordell

714,

Same as Above!

715,

Same as Above!

716,717,718,719,720,

 

 

 

 

 

 

85.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v Commissioner 12-07-2016 13-17

12/07/2016

/ Page Numbers: 721

 

85.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 2

Asbo Simon Cordell v Commissioner 12-07-2016 13-17

12/07/2016

/ Page Numbers: 721

--

721,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 12/07/2016 01:16:57 PM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner appeal against imposition of an ASBO 29th, 30th September 2016 and 1st October 2016

Dear Simon / Lorraine I refer to the above matter.

Please note that Mr Andrew Locke has returned from a career sabbatical and he has agreed to deal with the appeal against the imposition of an ASBO. I am in the process of confirming a conference date with Mr Locke, hopefully within the next two weeks. I have notified Mr Morris from the Public Defender Service that Mr Locke is your preferred choice and I have requested the written submissions that he had prepared for the mention hearing in April 2016 that you did not consent to or permit us to serve upon the prosecution, instead your own document was served at your insistence and contrary to the advice given by both Mr Andrew Morris and myself. Please confirm any dates that you are not available so that this conference can be arranged.

I have requested previously the complete list of witnesses that you now insist on calling and specifying their relevance to the ASBO appeal and the issues as to whether you were an organiser of illegal raves. I cannot advise on whether the witnesses are relevant to an issue in the appeal without you confirming the list and specifying their relevance.

I await hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

 

 

 

 

 

86.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

86. 1. 2

Asbo Conference with h July 2016 - 13-07-2016 12-53

13/07/2016

/ Page Numbers: 722

 

86.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

86. 1. 2

Asbo Conference with h July 2016 - 13-07-2016 12-53

13/07/2016

/ Page Numbers: 722

--

722,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 13/07/2016 12:53:17 PM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Conference with Mr Andrew Locke - 27th July 2016

Dear Simon / Lorraine

The earliest date that Mr Locke is available for a conference to discuss your appeal is the 27th July 2016. Can you please ensure that you make yourself available on that date. I will confirm the time and location on Monday 25th July 2016.

Yours sincerely

Josephine Ward MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

 

 

 

 

87.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

87. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 02-09-2016 20-57

02/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 723

 

87.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

87. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 02-09-2016 20-57

02/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 723

--

723,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 02/09/2016 08:57:16 PM

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Hello Paige

I am Mr Simon Cordell and this is just a quick reply back to yourself in regard to our conversation earlier today on the telephone, It was very nice to talk with you and you was a great help with lots of well needed information I will be sending you the consent form completed with my statements of facts I hope to achieve this by tomorrow say mid-day.

Kind regards,

Mr Simon Cordell

If ever any quires, please don’t hastate to contact me by way of my personal mobile phone.

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630

Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

88.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 2

Me to Mother Reports uding a reply 03-09-2016 10-47

03/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737

 

88.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 2

Me to Mother Reports uding a reply 03-09-2016 10-47

03/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737

--

724,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 03/09/2016 10:46:31 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Here

Attachments: julia_report.pdf Goodie_Full.pdf

I added files so they are in one see attached

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com 

Sent: 02 September 2016 20:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: files

This is the reports from the hospital including a reply I am up to my statement at the end.

725,

Mental Health NHS Trust

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Haringey Assessment Ward St Ann’s Hospital St Ann’s Road N15 3TH

Telephone No: 020 8702 6120

julia_report.pdf

25/08/16

Inpatient Psychiatric Report for Mental Health Tribunal on 26/08/16

Name: Mr Simon Cordell

Home address: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex

Date of birth: 26 Jan 1981

Hospital: St Ann’s Hospital, St Ann’s Road, London, N15 3TH

MHA status: Section 2

Responsible Clinician: Dr Julia Cranitch

Date admitted: 16 August 2016

1.      Preamble

1.1  I am preparing this report for Simon Cordell's Mental Health Act Tribunal in my function as the ST4 doctor working at the Haringey Assessment Ward under the supervision of Dr Cranitch (Consultant Psychiatrist in General Adult Psychiatry). I am a full member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists since 2015.

1.2  This report has been prepared for the Mental Health Tribunal hearing-w 26th August 2016. In preparing this report I have had access to Mr Cordell’s electronic patient record or RIO, and I have had personal knowledge of Mr Cordell since 22nd August 2016.

726,

2.      History of Presenting circumstances

2.1  5/8/16 Mr Cordell was arrested by police at his home after allegations that he had made threats to harm his neighbour and her children. The forensic medical examiner requested a mental health act assessment due to concerns about Mr Cordell’s mental state.

2.2  Assessing doctors felt that Mr Cordell presented with features suggestive of mental illness, in particular paranoid persecutory ideas about the police and his mother Collateral history suggested deterioration in Mr Cordell’s mental state: that he has been withdrawn and expressed beliefs that the television is talking about him and paranoid ideas about his mother alongside recreational use of 'laughing gas' Neighbours had reported verbal aggression, playing loud music. Mr Cordell presented with pressure of speech, angry and paranoid ideas about the police and the assessing doctors felt that Mr Cordell had impaired insight about his condition and required further assessment in hospital.

3. Mental State Examination on admission

3.1  Appearance and Behaviour: medium height, slim mixed-race gentleman. Slightly dishevelled, dressed in black tracksuit, noted to be missing several teeth. Initially good rapport but became quite irritable at times

Speech: Fast rate, pressured speech. Tangential.

Mood: subjectively Tm really good', objectively appears elevated Thoughts: no formal thought disorder. Denied thoughts to harm him or others.

Perceptions: denied hallucinations

Insight: limited. Aware of reasons for admission but does not agree that he may have a mental illness”

3.2  "Simon stated that he has been very busy setting up his company recently. Spoke about working very hard and spending years 'studying'. He spoke in grandiose terms, describing his company as managing mental health services and working in the entertainment industry. He spoke about buying speakers for Ł50,000 each and hiring out equipment to Glastonbury and Isle of Wight festivals. Simon stated that he owns a 'city' and it is his job to understand the various roles that people have in society so that he can 'look after people’. When asked how he was able to fund these projects he described a system of fundraising using 'charity bars' and websites".

4.      Physical Examination on admission

4.1  Physical exam, ECG and routine blood tests were initially refused by Mr Cordell, however he consented for this to be completed on 18th August 2016 results as follows:

4.2  ECG: Normal sinus rhythm

727,

4.3  Physical examination: pulse 76bpm, warm and well perfused, cap refill <2 secs. No signs of anaemia, no central or peripheral cyanosis. Heart sounds normal, no added sounds. Chest clear. Abdo soft non-tender No calf swelling or tenderness. Neurology not formally assessed but grossly intact.

4.4  Blood tests have been within normal range.

5.      Psychiatric History

5.1  Mr Cordell has received previous diagnoses of Unspecified nonorganic psychosis F29 in 2015 and Adjustment disorder F34.2 in 2014.

5.2  11/3/2014 - Mr Cordell was assessed by Dr Jarvis of Enfield Triage Team after a referral by GP with a history of 9 months of anxiety symptoms which were exacerbated by an upcoming court date. Diagnosed as Adjustment reaction. Dr Jarvis suggested IAPT, gave option of sertraline, crisis plan, and contacts given

5.3  19/11/14 Mr Cordell was referred to the Home treatment team due to concerns about his mental state, |had become paranoid about his mother. Police also attended the house due to Mr Cordell screaming out in distress, continued to present as verbally abusive and paranoid Assessment terminated as not safe to enter the premises.

5.4  25/11/14 MHA assessment completed, found to be much calmer, not legally detainable under the MHA, given crisis contacts.

5.5  8/12/15 Referred to Early intervention services, Mr Cordell presented as unwell, rapid speech, thought disordered, spoke mostly about misdiagnosis and mistreatment by police, paranoid persecutory delusions regarding conspiracies to damage his reputation and to kill him organised by a global agency called 'Storm', referred to subliminal messages through his TV. Believed that upstairs neighbour was stalking him. she has since moved, and he felt that she was still harassing mm and had CCTV of this.

5.6  19/1/16 Referred for MHA due to concerns by early intervention service - "He appeared paranoid about people, police especially and had grandiose delusions. Not eating well. No apparent evidence of self-harm or harm to others".

5.7  22/1/16 "Simon presented as paranoid, suspicious, and grandiose with flights of ideas, clear evidence that he is suffering from a mental disorder" Section 135 applied for as Mr Cordell not allowing access to his property.

5.8  2/2/16 MHA assessment completed, assessed as not detainable, plan made for follow up with Early Intervention Service.

5.9  29/2/16 Mr Cordell was discharged from EIS as he was not willing to engage with the team and did not feel that he had a mental illness.

728,

6.      Past Medical History

6.1  Electronic notes state that Mr Cordell has Crohn’s disease; however, this is elsewhere described as irritable bowel syndrome.

6.2  Mr Cordell currently has an injury to his left 5th finger which is under review by ward doctors.

7.      Medication prior to admission

7.1  None

8.      Family History

8.1  Mr Cordell’s maternal grandmother suffered from a mental illness, most likely schizophrenia, for which she received clozapine treatment and had admissions to hospital.

9.      Personal History

9.1  Mr Cordell was born at North Middlesex University Hospital. He has a younger brother and sister. Mr Cordell's father worked as a union representative and his mother ran her own computer company.

9.2  Mr Cordell says he did not get on well with his father who was a violent man. He was violent towards Mr Cordell, Mr Cordell's mother and siblings. Mr Cordell left home at the age of fifteen and was homeless for a while. He was placed in to care after stealing a pint of milk. He was placed in a series of children's care homes around the UK but says that each time he would steal a car and drive back to London.

9.3  Mr Cordell said he was pushed hard to achieve at school by his father and that he was "an A-star student" for most of the time. He says he was intelligent and would do the work at other times and as a result would often just "mess about" in class. He went on to college and studied engine mechanics, completing a city & guilds qualification. After leaving school he went on to get jobs in the construction industry.

9.4  Mr Cordell says he has tried to build himself up a business for providing party entertainment, he is also setting up a charity. At the moment he says he is not able to earn from this due to the restrictions of his bail.

10.  Forensic History

10.1          Mr Cordell was put in a Young Offender's Institution at the age of 16 after repeated driving offences (driving without a license)

10.2          2015 Received a 5-year ASBO for organising illegal raves- not allowed to enter industrial or disused premises between 10pm and 7 am.

729,

10.3          Mr Cordell has stated that he is currently on bail for making threats to harm his neighbours; he has a court date relating to this on 8"1 October 2016.

11.  Drug and Alcohol History

11.1          Documented on RIO notes in December 2015 to have been using cannabis 'skunk' on a daily basis at that time.

11.2          Admitted to A+E in 2012 for assessment after allegedly using LSD and drinking a bottle of rum at a festival.

11.3          Mr Cordell reports that he has not taken any illicit substances recently, has used cannabis occasionally in the past ‘recreationally’. Mr Cordell denies alcohol consumption or any drug use recently.

11.4          Unfortunately, I have been unable to find record of a urine drug screen since admission to hospital.

12.  Social History

12.1          Mr Cordell lives alone in a 1-bedroom flat which he says he owns outright. Mrs Cordell lives nearby and provides support to Mr Cordell. There are also siblings and other extended family that live in the local area.

13.  Progress on the ward

13.1          15/8/16 Upon admission to Haringey assessment ward, Mr Cordell was clerked in by the _SHO, who documented that Mr Cordell presented as irritable, with pressured speech, tangential thought patterns, appeared elated and spoke of several projects of a grandiose nature including his business in the entertainment industry, buying speakers for Ł50,000 and hiring them to Glastonbury. Mr Cordell described owning a 'city' and that it is 'his job to understand the various roles people have in society so that he can look after people.

13.2          16/8/16 Mr Cordell refused routine blood tests, physical exam and ECG on the ground that he treats his body like a temple. Mr Cordell was documented as appearing settled and calm on the ward, eating and drinking well.

13.3          17/8/16 72-hour CPA review - Mr Cordell presented with rapid speech, often talking about unrelated themes, and stated he felt he was being persecuted. Mr Cordell became irate shouting at his mother, angry that she has not appealed his section. Mr Cordell presented with paranoid persecutory and grandiose delusions with tangential thought pattern, no insight into mental health. It was agreed by the team to commence regular 1mg lorazepam bd.

730,

13.4          18/8/16 little change in presentation, generally calm on the ward however quick to become agitated during interaction with staff, can be unpredictable. Refused prescribed lorazepam. Consented to physical exam, bloods and ECG by SHO who also reviewed injury to 5iri finger.

13.5          19/8/16 Presented as fairly settled and calm in mood, continued to refuse medication as prescribed. Discussed this with Dr Humphries and agreed to take night-time dose of lorazepam, which he subsequently did with lots of reassurance from staff.

13.6          20/8/18 Presented as calm in mood, polite and appropriate with peers, spent the day playing music on laptop with peers. Ate and drank well, attended to personal care.

13.7          21/8/16 Calm, slept well, accepted lorazepam as prescribed at night, however, refused olanzapine 5mg. Further discussion with nursing staff to explore his feelings about this, however Mr Cordell told staff that he had been recording the interaction on his phone and taking pictures. Complained of painful finger, accepted PRN ibuprofen.

13.8          13 8.22/8/16 Nursing notes describe Mr Cordell as quite settled however remains consumed with same preoccupations which he relates with pressured, uninterruptible speech, preoccupied with proving that he was wrongfully admitted to hospital. Otherwise interacting with peers appropriately, accepted 1mg lorazepam as prescribed, refused olanzapine.

13.9          23/8/16 Consultant review by Dr Cranitch and MDT, during the interview Mr Cordell spoke with pressure of speech, in an over inclusive and tangential fashion, largely preoccupied with injustices in the past particularly by the police which made it difficult for him to focus on the present. He also expressed rather grandiose plans about his business and his ability to help others in the world. Mr Cordell denied any thoughts or threats to harm others and stated that he did not feel he was mentally unwell at present. Mr Cordell however agreed to trial a small dose of olanzapine 5mg at night as recommended by Dr Cranitch for psychotic symptoms.

13.10      24/8/16 Mr Cordell has accepted his prescribed medication overnight and slept well.

14.  Current Medication

14.1          Lorazepam 1mg nocte

14.2          Olanzapine 5mg nocte

15.  Most Recent Mental State Examination (04/08/16)

731,

15.1          Appearance and Behaviour

Well kempt and casually dressed slim gentleman in his early thirties Staring eye contact, remained seated throughout the interview.

15.2          Speech

Fast pace and very difficult to interrupt, normal volume and tone.

15.3          Mood

Subjectively ‘happy’, objectively appears quite irritable, reports sleeping well, good appetite, positive plans for the future, no plans, or thoughts to harm self or others.

15.4          Thought

Evidence of tangentiality, struggled to stay on topic without repeated prompting. Overinclusive, spoke at length about minutiae of legal aspects of organising a festival, grandiose plans to help others across the country which were difficult to follow. Denied worries about the police, more focussed on health professionals and legal aspects of his admission to hospital and alleged wrongdoings

15.5          Perception

No evidence of responding to abnormal perceptions, denied same.

15.6          Cognition

Alert and orientated to time place and person.

15.7          Insight

Mr Cordell feels he does not have a mental disorder.

16.  Factors affecting this hearing

16.1          Mr Cordell has made recordings of assessments and other interactions with health professionals and police in the past and refers to this frequently. Mr Cordell has attempted to make recordings of encounters with staff during his admission, there is a chance he may attempt to make recordings of tribunal proceedings.

17.  Opinion and Recommendations

17.1          Mr Cordell is currently suffering from a mental disorder:

17.2          He presents with persisting psychotic symptoms of paranoid persecutory delusions involving police and mental health services, he also presents with pressured speech, and has presented as elated and irritable, which may represent a mood disturbance Whilst Mr Cordell has indeed had several encounters with the police and has a forensic history, it is my opinion that his interpretation and experience of these encounters goes beyond reality into beliefs of a delusional nature. These beliefs have dominated Mr Cordell's life and his behaviour at the expense of his wellbeing and ability to function safely in the community.

17.3          In the past these persecutory ideas have also focused on family members and neighbours, one of his neighbours was also a service user and needed to be rehoused as a result of encounters with Mr Cordell. Mr Cordell presents with evidence of thought disorder; his speech is pressured and tangential upon interview.

17.4          His mental disorder is currently of a nature or degree to justify on­going detention in hospital.

732,

17.5          If he insisted on leaving the ward, we would ask our home treatment team to monitor him at home and offer him medication - historically Mr Cordell has not engaged well with community services due to his lack of insight.

18.  If Mr Cordell is NOT discharged from his Section:

18.1          We would encourage Mr Cordell to take antipsychotic medication, starting with a low dose and monitoring closely for response and any side effects.

18.2          We would titrate the dose antipsychotic medication according to his mental state and side effect profile.

18.3          Once regularly taking antipsychotic medication and stabilised in mental state we would start to introduce some leave from the ward initially escorted before moving to longer periods of unescorted leave.

18.4          Once deemed stable in mental state we would look at discharge to his home with Home treatment team support and referral to community team.

Signed: Dr Rosemary Mills ST4 to Dr Julia Cranitch, Consultant Psychiatrist

Dated: 24th August 2016

733,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust A University Teaching Trust

SOCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE REPORT FOR MENTAL HEALTH ACT TRIBUNAL

HEARING

Name of Patient: Mr Simon CORDELL

Date of Birth: 26 January 1981

Hospital Number: 11214451

NHS Number: 434 096 1671

Address: Permanent: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield. EN3 7JQ

Current: Haringey Assessment Ward, St Ann’s Hospital, Tottenham. N15

Status: Section 2

GP: Dr Y Chong, Nightingale HSE Surgery, 1 Nightingale Road N9 8AJ

Responsible Clinician: Dr Julia Cranitch, Haringey Assessment Ward, St Ann’s Hospital.

Report Author: Goodie Adama

Locum Community Mental Health Nurse

Early Intervention for Psychosis

Lucas House 305-309 Fore Street London. N9

Date of Report: 25 August 2016

I am a Locum Community Mental Health Nurse and allocated care co-ordinator to Mr Simon Cordell. I work for the Enfield Mental Health NHS Trust in partnership with the London Borough of Enfield, the local Social Services Authority that has statutory responsibility for providing after care to Mr Cordell under Sectionll7 when he leaves hospital.

4

In preparing this report I had access to previous reports, nursing and medical notes on electronic data base - RIO. I had the opportunity to speak with Mr Cordell as his care co-ordinator. And with his consent, I spoke with his mother Mrs Loraine Cordell by telephone. Mr Simon Cordell prefers to be called by his first name, Simon.

1

SIMON CORDELL

734,

Goodie_Full.pdf

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey NHS

Mental Health NHS Trust A University Teaching Trust

CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO ADMISSION

Arrested at his home address after his mother raised concerns about his mental state - he was allegedly verbally threatening towards his neighbour and (?) neighbour's children. Simon's mother called police who arrested him. He was seen by the FME at Wood Green police station, then referred for MHA.

CURRENT MEDICATION

Olanzapine 5mg

PERSONAL & FAMILY HISTORY

Mr Cordell was born at North Middlesex University Hospital. He has a younger brother and sister. Mr Cordell says he knows his maternal grandmother attempted suicide on a number of occasions and had had admissions to mental hospital. Mr Cordell's father worked as a union representative and his mother ran her own computer company.

Mr Cordell says he did not get on well with his father who was a violent man. He was violent towards Mr Cordell, Mr Cordell's mother and siblings Mr Cordell left home at the age of fifteen and was homeless for a while. He was placed in to care after stealing a pint of milk He was placed in a series of children's care homes around the UK but says that each time he would steal a car and drive back to London.

Mr Cordell said he was pushed hard to achieve at school by his father and that he was "an A-star student" for most of the time. He says he was intelligent and would do the work at other times and as a result would often just "mess about" in class. He went on to college and studied engine mechanics, completing a city & guilds qualification. After leaving school he went on to get jobs in the construction industry.

Mr Cordell says he has tried to build himself up a business for providing party entertainment. At the moment he says he is not able to earn from this due to the restrictions of his bail.

Mr Cordell has had one long term relationship which he describes as "my first true love". This is with a woman called Diana who is currently studying physiotherapy. They were together thirteen years, but he says she has moved back out of his flat in recent months. Mr Cordell thinks this is

SIMON CORDELL

2

735,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

secondary to the repeated involvement of the police in their lives and the stress this has caused.

Mr Cordell says he does not smoke tobacco and does not drink alcohol.

Grandmother (? maternal) had BPAD and/or schizophrenia

PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY in brief

-Has previously been open to Enfield EIS, discharged in March 2016 due to non-engagement -Has been assessed under the MHA in 2014 and early 2016 but was not detained as there was not sufficient evidence of a mental disorder

FORENSIC HISTORY

Mr Cordell was put in a Young Offender's Institution at the age of 16 after repeated driving offences (driving without a license)

Mr Cordell says he has not been in trouble with the police for a number of years. He had stolen some trainers at a festival in 2009 and prior to that had not been in trouble since 2005.

He denied any violent offences.

Mr Cordell currently stands accused of burglary. He has a solicitor and the case will not be heard until July at the earliest.

MEDICAL HISTORY

Simon said he had Crohn's disease as a child. He denied any other physical health problems. DRUGS AND ALCOHOL

He said he only got drunk once a teenager and has since not taken alcohol or drugs. He denied current use

FINANCE

Simon receives Ł200 Income Support every fortnight VIEWS OF THE NEAREST RELATIVE

With Simon's consent I spoke with his mother Mrs Loraine Cordell. Mrs Cordell's views were that "I don't think he [Simon] needs to be on section; he is not a danger to himself or other people" Mrs

SIMON CORDELL

3

736,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

Cordell said as far as she knows Simon is willing to work with the doctors and take his medication. Mrs Cordell will not say her views if Simon changes his mind and her response summed up as "we cross the bridge when we get there".

VIEWS OF THE PATIENT

Simon is willing to co-operative with mental health services. He said he is willing to take his medication.

He gave me a letter he wrote to indicate his commitment to treatment and willingness to engage. I attach it for your information.

POSITIVE ASPECTS OF PATIENT

Simon was able to access community resources independently and had the ability and capacity to make some choices. He is competent in his activities of daily living skills.

He plans to register a charity to raise funds to support causes dear to his heart One of such causes is towards premature babies. He said his sister was born premature. The other is to help homeless people.

AFTERCARE

Simon lives on his own in a one-bedroom ground floor flat in Enfield. His mother is supportive and in constant contact with him.

Enfield Council will have section 117 responsibilities and will provide the appropriate housing and care in the community.

Simon will also have the support of an allocated care co-ordinator who will regularly monitor his mental state and concordance with medication. The team will offer Simon psychology assessment and or input; he will be seen and reviewed by psychiatrist regularly i.e. every 2-3 months or sooner If required. He will be offered interventions around concordance to medication, identifying triggers and relapse preventions. A referral to dual diagnosis worker will be offered. Simon will have access to groups such as social recovery and mental well-being and specialist services for vocational/occupation recovery.

SIMON CORDELL

4

737,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey NHS

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

RECOMMENDATION

I met with Simon today on the ward and assessed him in preparation of the report. Simon recognised me immediately. He was warm, welcoming, polite and co-operative throughout the meeting. He stated about half a dozen times that he is willing to work with the services and also willing to accept medication.

It would be helpful if Simon will agree to stay in hospital to continue treatment as he appeared to have made good progress since admission. As part of the medical and nursing team I believe that Simon will benefit from staying in hospital for further assessment and continue treatment.

Goodie Ada mo Locum CMHN

Early Intervention for Psychosis

SIMON CORDELL

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

89.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 05-09-2016 16-24

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 738

 

89.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 05-09-2016 16-24

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 738

--

738,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/09/2016 04:23:59 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Can you help me sort this out please?

ok thanks

On Monday, 5 September 2016, 16:22, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Simon I will need to pick your card up and put the money into my bank so I can pay for it as I have no money.

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 05 September 2016 16:17 To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Can you help me sort this out please?

Can you help me sort this out please?

http://www.ebav.co.uk/itm/Canon-Compatible-CISS-Refill-Pigment-Ink-6-x-1-Litre-/131174780037?hash=item1e8aa04c85:g:85YAAOxvQalTW4KM

Ł83:00

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/JOB-LOT-Self-Adhesive-Vinyl-x-22-Rolls-Various-Colours-Sizes-Crafts-Fun-/182260532060?

hash=item2a6f93035c: g: eXgAAOSwtnpXo5Ww

try to get for Ł35 pounds please say for starting company + Ł20 delivery and I need a roll of plan paper. I see it for about Ł60, I think.

 

 

 

 

 

90.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

90. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -05-09-2016 12-34

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 739

 

 

90.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

90. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -05-09-2016 12-34

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 739

--

739,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 05/09/2016 12:25:34 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: introductory call

Simon,

Not a problem.

Regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630

Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired [mailto:re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 05 September 2016 12:07

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Dear Paige

I know I said I would get the paper work over to you but it is taking longer than I was thinking it would, I am hoping to complete this later today maybe tomorrow I am very sorry about the delay and I will send everything r to you as soon as it is completed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

 

91.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

91. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 05-09-2016 12-07

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 740

 

 

91.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

91. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 05-09-2016 12-07

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 740

--

740,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/09/2016 12:06:42 PM

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Dear Paige

I know I said I would get the paper work over to you but it is taking longer than I was thinking it would, I am hoping to complete this later today maybe tomorrow I am very sorry about the delay and I will send everything r to you as soon as it is completed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630

Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

 

92.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

92. 1. 2

Too Smooth RE Can you is out please 05-09-2016 16-23

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 741

 

 

92.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

92. 1. 2

Too Smooth RE Can you is out please 05-09-2016 16-23

05/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 741

--

741,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 05/09/2016 04:22:47 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Can you help me sort this out please?

Simon I will need to pick your card up and put the money into my bank so I can pay for it as I have no money.

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 05 September 2016 16:17 To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Can you help me sort this out please?

Can you help me sort this out please?

http://www.ebav.co.uk/itm/Canon-Compatible-CISS-Refill-Pigment-Ink-6-x-1-Litre-/131174780037?hash=item1e8aa04c85:g:85YAAOxvQalTW4KM

Ł83:00

http://wwwebavcouk/itm/JOB-LOT-Self-Adhesive-Vinvl-x-22-Rolls-Various-Colours-Sizes-Crafts-Fun-/182260532060?

hash=item2a6f93035c: g: eXgAAOSwtnpXo5Ww

try to get for Ł35 pounds please say for starting company + Ł20 delivery and I need a roll of plan paper. I see it for about Ł60, I think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

93.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

93. 1. 2

Asbo Josie to Me 08-09-2016 01-40

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 742,743,744

745,746

 

 

93.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

93. 1. 2

Asbo Josie to Me 08-09-2016 01-40

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 742,743,744,745,746

--

742,

From: JOSEPHINE WARD <josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 04:01:40 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

too smooth <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Proposed letter for Commissioner of Metropolitan Police

Attachments: Specific disclosure requests by Simon Cordell 08.09.2016.docx

Lorraine / Simon

Simon, I do not believe that it is in your best interests for me to serve the suggested amendments to the letter that I proposed sending to the Ms Sally Gilchrist. The reason for this advice is similar to the advice given to you by Mr Morris on 4th April 2016 and you decided to ignore his advice. A lot of the matters you raise I have previously advised you can be dealt with by cross examination. Your instructions are simply that you have not organised, provided equipment, or been concerned in the organisation of illegal raves. In relation to all events with the exception of Millmarsh Lane you dispute providing equipment or any intention to hold any events. In some you are visiting friends who are homeless and have a LAPSO notice up confirming they are treating the building as their residence. The legal technicality you refer to i.e. absence of trespass does not prevent any parties from being held at the buildings in question as amounting to anti-social behaviour. You are well aware of how anti-social behaviour is defined and loud music being played over two nights would satisfy this definition as it undoubtedly causes noise nuisance and distress to neighbours. Your defence to Progress Way is denying being in attendance inside the premises on any occasion and you merely dropped off keys. The question as to whether the premises were being squatted and the appropriate notice was on display to prevent trespass does not affect whether anti-social behaviour was caused. I have advised you that championing the rights of persons squatting in a building to hold a party where a couple of hundred people attend and justifying the event as not being a rave due to lack of trespass does not prevent the event from causing anti-social behaviour. Anti-social behaviour was clearly caused as a result of the Progress Way event. There is a significant risk that you will alienate the Judge if you advance the argument that anyone squatting can hold a loud party. The loud parties cause anti-social behaviour regardless of trespass / rave definition being satisfied.

I ask you to reconsider whether the attached document should be served on the Respondent. This document I have copied and pasted from the amendments you made to the letter that I sent to you. The views you expressed in the letter and the requests made were your requests and legal challenges, so I have changed "we" to, "I, Simon Cordell" to reflect this. My view is that this document should not be sent but if you insist then please confirm this in writing. Type in your signature and email back to me please.

Mr Andy Locke is available for a conference on 13th September 2016 at his Chambers and following this conference a decision will be made whether to list the case for lack of disclosure or not.

Please confirm your instructions on the service of the attached word document. I reiterate that I do not believe that it is in your interests to serve the document.

Regards

Josephine

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Josey please see letter back from Simon

From: JOSEPHINE WARD mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 08 September 2016 12:51

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Proposed letter for Commissioner of Metropolitan Police Lorraine

Please confirm whether there are any additions that Simon wants included in this letter. I need to send this document across within the next hour.

743,

Many thanks

Josephine

744,

Specific disclosure requests by Simon Cordell.docx

Specific disclosure requests by Mr Simon Cordell who insists the below is forwarded.

I, Simon Cordell am of the view that a lot of the CAD’s are fabricated and being used in support of this ongoing appeal.

Such as the Progress Way matters that is in reference to completely different geographical locations, some distance away from Progress Way.

The redacting of the CAD messages makes this extremely difficult to stand a fair trial against under my Human Rights, Article Six the Right to a fair trial.

Referring to the Grid numbers contained in the respondents bundle that do show that a large amount of the evidence being relied upon does in fact show wrong locations, leading further towards the matter of concerns regarding the CADs, when taking a clear insight to CAD 1047 of the 8th June 2014, That does state the call name of a police officer on duty as PC Shink, who’s grid reference location was 534380, 195513 this insight leads to other issues of concern to be highlighted and them issues being that of a vast majority of all other CADS relating to progress way, do in fact having the same Grid number as the officer on duty PC Shink, but on each CAD, the Call name has been redacted Mr Simon Cordell believes the cads are of police officers not civil people and asks for the to be redacted.

I, Simon Cordell request all CADs / crime reports for all events cited in the ASBO application where reference is made to police attending the location in response to crimes being committed. This includes all incident numbers that do not include the relevant Cad intelligence contained in linked explicitly to and Linked implicitly to, that is relevant to the bundle so that I can stand a fair appeal, this is to include crown roads party at the old man building on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 as in cad 3319 and mutable others CADS.

I, Simon Cordell request disclosure of the CCTV of the persons breaking into the premises on the 25th May 2014, the CRIS and details of any persons arrested for criminal damage / burglary.

I, Simon Cordell request the full details of the original intelligence report inputted on 25th May 2014 and also reasons why there was a need to update this report on 19th June 2014. The Intelligence report should not be allowed in evidence under the hearsay rules as it is prejudicial to me. The report has been amended.

I, Simon Cordell question the accuracy and truthfulness of the statements, CADS etc served in support of the above. I also question why some of the CAD reports have been redacted. I believe that the CAD’s may well confirm the names of the real organisers, vehicle registrations etc that will confirm no vehicle belonging to the Appellant being inside the venue. I also question the chronological sequence of the CAD reports due to the time stamps.

CAD Number: CAD 2637

Date: 07/06/2014

Time: 08:18

Page: Page 191 to 195

745,

Specific disclosure requests by Simon Cordell.docx

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16 - Page 196 to 198

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22 - Page 203 to 205

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20 - Page 179 to 183

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47 - Page 233 to 237

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44 - Page 238 to 241

I, Simon Cordell specifically ask the Respondent to confirm why the event was not closed down or proof of trespass or evidence of profit being made as required under the licensing act 2003 and section 63 of the CJPOA, if it was in fact a rave.

I, Simon Cordell also asks why went the sound systems not seized under section 63 of the CJPOA.

I, Simon Cordell seek clarification as whether a section 144 LAPSO notice was on display or tress pass had taken place.

I, Simon Cordell question why the Respondent has not supplied any Cads from 6th June 2014, which is in fact the date when this event started and why so many Cads’ are missing from the 07th and the 08th June 2014.

ALMA ROAD - 24TH JULY 2014, I Simon Cordell will state that this date should be struck from the Respondent’s bundle as there was no rave / Event.

I, Simon Cordell will argue that the court was wrong in principle in granting the original ASBO application as the Respondent made the original application based on me being involved in illegal raves. The Respondent did not establish this at the initial hearing and the District Judge erred in granting this ASBO.

It has been noted and said by PC Parcel that the I am known for class A drugs and or supplying drugs this was proved not to be true as can be read in a copy of the magistrates court transcripts and that of the district judge agreeing to take no weight in such statements, why has this not yet been deducted?

In the interests of a fair hearing I, Simon Cordell request all Cad’s cross linked and referred to should be served in an unedited format.

I feel that contained in the respondents bundle that there is so many fabricated irregularities, that they should be investigated, and I feel without this being done I will not stand a fair trial.

I also believe that all the anonymous witnesses are police officers. I do not believe that they are civilian witnesses and I require all anonymous witnesses to attend court to give evidence.

I, Simon Cordell also request that all disclosure is made in respect of the raves at the Old Man Building, Crown Road on 6th, 7th and 8th June 2016.

746,

Signed:

Dated:

 

 

 

94.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

94. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-09-2016 23-10

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 747,748,749

 

94.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

94. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 08-09-2016 23-10

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 747,748,749

--

747,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 11:10:24 PM

To: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Dear Josie

I do not understand why it is not in my best interests for you to serve the suggested amendments that I made in relation towards the letter that you proposed sending to Ms Sally Gilchrist.

The reason I do not understand is because:

1.      Mr Morris advice on 4th April 2016 was the same as what I had explained to yourself when the case had started dated 12th September 2014 as received on receipt by yourself and by method of email's and them email's referred to the respondent's application of an Asbo order quoting "That a case should not rely solely on hearsay" as mine seems to do by the police officer's. Most of the hearsay in any case is reported to be third party and therefore carry less weight in any case.

2.      I want to show the true facts about the case as I am the one who is suffering because of untrue cut and paste facts that represent the basics of the respondent's case and that singed evidence being off fabricated police statements, as detailed in the amendments towards your letter to Sally Gilchrist, whom is already in receipt of such evidence but refuses to act upon such intelligence in accordance of the law and you advise me to ignore this even low I suffer.

3.      I understand that a lot of the matters that should be dealt with at court will be.

4.      I still argue for a speedy and fair trial: and feel that when a judge asks the respondent to reply by a set date such as the 1/08/2016 as the judge HHJ PAWLAK has ordered to happen it should.

5.      The respondent should do so within the time duration as dated 01/09/2016 and agreed with the judge and then received with the correct response, as has not happened.

6.      I have been awaiting the reply since 00/02/2016 from an ongoing civil application that is dated 13th August 2014 so to be able to have a fair trial.

7.      After waiting on the 01/-9-2016 with no response I waited till the 2/09/2016 and telephoned the respondent I spoke with a lady called sally gill Hurst, she states that she has served some paperwork to my solicitor's at the beginning of august a month prior, after finishing our conversation I contacted my solicitor she explained to me that she was away on holiday and that I must wait till she gets back on the 6th September 2016.

8.      I again put the phone down and called my solicitor firm's office to see if any paperwork had been served to be told no.

9.      On the 8TH August I spoke with my mother who explained to me that she had been in contact with my solicitor and that I would be reviving a letter to sign to be sent to Sally Gill Hurst.

10.  On receiving this letter, it raised the following concerns.

11.  The paperwork has not been served in time.

12.  In a preliminary hearing, so to be ready for the appeal the judge ordered this to be achieved.

13.  The respondent has had another 6 months sine 22/02/2016 from the start of the on goings as dated 13/08/2014

14.  We are now at 08/09/2016 the appeal is on the 26/09/2016 this leads me to the concerns of once again the case being postponed, as it has already been ten times before.

15.  I have handed to article Six the right to a speedy and fair trial in regard to some of my human rights being breached because of the on goings in the ASBO proceedings drafting clear corruption and fabricated evidence asking for the case to be investigated our the correct paperwork to be served in accordance to my response to HHJ PAWLAK.

16.  Yes, my instructions are clear, I did not organised any illegal raves or provide any equipment with an intention of holding an illegal rave and surely did not cause any Anti-Social behaviour on the dates sighted, this is also to include Mill Marsh Lane with no exception.

17.  Yes, in some I am visiting my friends who are or were homeless at the time.

18.  The legal technicality you state that I refer to i.e. absence of trespass that does not prevent parties from being held in accordance of the law, may lead to a standalone anti-social behaviour order if a person commits a public order offence, to which I did not cause as I was not organizer neither did I take part in the organisation of the party or did I commit any civil or criminal offence. –

748,

-- In any one un-regular occasion over the duration of the weekend I can a understand the noise nuisance and distress to neighbours this can cause if the allegations were to be true and not fabricated by police as I can prove. I was not the organizer of the event.

19.  The case is based on what the respondent based it upon and in my case, this is the organisation of illegal raves not the organisation of raves: -

20.  I proved that indoor parties are not illegal unless there is a breach of the licensing act 2003 as this is the law for entertainment.

21.  That the word rave cannot be used in a building as section 63 requires as a key element unless tress pass has taken place.

22.  I proved that I was not the organizer of the events as I was not.

23.  That I never took part in any anti-social behaviour or intended or encouraged any other person to neither.

24.  Anti-social behaviour was not clearly caused as a result of the Progress Way by myself or my actions as I was only a visitor who never caused any offence.

25.  I feel as my solicitor you should have my best interest at heart and if you Know a police officer to be caught for being corrupt for, the evidence that they have supported so that your client faced a wrongful conviction of any sort you should not encourage them to not stand up for what is correct and right, so I do not understand why you would ask me to reconsider whether the attached document should be served on the Respondent.

26.  The amendments I made have already been served on the 22/02/2016 and the Judge ask for the respondent to answer them questions from the 01/02/2016 and the respondent refuse to do so.

27.  I do insist for the challenges to be answered as it is my life that has been tarnished for civil proceedings, so I do confirm this on writing.

28.  I feel that the meeting has been left by yourself to the last minute I have been requesting this in a multitude of emails to be achieved well in advance to the date that you have now sited a few days before the appeal, when I know that you have had ample amounts of time, so if this is the earliest time I will take it and I look forward to meeting Mr Andy Locke, thank you.

29.  I do not see how the case will not get re listed due to lack of disclosure to be quite frank.

30.  I do not understand why any solicitor would encourage me to go to trial or appeal and not draft out the police corruption that you can clearly see in turn making me accept the clearly fabricated evidence and wrongful conditions that I know have been imposed on myself under section 63 with no trespass taking place, this being said as for any of the incidents contained in the Asbo and with you knowing the true facts of them incidents being contained in private air.

31.  There is also that of the clearly fabricated evidence I am standing against as for sure any solicitor works in Co Hurst towards the understanding of noun precedent in relation to the weight of any evidence put towards a client. I am concerned about the case, relying sole on hearsay by police. Is this correct in procedure?

32.  However I do understand and take note, that all resident parties contained within the respondent’s bundle, were held on single occasions and in places of residence and were not held as a running commercial business by myself or by any other to my knowledge. I have also read that any person is entitled to have a house or resident party in private air under the licensing act 2003 or where they reside. To my understanding, each accused incident in the respondent’s bundle is a place of residence and was in fact different people holding their own private parties at their places of residence.

33.  Aloe there may have been complaints in regard to issues of concern about them house parties I was not the occupier of any of the accused locations; neither was I the hire of equipment and surely not the organizer.

34.  I was establishing a hire company around the dates of the accused events and have provided evidence of the work I had been committing myself to. I was not trading at the time and whenever hiring out equipment I do with due care and responsibility, however I do not accept responsibility for other people's actions when hiring out such equipment in good faith. I do take legal action for any persons when breaking my terms and conditions. I do not hire out equipment to any person without being in the constraints of the law and in good business practice or without the correct ID.

35.  On one occasion I did hire out a sound system in good faith on a pro Bono basis, this being of the understanding that no laws were being broken and as a Ltd company acting responsible. I know that I should not be liable for them persons actions when hiring out equipment and having the correct protocols in place as I clearly do.

36.  I do not feel that it is right for the respondent to obtain criminal punishments such as section 63 of the crime and disorder act 1994 and for that section to be then imposed against my freedom of movement and many other Human Right that have been breached by being pro-claimed under wrongful civil proceedings, as for a multitude of incorrect procedures and legislation that I have occurred, for instance I have no previous nature offences of a similar sort as required by law when applying a standalone Asbo on a person’s statue, as I do feel I should of have had the right to challenge the allegations under a true Criminal investigation, especially when

749,

37.  referring to the organisation of illegal raves as the respondent has clearly headlined the offence to be.

RE: SIMON CORDELL V. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPOSITION OF AN ASBO - 26TH SEPTEMBER 2016 AT 10:00 AM

I write even further with concerns regarding: Your issues of concern dated 08/09/2016 that was received by email at the time:

06:00pm,

So as towards the letter drafted by yourself and amended by myself is the response as detailed below, with the listed concerns.

1. I understand that the correct protocols for the offences I am being accused of should be carried out in a manner to be of a high professional standard as required by law, so for me to be able to defend myself.

2. I am therefore not happy with the issues of police corruption not being addressed, by you self and all other legal persons, as I know I cannot stand a fair trial or appeal without them issues being rectified first and this is why the amendments have been made to your letter to Sally Gilchrest Hurst.

3. I have suffered since 2014 for conditions that have been wrongfully imposed upon myself and still awaiting an appeal.

1.1  As my acting solicitor you drafted a letter requesting the respondent to remove any CADS that have been placed in the Asbo bundle served to myself Mr Simon Cordell.

1.1.1        I understand that they cads are already inputted incorrectly and you and the barrister take note of this, as do , we all achieve this in the understanding that I could not have and did not commit the alleged offices that I have been accused of that are contained with a vast majority of other CADS within incorrect and blocked out context; such as the Att Locations that are un-redacted and do state Crown road and other locations such as Hardy Way, on the same day as progress way so I could not have committed as I could not be in two places at once.

1.1.2        There is a further issue in relation to a significant amount of Cads that should contain the Att Locations that have been blocked out such as referred to as retracted and them CADS that also contain the Grid reference numbers that also prove other locations already.

1.1.3        However I am even further worried about CADS such as all the listed and any in the format such as fully retracted where know person can, or is able to see the true CAD intelligence in regards to the wrongful fabricated claims being held against my person, being so reviled for all to see.

1.1.4        I do believe when all CADS do get retracted and a blocked, then that will help any barrister and put them in a better position to defend me, so for all Cads and pages in his Asbo application being served in an unedited format and so for myself to understand the truth, to why the conditions have been imposed upon myself since the Asbo's on goings.

2.1  I am also seriously worried about the reasons why the case has taken so long with all the evidence I have supported towards my innocent plea, such as: -

2.2  The incorrect time stamps.

2.3  The facts of the conditions of law relating to a section 63 of the crime and disorder act being imposed upon myself for indoor house parties without tress pass taking place.

2.4  The Events that I am being accused of no police officers have gone and spoken to any landlord’s or owners.

2.5  There has been no evidence of a breach under the Licensing act 2003.2.5. No proof of organisation being presented against myself.

2.6  There is also the matter being of; all incidents that are in the Asbo application with particulars to them members of the police involved, not having 101 books that are time stamped for them incidents and I once again would like to request them.

3. In relation to all cads that do have a grid number of 53491,196790 and or Att location of Crown road I request that the police officers involved in attending that incident attended court so to be able to prove that what PC Elesmore stated to the Judge at the magistrates court on the date of trial to obtain a guilty plea against my person, not to be creditable in any weight , that being of all the statements he made that are contained in a copy of the court transcripts, which do quote: When making the Asbo application and redacting any intelligence he was sure that all event on the 7th 8th June 2014 was in fact 100% progress way and that he was sure that there was no other parties / events in the borough on them dates.

I intended for my acting barrister to be able to use a copy of the magistrate's court trial transcripts on the date of the appeal.

Pleas can you reply to this letter of concern Kind regards Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

95.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

95. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 23-12

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 750

751,752

 

95.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

95. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 23-12

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 750,751,752

--

750,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 11:12:06 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: I sent this to Josie

Dear Josie

--

Same as 08/09/2016 11:10:24 PM

751,

Same as 08/09/2016 11:10:24 PM

752,

Same as 08/09/2016 11:10:24 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

96.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

96. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 14-03

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 753      

 

 

96.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

96. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 14-03

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 753

--

753,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 02:02:47 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Here is a copy thanks

Attachments: 4686d991-e355-3707-4d08-656ca31aab33@yahoo.com

 

 

 

 

97.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

97. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 14-05

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 754

 

 

97.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

97. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 08-09-2016 14-05

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 754

--

754,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 02:05:25 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: mum

Attachments: 6329e4cc-4d86-b369-1fbd-11381fa923be@yahoo.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

98.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

98. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - FW Metropolitan Police 08-09-2016 12-52

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 755,756

757           

 

98.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

98. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - FW Metropolitan Police 08-09-2016 12-52

08/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 755,756,757

--

755,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 08/09/2016 12:52:02 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Proposed letter for Commissioner of Metropolitan Police

Attachments: Letter to Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis 08.09.2016.doc

here read what she wants to see to silly Gilchrest

From: JOSEPHINE WARD

mailto: josephinewardsolicitor@gmail.com

Sent: 08 September 2016 12:51

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Proposed letter for Commissioner of Metropolitan Police Lorraine

Please confirm whether there are any additions that Simon wants included in this letter. I need to send this document across within the next hour.

Many thanks

Josephine

756,

Letter to Commissioner of Police of the Metrop.doc

FAO Miss Sally Gilchrist Directorate of Legal Services Metropolitan Police 10 Lamb’s Conduit Street

London WC1N 3NR  

Date: 8th September 2016

By fax: 0207 404 7089

By email: sally.gilchrist@met.police.uk

Dear Ms Gilchrist

RE: SIMON CORDELL V. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPOSITION OF AN ASBO - 26th SEPTEMBER 2016 AT 10AM

I refer to the above matter.

As you are aware Mr Cordell’s appeal is listed for 26th September 2016. On 4th April 2016 HHJ Pawlak made a direction that the Respondent prepare and serve on the Appellant and the court a schedule setting out the dates, times and locations of each incident and also to specify the alleged involvement of the Appellant in the organisation of the illegal raves by 1st September 2016.

You should also be in possession of a lengthy document prepared by the Appellant and his request for disclosure of all unredacted CAD’s that the Respondent is relying on. The Appellant is of the view that a lot of the CAD’s used in support of the Progress Way matters are in reference to completely different geographical locations, some distance away from Progress Way. The redacting of the CAD messages makes this extremely difficult to check. The Appellant has prepared in his bundle a number of maps for each CAD. Can you please request that DC Elsmore double checks the accuracy of the location of the CAD’s relied upon and please provide unredacted CADs or remove CADs that are not geographically relevant. A request was also made for statements to be obtained from DS Val Tanner and DC Chapman in relation to any intelligence that the Public Order Unit holds that confirms Simon Cordell is an organiser of illegal raves. This information is crucial to Mr Cordell’s appeal as he disputes ever organising an illegal rave, under the legal definition.

Mr Cordell also specifically requests that we obtain disclosure of a copy of all emails sent from DC Elsmore or any officer involved in the investigation of this ASBO application against Mr Cordell to the Public Order Unit in respect enquiries made by them in relation to Mr Cordell’s involvement in the organisation of illegal raves and the responses. The Bundle makes specific reference to DS Val Tanner responding to an enquiry in DC Elsmore statement dated 26th June 2015. We request that DS Tanner provides a statement in relation to her conversations with Ms Lorraine Cordell and we also request that any recordings of these conversations be provided.

Principal: Michael Carroll LLB HONS

Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority

SRA ID: 307837

757,

We also request that the Public Order Unit also discloses full details of all illegal events / raves that "Every Decible Matters” are linked to as it is Mr Cordell’s specific instructions that he is not an owner and does not have any business interest in "Every Decible Matters” and it is his instructions that it was "Every Decible Matters” that arranged the event on 9th August 2014 that Mr Cordell is being blamed for.

We request all CADs / crime reports for all events cited in the ASBO application where reference is made to police attending the location in response to crimes being committed.

We thank you in advance and await the service of the schedule re Mr Cordell’s involvement in the raves as directed by HHJ Pawlak. Please provide by close of business today otherwise we will have to request that the case be listed for mention on Monday 12th September 2016.

We await hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

MICHAEL CARROLL & CO.

2         

Principal: Michael Carroll LLB HONS

Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority

SRA ID: 307837

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

99.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

99. 1. 2

Too Smooth 11-09-2016 10-41

11/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 758

 

99.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

99. 1. 2

Too Smooth 11-09-2016 10-41

11/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 758

--

758,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 11/09/2016 10:40:55 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Hi Pleas read and reply.

this is what you want but I think is wrong thing I think it stores info to their database which is no good for you also think the users will need to pay.

unless it was installed could not tell100%

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 10 September 2016 16:40

To: Lorraine Cordell Subject: Hi Pleas read and reply.

This is what I want to pay for but first I want to be sure that I can make the payment feature not charge the clients’ money for the service.

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer Design

Business card and flyer. jpg

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer Design

If this plugin is useful, could you please help us to rate it? it will be a big encouragement to improve for us....

I would like to make the menu bar in the business directory the same as the word press menu so that it shows a link to the festival pages Once this has been achieved then I believe I can sort the rest please can you help me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

100.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

100. 1. 2

Too Smooth 11-09-2016 10-56

11/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 759

 

100.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

100. 1. 2

Too Smooth 11-09-2016 10-56

11/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 759

--

759,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 11/09/2016 10:56:20 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: problems

Ř  Your PHP setting max file uploads is currently set to 20. We recommend to set this value at least to 100 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

--

·         I fixed this

--

Ř  Your PHP setting post max size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

--

·         I fixed this

--

Ř  Your PHP setting upload max file size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

--

·         I fixed this this will need to be done by farjat or server side.

--

Ř  Your PHP setting max input vars is currently set to 1000. We recommend to set this value at least to 5000 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 10 September 2016 19:29

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: problems

WooCommerce Product Designer:

Ř  Your PHP setting max file uploads is currently set to 20. We recommend to set this value at least to 100 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Ř  Your PHP setting max input vars is currently set to 1000. We recommend to set this value at least to 5000 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Ř  Your PHP setting post max size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Ř  Your PHP setting upload max file size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

101.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

101. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 12-09-2016 11-57

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 760

 

101.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

101. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Mother 12-09-2016 11-57

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 760

--

760,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 11:57:22 AM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: report

I want to sue them I am showing the solicitor

On Monday, 12 September 2016, 10:18, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

I do not understand why you would put the whole of the CD in this I just cannot understand it you keep them wondering what's on that CD did they say anything they should have etc. why are you giving them all the information so they can keep it on file about you.

Simon you are meant to be trying to get your records corrected you want them to have as little as possible on file about you why are you doing this in such a way, they can hold more on you.

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 12 September 2016 03:57

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: report

 

 

 

 

 

102.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

102. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate - 12-09-2016 02-36

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 761,762

 

102.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

102. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate - 12-09-2016 02-36

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 761,762

--

761,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 02:36:36 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: introductory call

Thank you for this, I will review it and call you later this week to discuss.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 12 September 2016 13:46

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Hello Paige, the report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I attach a copy of the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports, this does include a personal statement and a copy of the assessments transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards amendments please tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

I was also wondering, if you would be so kind to give me a phone call once you have had time to process the reports, so to tell myself your opinion.

Many thanks again Simon Cordell

On Monday, 5 September 2016, 12:25, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org> wrote:

Simon,

Not a problem.

Regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re wired@ymail.com

Sent: 05 September 2016 12:07

762,

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Dear Paige

I know I said I would get the paper work over to you but it is taking longer than I was thinking it would, I am hoping to complete this later today maybe tomorrow I am very sorry about the delay and I will send everything r to you as soon as it is completed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57,

Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

w: www.voiceability.org

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales) Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

 

103.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

103. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 12-09-2016 13-46

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 763,764

 

103.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

103. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 12-09-2016 13-46

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 763,764

--

763,

Hello Paige, the report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I attach a copy of the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports, this does include a personal statement and a copy of the assessments transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards amendments please tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 01:45:30 PM

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Attachments: Reports. Rar

Hello Paige, the report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I at the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports, this does include a personal statement and a copy of the ass transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards me tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

I was also wondering, if you would be so kind to give me a phone call once you have had time to process the reports, so to tell n opinion.

Many thanks again Simon Cordell

On Monday, 5 September 2016, 12:25, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Not a problem.

Regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 05 September 2016 12:07

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Dear Paige

I know I said I would get the paper work over to you but it is taking longer than I was thinking it would, I am hoping to complete today maybe tomorrow I am very sorry about the delay and I will send everything r to you as soon as it is completed.

Regards

Simon Cordell

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

764,

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org

w: www.voiceabilitv.org

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales) Disclaimer: www.voiceabilitv.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

104.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

104. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 12-09-2016 14-42

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850,851,852

853,854,855,856,857,858

859

 

 

 

104.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

104. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 12-09-2016 14-42

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850,851,852

853,854,855,856,857,858

859

--

765,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 02:42:10 PM

To: paige.christie@voiceability.org

Subject: Re: introductory call

Att Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Goodie_Full.pdf

 julia_report.pdf Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

Report -ac men S: Reply.pdf

Dear Paige

The report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I attach a copy of the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports which has not been sent to them as I wanted you to go over them before.

This does include a personal statement and a copy of the assessments transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards amendments please tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

I was also wondering, if you would be so kind to give me a phone call once you have had time to process the reports, so to tell myself your opinion.

Many thanks again Simon Cordell

On Monday, 12 September 2016, 13:45, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Hello Paige, the report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I attach a copy of the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports, this does include a personal statement and a copy of the assessments transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards amendments please tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

I was also wondering, if you would be so kind to give me a phone call once you have had time to process the reports, so to tell myself your opinion.

Many thanks again Simon Cordell

On Monday, 5 September 2016, 12:25, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Not a problem.

Regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceabilitv.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 05 September 2016 12:07

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: introductory call

Dear Paige

I know I said I would get the paperwork over to you, but it is taking longer than I was thinking it would, I am hoping to complete

 

766,

this later today maybe tomorrow I am very sorry about the delay and I will send everything r to you as soon as it is completed.

Regards Simon Cordell

On Friday, 2 September 2016, 14:57, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org> wrote:

Simon,

Please find attached the consent form as discussed. Send over the information you have collated regarding your case and I will get back to you as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceability.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales) Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

767,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust A University Teaching Trust

SOCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE REPORT FOR MENTAL HEALTH ACT TRIBUNAL

HEARING

Name of Patient: Mr Simon CORDELL

Date of Birth: 26 January 1981

Hospital Number: 11214451

NHS Number: 434 096 1671

Address: Permanent: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield. EN3 7JQ

Current: Haringey Assessment Ward, St Ann’s Hospital, Tottenham. N15

Status: Section 2

GP: Dr Y Chong, Nightingale HSE Surgery, 1 Nightingale Road N9 8AJ

Responsible Clinician: Dr Julia Cranitch, Haringey Assessment Ward, St Ann’s Hospital.

Report Author: Goodie Adama

Locum Community Mental Health Nurse

Early Intervention for Psychosis

Lucas House 305-309 Fore Street London. N9

Date of Report: 25 August 2016

1 am a Locum Community Mental Health Nurse and allocated care co-ordinator to Mr Simon Cordell. I work for the Enfield Mental Health NHS Trust in partnership with the London Borough of Enfield, the local Social Services Authority that has statutory responsibility for providing after care to Mr Cordell under Sectionll7 when he leaves hospital.

In preparing this report I had access to previous reports, nursing, and medical notes on electronic data base - RIO. I had the opportunity to speak with Mr Cordell as his care co-ordinator. And with his consent, I spoke with his mother Mrs Loraine Cordell by telephone. Mr Simon Cordell prefers to be called by his first name, Simon.

SIMON CORDELL

1

768,

Goodie_Full.pdf

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey NHS

Mental Health NHS Trust A University Teaching Trust

CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO ADMISSION

Arrested at his home address after his mother raised concerns about his mental state - he was allegedly verbally threatening towards his neighbour and (?) neighbour's children. Simon's mother called police who arrested him. He was seen by the FME at Wood Green police station, then referred for MHA.

CURRENT MEDICATION

Olanzapine 5mg

PERSONAL & FAMILY HISTORY

Mr Cordell was born at North Middlesex University Hospital. He has a younger brother and sister. Mr Cordell says he knows his maternal grandmother attempted suicide on a number of occasions and had had admissions to mental hospital. Mr Cordell's father worked as a union representative and his mother ran her own computer company.

Mr Cordell says he did not get on well with his father who was a violent man. He was violent towards Mr Cordell, Mr Cordell's mother and siblings Mr Cordell left home at the age of fifteen and was homeless for a while. He was placed in to care after stealing a pint of milk He was placed in a series of children's care homes around the UK but says that each time he would steal a car and drive back to London.

Mr Cordell said he was pushed hard to achieve at school by his father and that he was "an A-star student" for most of the time. He says he was intelligent and would do the work at other times and as a result would often just "mess about" in class. He went on to college and studied engine mechanics, completing a city & guilds qualification. After leaving school he went on to get jobs in the construction industry.

Mr Cordell says he has tried to build himself up a business for providing party entertainment. At the moment he says he is not able to earn from this due to the restrictions of his bail.

Mr Cordell has had one long term relationship which he describes as "my first true love". This is with a woman called Diana who is currently studying physiotherapy. They were together thirteen years, but he says she has moved back out of his flat in recent months. Mr Cordell thinks this is

SIMON CORDELL

2

769,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

secondary to the repeated involvement of the police in their lives and the stress this has caused.

Mr Cordell says he does not smoke tobacco and does not drink alcohol.

Grandmother (? maternal) had BPAD and/or schizophrenia

PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY in brief

Has previously been open to Enfield EIS, discharged in March 2016 due to non-engagement -Has been assessed under the MHA in 2014 and early 2016 but was not detained as there was not sufficient evidence of a mental disorder

FORENSIC HISTORY

Mr Cordell was put in a Young Offender's Institution at the age of 16 after repeated driving offences (driving without a license)

Mr Cordell says he has not been in trouble with the police for a number of years. He had stolen some trainers at a festival in 2009 and prior to that had not been in trouble since 2005.

He denied any violent offences.

Mr Cordell currently stands accused of burglary. He has a solicitor and the case will not be heard until July at the earliest.

MEDICAL HISTORY

Simon said he had Crohn's disease as a child. He denied any other physical health problems. DRUGS AND ALCOHOL

He said he only got drunk once a teenager and has since not taken alcohol or drugs. He denied current use

FINANCE

Simon receives Ł200 Income Support every fortnight

VIEWS OF THE NEAREST RELATIVE

With Simon's consent I spoke with his mother Mrs Loraine Cordell. Mrs Cordell's views were that "I don't think he [Simon] needs to be on section; he is not a danger to himself or other people" Mrs

SIMON CORDELL

3

770,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

Cordell said as far as she knows Simon is willing to work with the doctors and take his medication. Mrs Cordell will not say her views if Simon changes his mind and her response summed up as "we cross the bridge when we get there".

VIEWS OF THE PATIENT

Simon is willing to co-operative with mental health services. He said he is willing to take his medication.

He gave me a letter he wrote to indicate his commitment to treatment and willingness to engage. I attach it for your information.

POSITIVE ASPECTS OF PATIENT

Simon was able to access community resources independently and had the ability and capacity to make some choices. He is competent in his activities of daily living skills.

He plans to register a charity to raise funds to support causes dear to his heart One of such causes is towards premature babies. He said his sister was born premature. The other is to help homeless people.

AFTERCARE

Simon lives on his own in a one-bedroom ground floor flat in Enfield. His mother is supportive and in constant contact with him.

Enfield Council will have section 117 responsibilities and will provide the appropriate housing and care in the community.

Simon will also have the support of an allocated care co-ordinator who will regularly monitor his mental state and concordance with medication. The team will offer Simon psychology assessment and or input; he will be seen and reviewed by psychiatrist regularly i.e. every 2-3 months or sooner If required. He will be offered interventions around concordance to medication, identifying triggers and relapse preventions. A referral to dual diagnosis worker will be offered. Simon will have access to groups such as social recovery and mental well-being and specialist services for vocational/occupation recovery.

SIMON CORDELL

4

771,

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey NHS

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

RECOMMENDATION

I met with Simon today on the ward and assessed him in preparation of the report. Simon recognised me immediately. He was warm, welcoming, polite and co-operative throughout the meeting. He stated about half a dozen times that he is willing to work with the services and also willing to accept medication.

It would be helpful if Simon will agree to stay in hospital to continue treatment as he appeared to have made good progress since admission. As part of the medical and nursing team I believe that Simon will benefit from staying in hospital for further assessment and continue treatment.

Goodie Adamo

Locum CMHN

Early Intervention for Psychosis

SIMON CORDELL

5

772,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell

The Events Leading Up to My Wrongful Detention of my Detainee: -

The events leading up to my wrongful detention of my detainee that have been governed under civil proceeding, do in fact relate to the following incidents:- On the 25th June 2013 the Metropolitan police attended my home address that being of 109 Burncroft avenue Enfield En3 at around midday, the reason for them members of the met police to attend, was about a criminal allegation, one offence of the nature of burglary, to which I Mr Simon Cordell did In fact dispute and proved my innocents at court.

On this occasion I was charged and then bail was denied I was then transferred to the world of scrubs her majesties pleasure HMP, the reason given for bail to be denied was because there was false and therefore wrongful criminal convictions that had been maliciously fabricated on the police national computer containing the wrongful convictions in my PNC , “to which I did disputed and then challenge and this has now been proven to be incorrectly inputted on my Criminal record and therefore myself to be correct, proof of this statement is contained within this official document as exhibit sc1, this exhibit contains the proof of 8 false criminal convection not in the court official registries (1 of the guilty verdict off failing to surrender of which was the reason I was denied bail.)

On the 28th June 2013 I did apply to the district judge to reconsider the application of bail to which he did choose to overturn in my favour. I was then granted bail with the following condition that the Prosecution’s opposed bail was:

·         Possibility of committing further offences whilst on bail:

·         Possibility of Failure to surrender

Judge’s Decision Bail Granted with the Following Conditions:

·         Surety of Ł1000 from Ms Lorraine Cordell (To be surrendered to the nearest Police Station) - prior to release from Custody.

·         Residence @ 109 Burncroft Road, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

·         Not to enter the London Borough of Southwark

·         Surrender Passport to nearest Police Station

·         Report daily to Edmonton Police between 1400 - 1600do

·         Curfew 8pm - 6am (doorstep condition - the Defendant should show himself to any officer upon that person knocking on the front door.

I Mr Simon Cordell had to abide to the strict regime of bail conditions until the date of 00/00/2014, this was the date set for trial, but before the start of the trial I was found not guilty due to the judge accepting my evidence of a till recipe of proof of punchers of a garden gazebo too which was the basis of the prosecution's evidence regarding the allegations of burglary.

While I was awaiting the on goings of the case to proceed to trial to defend my rights of a non-guilty plea, I felt I was being mistreated by the justice system as I knew I had not committed the offence I was being accused off and this lead me Mr Simon Cordell to pre arranging a meeting by way of telephone, this was accomplished at my own free will, so for myself to be able to attend the silver street Mental health department, to help my self-document a true understanding of the facts that was present in my life

773,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

of concern I exhibit proof of this contained and attached to this official document as sc2.

I also arranged an appointment with my Doctor who was named Dr Warren at number 1 nightingale Rd, Edmonton, this appointment was not arranged due to feeling Mentally unstable, but due to the duration of the time the court proceeding had occurred and the effect the Metropolitan Police wrongful claims of proceedings was therefore having on the ruining abilities of myself Mr Simon Cordell being a high statue director for my own company running objectives.

On the date of 00/00/00, I Mr S. Cordell was at my home addresses as noted above, with the following friends who are named 3 of 3 people not including myself Mr Simon Cordell.

1:

2.

3.

When to my unexpected attention I received a phone call on my personal mobile telephone. When I asked whom the caller was I received a name of a gentleman who claimed the name of Goody and the occupation of this gentleman is an amp Mental health worker, the nature of the reason given for the call was proclaimed to be about the appoint that was previously arranged months prior with my personal GP as dated above. I clearly remember when speaking to Goodies on the phone that of an appointment being pre-arranged at my own home address, as also noted above in this document.

On the agreed date that the appointment was made was 00/00/2015, the gentlemen whom I had previously had the telephone conversation with arrived at my home address with another team member who I know no to be called (Sandra) I invited them into my home, the flat was clean as I knew I had been expecting guest and also because of the general fact I keep a strict house upkeep policy, and as for this policy I like to have nice essential utilities and personal accessories on this day my cupboards were full of food and also that of my fridge and freeze, this was checked by Sandra and goodie to my surprise.

The meeting started to take place once I had asked every person to make them self’s feel at home, the meeting started to initialise and I found myself and goodies conversation started to lead towards what I had been up to prior to the visit, I explained that I was in the process of establishing my own company.

Once the meeting had started, we all started to settle into conversation within the average time duration of 5 minutes, the ladies phone whose name is Sandra started to ring she then asked every person, if she can quickly answer the call, as she answered her phone she walked into my front entrance corridor, myself and goodie continued to chat about positive things that I had been applying my time to, when Sandra walked back into the room after finishing her call, she asked if the meeting can be stopped, as she had to leave due to her telephone conversation. Goodie explained to myself that he was happy with my mental health assessment and that he was going away on holiday for four weeks and that he would like to have a follow up meeting once he

774,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

gets back from his work holiday leave, I explained I would be very happy to meet with himself again, as it was a pleasure to chat with himself.

At this stage in my life I had worked hard to achieve in a positive view and it had taken me many years to save and buy what I knew to be needed to start the company I wanted to build I would have not been able to start without the help of my family.

I can clearly note that of the facts that by 2010 I had things in place and needed to start on my next step with building my website so I order my domain name http://toosmooth.co.uk on the 22/07/2010, my mother was going to try and help build the website as money was an issue and to build the type of website that was needed would have cost a lot of money.

The development of the Website took much longer than anticipated; this was due to the building process and also my mother's health.

The coding beside the website is of a large scale due to the 4 databases that was needed.

By 2012 the website was coming along I order 2 other domains http://toosmoothentertainment.co.uk and http://toosmoothentertainment.com 22/05/2012 these were ordered, I had also started looking ahead to the summer of 2013 to start bridging out with contacts and doing some unpaid work in the local community so to get my company name known in the public, and help my local community.

I had planned to order the company name just before the work started in 2013.

The following day after of Goodie attending my private home, I was again at home working on my company I remember this date to be 00/00/2015 as for I was programming parts of my website and finding things reasonably hard to achieve, I noticed a knock on my front door and went to see who it was, when I noticed a large group of people, when asking whom them persons were I was told the name of elan, she stated that her occupation was from the mental health department so I opened up my front door and asked what they wanted to speak to me about in the safety of knowing all was being recorded on CCTV. I showed some concern in regard to the team turning up to my address unannounced and that I felt that this was a breach of my privacy. I was un happy with the way I was spoken to by the Mental Health team, on this occasion, especially with the understand of what had been portrayed to me and that being that since goodie had gone away on leave that elan and the other people standing at my front door had been made case handlers of myself for no reason I was quite shocked and concerned as goodie was surely happy when he had left prior and never said anything of the sort, it was then explained to me that they wanted to do another assessment on me once again I explained that I had just let goodie into my home less than 2 days, the team soon left.

once again with the concern of being assessed without no true reason as I knew that I had mostly been indoors and had travelled to the shops a few times with friends and family with no concern about my well-being, After elan and team had arrived I called the mental health team so to find out why they had truly attended and to raise my

775,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

concerns, while achieving this I used a dictator to record the minutes of the conversation I managed to speak to Ellen herself and explained to her that I was happy for the team to have a meeting with my se

If they wanted but please could they contact myself first or have a true reason under the mental health act.

A few days later I revived a phone call of my mother and she seemed quite concerned for my wellbeing, on asking her what was wrong she explained that the early prevention team had called her mobile phone and told her that they were obtaining a warrant under a person of interest section 135 of the mental health act 1983, this was said to be for the reason that I would not allow them access into my home.

On the 00/00/2016 while at home with my mother and civil partner I received a knock on the front door, on opening the door there was a multitude of persons present when asking them who they were they expanded police officers and doctors awaiting to serve a warrant to enter my home under section 135 of the mental health act 1983 I explained to them that I was happy to allow the doctors and medical teams access once again so to be able to conclude their assessment but was not happy for members of the police to enter due to the sensitivity of my personal information as I still had ongoing complaints and cases that I was a subject towards, the police agreed to await outside.

Before the meeting started, I pressed play on my recording system so to be able to have a copy of the minutes of the meeting as I find professional best for all people’s interest.

The general outcome of the meeting was that the warrant had been obtained illegal due to my self-having a recording of them being invited for a meeting into my home of my own free will prior and that I had allowed goodie entry into my home two days before they arrived at my front door unannounced, with no truth in decrease or evidence of an un stable mental mentality of mine, between and on them dates. The warrant issued was and is for a person who won’t allow access to mental health teams to which I clearly did do; Ellen makes a full confection of this on CD.

I allowed the meeting to go ahead in any case and was assessed as being mental stable with no issues of concern.

When listening to the transcripts of the minutes that took place that day under the grounds of the assessment, after being confirmed as well by the doctors, I was then asked if I was happy to be assessed every day or once a week, I was not happy with this as I feel I have worked hard to achieve my goals and this would have a negative impact on my time and ability as it clearly is right now, I did however say that I will talk with my partner about this and come to an agreement. After taking to my civil partner we decided that the mental health team had come to the right conclusion of me being well and that we were much more than capable of looking after our self and felt more commutable do this.

I soon received a letter asking myself to go to Edmonton green for another assessment as dated 2902/2016, I called the centre and explained that me and my partners had made our decision and that was that we can cope alone and if we ever find our self’s insure of any think that we will contact the mental health team.

The care team called my mobile phone 14 August 2016.

776,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

In response to the allegations of Threats to kill 14/08/2016

On the day in question I was in my home address, all day my mother attended my home at around 3pm to collect my credit card as arranged leaving myself with no other source of money as for this I had no reason to leave my home. I have a text on my mobile phone and computer to prove this from my mother.

I was then fortunate another to have some good friends visit with their new born baby to which on their visit good news was announced that I will be the god father to the new born baby, my visitors stayed at my home address till around 7pm after their departure I was left at home alone and started to listen to a music CD that was given to me by my guests I continued to listen to music until at around 8pm, up and till I notice a very large amount of uniformed police officers entering my communal hall way and started to implosively bang on my front door intimating myself in my own place of residence.

I clearly remember approaching my front door with large concern for my safety as for I have other on goings cases against the Metropolitan police that are in the process of the IPPC.

As I approached my home front door I had that of my mobile phone in my hand and called for assistance of members of my family who could be in support of me as they may be relevant as to a witness to any ongoing about to occur.

When asking the police the reason for their presents at my home address the reply back was that of the remark, that they just wanted to speak to my person, I did reply back to them that I was not happy to speak to them self’s as I knew I had done nothing un-law and was therefore a victim.

I do remember asking the police to contact my solicitors as a first point of contact for any incident as the police have a full understanding when attended my home address that my home has been my place of residents for over 11 years and I have no issues with surrendering to police.

After about a 40 minute interview of compulsive and aggressive knocking by on duty police officers on my front door, I choose to explained to them members of active police that they were being recorded by my CCTV, This caused a different reaction and the woman office who was knocking on my front door choose to cause a criminal offence by way of causing criminal damage to my personal property otherwise named as my CCTV equipment, she achieved this by staring straight into the camera and intentionally ripping out the cables in turn causing damage so that the crammers were no longer active.

As this happened while my mother attended with my uncle whom I had previously called and continued to recorded the ongoing on their mobile phone’s crammers.

Another police officer a male offered to repair the damage that had been caused by the female officer by asking myself to pass them a screwdriver out of my letter box I found this an unusual request.

777,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

On arrival of my mother and uncle attending I felt much more at ease and secure of my own safety and opened my front door knowing I had all the evidence I need on CD and mobile phones to prove my innocents and the damage cause to my property.

As for other video footage I do dispute the allegations of the Quoted fact off being taken out of cell number 3 for a legal assessment by members of the MHA Mental Health Assessment Team as named AMHP worker Maggie fuller and 2 x Doctors of the names (---) and (---) whom did attended my cell while I was being recorded by CCTV as true as I am sure they did walk up to my cell hatch and verbally said to myself that I was being sectioned under the mental health act without caring out the correct procedures to obtain such regulations.

While the AMHP workers was at my cell door while being contained at wood green police station I did notice one of the doctors to be an official person that I had a complaint against for attending my home address in February 2016 and have a CD of evidence of the full mental health team of the day which does prove illegal entry into my home by way of completing a section 135 illegally in turn by stating to a judge under oath that I would not give access to my place of fixed resentence and is clearly admitted to be a lie on the CD as I have the evidence.

I Mr S. Cordell did in fact find this to be un professional conduct as for I had been detained for 24 hours with no issues of concern for my safety or any other persons and was left in my cell while being a detainee with my full clothing inclusive of shoe lyses and belt and all other articles of personal clothing that in any case would be taken of a person acting with mental health issues of concern by the acting custody officer.

I also would like to make the correct notes regarding the statement of being seen by a police officer FME, as for this is not true to its statements as quoted in Mr Goodie official statement as dated the 25th August 2016 on page 2 chapter 1.

I do not feel I was correctly pre assessed under the mental Health act 1983 at wood green police station never was I interviewed or charged for any criminal offence, as the camera evidence being becalmed will clearly show and for this reason I also request a copy of the said official assessments doctors notes made on the day,

I Know the truth to be on the 14th I was detained at my home address at around 9pm and booked into the police station I was then held for 23 hours until the official case handler came to my cell he asked me to contact my mother and ask for the video footage from my mother and uncles mobile phone and for my mother to attended the police station for an interview as in other occasion with the police I have needed an appropriate adult as I had learning difficulties such classed as reading and writing difficulties, I explained that I was willing to do the interview on my own as over the last 3 years of my life I have had much practice in reading and writing and have now improved on such needed skills, the police officer was not happy with my reply and re appeared a shot time latter with the Mental health team who never assessed me, in total I was detained for near on 30 hours taken to St Ann’s Hospital and then first assed 72 hours after arriving for the first time so I understand I was detained illegally for the average of 100 hours.

778,

Official Statement of Mr Simon Cordell.pdf

Since detainee there has been many issues of concern that are to be raised and them issues of concern do in fact, contained wrongful personal information on the RIO data base and St Ann’s computer systems inclusive of any other medical data in regards to doctor and client personal data and that information being not correct of it facts, so for any medical provisions to be able to use that information in a true positive method, as for that information can be proved to be fabricated and therefore false intelligence or classed as Intel.

Such fabricated medical intelligence was prepared by a Dr Rosemary Mill a St4 doctor in response for Dr Julia Cranitch, who states she has personal knowledge of Mr S. Cordell, Since the 22nd of august which is understood to be the start of her Job title for St Ann’s hospital, contained in a prepared doctors statement that was requested to be served in a paper format as legal required for a tribunal.

on the 25th 08 2016 a prepared copy of the doctors notes made from all nurses assessment notes and their own personal involvement with myself, should have been served towards myself so to be able to prepare a fair deface for tribunal this should have been achieved by mid-day and was not. When staff was asked it was said my acting solicitor will be able to show myself a copy even low a consent form had been completed and submitted into St Ann’s hospital.

I Mr Simon Cordell feel that was I not served in accordance of the legalisation framework that represents the mental health act 1983, neither assessed at the correct opportunity falsifying my illegal detainee.

I Mr S. Cordell was in fact shown a copy of the doctor’s reports 20 minutes before the tribunal started by my acting solicitor due to a break down in communications and never had the opportunity to analyse any official documentation to in fact be able to stand a true legal defence.

As a matter of fact the tribunal did go in my favour and I feel a fair and equal decision was made by the boards official panel this decision was of the conclusion as quoted The section 2 Mental Health act 1983 was removed of my statue of liberty and I agreed to the doctors decision of staying in St Ann’s hospital as a formal patient,

As the tribunal is held in St Ann’s hospital there is less than a 5 minute walk from the assessment wing to where I have been detained while being assessed and on arriving back to the ward after the panel turned the decision in my favour I had the first opportunity to assess the doctors notes used in the tribunal in regards to myself that had been pre drafted and not severed to myself in accordance of the duration of the time limit that legal jurisdiction apposes and felt the need to correct wrongful lintel and state the true claims such tribunals should be based upon.

I have contained evidence that is overwhelming to the fact of the matters that I do quote within this official document of complaint.

779,

This has led to my human rights 1998 being in breach such

as the listed: -

·         Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment what is the prohibition on torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, this is one of the most important provisions in the Human Rights Act, and clearly states the following: -

·         Article 3 is like the right to life article 2, the prohibition in Article 3 requires an official and effective investigation to take place where there are credible allegations of serious ill-treatment by public officials to which Mr Simon Cordell claim and provide the supported evidence beyond reasonable doubt R V Bones, as provided within this official complaint.

The most obvious obligation that I claim my rights towards do in fact prevent State officials from torturing a person or subjecting them to inhuman or degrading treatment.

This applies anywhere in the UK jurisdictions and this can include places outside the UK, as well as in UK prisons, hospitals, schools etc.

Any person’s human rights may be affected within Article 3, whom is being contained within a Government policy that does in fact put a person in a situation where they face inhuman or degrading treatment to which I Mr Simon Cordell do feel I have been subject towards.

·         Article 3 does require that public authorities take all steps to prevent torture and ill- treatment. This requires laws in place to adequately protect vulnerable groups from ill-treatment and for public officials to act so to protect vulnerable people from harm inflicted on them by others.

·         Article 5: Right to liberty and security.

·         Article 7: No punishment without law.

Hello Paige, the report took me a bit more time than I first thought to finish. I am sorry if I have caused you any inconvenience. I attach a copy of the two hospital reports and also that of my reply to them reports, this does include a personal statement and a copy of the assessments transcripts that took place at my home address in February before the 14/08/2016 incident, if you have any advice towards amendments please tell me, I have not sent the documents to any other person(s) other than yourself and ask for your guidance.

Many thanks again Simon Cordell

780,

Julia_report.pdf

Barnet, Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

Haringey Assessment Ward St Ann’s Hospital St Ann’s Road N15 3TH

Telephone No: 020 8702 6120

25/08/16

Inpatient Psychiatric Report for Mental Health Tribunal on 26/08/16

Name: Mr Simon Cordell

Home address: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex

Date of birth: 26 Jan 1981

Hospital: St Ann’s Hospital, St Ann’s Road, London, N15 3TH

MHA status:  Section 2

Responsible Clinician: Dr Julia Cranitch

Date admitted: 16 August 2016

1. Preamble

1.1.1 am preparing this report for Simon Cordell's Mental Health Act Tribunal in my function as the ST4 doctor working at the Haringey Assessment Ward under the supervision of Dr Cranitch (Consultant Psychiatrist in General Adult Psychiatry). I am a full member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists since 2015.

1.2. This report has been prepared for the Mental Health Tribunal hearing 26th August 2016. In preparing this report I have had access to Mr Cordell’s electronic patient record or RIO and I have had personal knowledge of Mr Cordell since 22nd August 2016.

781,

2 History of Presenting circumstances

2.11 5/8/16 Mr Cordell was arrested by police at his home after allegations that he had made threats to harm his neighbour and her children. The forensic medical examiner requested a mental health act assessment due to concerns about Mr Cordell’s mental state.

2.2 Assessing doctors felt that Mr Cordell presented with features suggestive of mental illness, in particular paranoid persecutory ideas about the police and his mother Collateral history suggested deterioration in Mr Cordell’s mental state: that he has been withdrawn and expressed beliefs that the television is talking about him and paranoid ideas about his mother alongside recreational use of 'laughing gas' Neighbours had reported verbal aggression, playing loud music. Mr Cordell presented with pressure of speech, angry and paranoid ideas about the police and the assessing doctors felt that Mr Cordell had impaired insight about his condition and required further assessment in hospital.

3. Mental State Examination on admission

·         “Appearance and Behaviour: medium height, slim mixed-race gentleman. Slightly dishevelled, dressed in black tracksuit, noted to be missing several teeth. Initially good rapport but became quite irritable at times

·         Speech: Fast rate, pressured speech. Tangential.

·         Mood: subjectively Tm really good', objectively appears elevated Thoughts: no formal thought disorder. Denied thoughts to harm him or others.

·         Perceptions: denied hallucinations

·         Insight: limited. Aware of reasons for admission but does not agree that he may have a mental illness”

·         "Simon stated that he has been very busy setting up his company recently. Spoke about working very hard and spending years 'studying'. He spoke in grandiose terms, describing his company as managing mental health services and working in the entertainment industry. He spoke about buying speakers for Ł50,000 each and hiring out equipment to Glastonbury and Isle of Wight festivals. Simon stated that he owns a 'city' and it is his job to understand the various roles that people have in society so that he can 'look after people’. When asked how he was able to fund these projects he described a system of fundraising using 'charity bars' and websites".

4. Physical Examination on admission

·         Physical exam, ECG and routine blood tests were initially refused by Mr Cordell, however he consented for this to be completed on 18th August 2016 results as follows:

·         ECG: Normal sinus rhythm

782,

·         Physical examination: pulse 76bpm, warm and well perfused, cap refill <2 secs. No signs of anaemia, no central or peripheral cyanosis. Heart sounds normal, no added sounds. Chest clear. Abdo soft non-tender No calf swelling or tenderness. Neurology not formally assessed but grossly intact.

·         Blood tests have been within normal range.

5.      Psychiatric History

·         Mr Cordell has received previous diagnoses of Unspecified nonorganic psychosis F29 in 2015 and Adjustment disorder F34.2 in 2014.

·         11/3/2014 - Mr Cordell was assessed by Dr Jarvis of Enfield Triage Team after a referral by GP with a history of 9 months of anxiety symptoms which were exacerbated by an upcoming court date. Diagnosed as Adjustment reaction. Dr Jarvis suggested IAPT, gave option of sertraline, crisis plan, and contacts given

·         19/11/14 Mr Cordell was referred to the Home treatment team due to concerns about his mental state, |had become paranoid about his mother. Police also attended the house due to Mr Cordell screaming out in distress, continued to present as verbally abusive and paranoid Assessment terminated as not safe to enter the premises

·         25/11/14 MHA assessment completed, found to be much calmer, not legally detainable under the MHA, given crisis contacts.

·         08/12/15 Referred to Early intervention services, Mr Cordell presented as unwell, rapid speech, thought disordered, spoke mostly about misdiagnosis and mistreatment by police, paranoid persecutory delusions regarding conspiracies to damage his reputation and to kill him organised by a global agency called 'Storm', referred to subliminal messages through his TV. Believed that upstairs neighbour was stalking him. she has since moved, and he felt that she was still harassing mm and had CCTV of this.

·         19/1/16 Referred for MHA due to concerns by early intervention service - "He appeared paranoid about people, police especially and had grandiose delusions. Not eating well. No apparent evidence of self-harm or harm to others".

·         22/1/16 "Simon presented as paranoid, suspicious, and grandiose with flights of ideas, clear evidence that he is suffering from a mental disorder" Section 135 applied for as Mr Cordell not allowing access to his property.

·         02/2/16 MHA assessment completed, assessed as not detainable, plan made for follow up with Early Intervention Service.

·         29/2/16 Mr Cordell was discharged from EIS as he was not willing to engage with the team and did not feel that he had a mental illness.

783,

6.      Past Medical History

· Electronic notes state that Mr Cordell has Crohn’s disease; however, this is elsewhere described as irritable bowel syndrome.

· Mr Cordell currently has an injury to his left 5th finger which is under review by ward doctors.

7.      Medication prior to admission

· None

8.      Family History

· Mr Cordell’s maternal grandmother suffered from a mental illness, most likely schizophrenia, for which she received clozapine treatment and had admissions to hospital.

9.      Personal History

· Mr Cordell was born at North Middlesex University Hospital. He has a younger brother and sister. Mr Cordell's father worked as a union representative and his mother ran her own computer company.

· Mr Cordell says he did not get on well with his father who was a violent man. He was violent towards Mr Cordell, Mr Cordell's mother and siblings. Mr Cordell left home at the age of fifteen and was homeless for a while. He was placed in to care after stealing a pint of milk. He was placed in a series of children's care homes around the UK but says that each time he would steal a car and drive back to London.

· Mr Cordell said he was pushed hard to achieve at school by his father and that he was "an A-star student" for most of the time. He says he was intelligent and would do the work at other times and as a result would often just "mess about" in class. He went on to college and studied engine mechanics, completing a city & guilds qualification. After leaving school he went on to get jobs in the construction industry.

· Mr Cordell says he has tried to build himself up a business for providing party entertainment, he is also setting up a charity. At the moment he says he is not able to earn from this due to the restrictions of his bail.

10.  Forensic History

· Mr Cordell was put in a Young Offender's Institution at the age of 16 after repeated driving offences (driving without a license)

· 2015 Received a 5-year ASBO for organising illegal raves- not allowed to enter industrial or disused premises between 10pm and 7 am.

784,

· Mr Cordell has stated that he is currently on bail for making threats to harm his neighbours; he has a court date relating to this on 8"1 October 2016.

11.  Drug and Alcohol History

· Documented on RIO notes in December 2015 to have been using cannabis 'skunk' on a daily basis at that time.

· Admitted to A+E in 2012 for assessment after allegedly using LSD and drinking a bottle of rum at a festival.

· Mr Cordell reports that he has not taken any illicit substances recently, has used cannabis occasionally in the past ‘recreationally’. Mr Cordell denies alcohol consumption or any drug use recently.

· Unfortunately, I have been unable to find record of a urine drug screen since admission to hospital.

12.  Social History

· Mr Cordell lives alone in a 1-bedroom flat which he says he owns

· outright. Mrs Cordell lives nearby and provides support to Mr Cordell. There are also siblings and other extended family that live in the local area.

13.  Progress on the ward

· 15/8/16 Upon admission to Haringey assessment ward, Mr Cordell was clerked in by the SHO, who documented that Mr Cordell presented as irritable, with pressured speech, tangential thought patterns, appeared elated and spoke of several projects of a grandiose nature including his business in the entertainment industry, buying speakers for Ł50,000 and hiring them to Glastonbury. Mr Cordell described owning a 'city' and that it is 'his job to understand the various roles people have in society so that he can look after people.

· 16/8/16 Mr Cordell refused routine blood tests, physical exam and ECG on the ground that he treats his body like a temple. Mr Cordell was documented as appearing settled and calm on the ward, eating and drinking well.

· 17/8/16 72-hour CPA review - Mr Cordell presented with rapid speech,

· often talking about unrelated themes and stated he felt he was being persecuted. Mr Cordell became irate shouting at his mother, angry that she has not appealed his section. Mr Cordell presented with paranoid persecutory and grandiose delusions with tangential thought pattern, no insight into mental health. It was agreed by the team to commence regular 1mg lorazepam bd.

785,

· 18/8/16 little change in presentation, generally calm on the ward however quick to become agitated during interaction with staff, can be unpredictable. Refused prescribed lorazepam. Consented to physical exam, bloods and ECG by SHO who also reviewed injury to 5iri finger.

· 19/8/16 Presented as fairly settled and calm in mood, continued to refuse medication as prescribed. Discussed this with Dr Humphries and agreed to take night-time dose of lorazepam, which he subsequently did with lots of reassurance from staff.

· 20/8/18 Presented as calm in mood, polite and appropriate with peers, spent the day playing music on laptop with peers. Ate and drank well, attended to personal care.

· 21/8/16 Calm, slept well, accepted lorazepam as prescribed at night, however, refused olanzapine 5mg. Further discussion with nursing staff to explore his feelings about this, however Mr Cordell told staff that he had been recording the interaction on his phone and taking pictures. Complained of painful finger, accepted PRN ibuprofen.

· 22/8/16 Nursing notes describe Mr Cordell as quite settled however remains consumed with same preoccupations which he relates with pressured, uninterruptible speech, preoccupied with proving that he was wrongfully admitted to hospital. Otherwise interacting with peers appropriately, accepted 1mg lorazepam as prescribed, refused olanzapine.

· 23/8/16 Consultant review by Dr Cranitch and MDT, during the interview Mr Cordell spoke with pressure of speech, in an over inclusive and tangential fashion, largely preoccupied with injustices in the past particularly by the police which made it difficult for him to focus on the present. He also expressed rather grandiose plans about his business and his ability to help others in the world. Mr Cordell denied any thoughts or threats to harm others and stated that he did not feel he was mentally unwell at present. Mr Cordell however agreed to trial a small dose of olanzapine 5mg at night as recommended by Dr Cranitch for psychotic symptoms.

· 24/8/16 Mr Cordell has accepted his prescribed medication overnight and slept well.

14.  Drug chart

· Lorazepam 1mg nocte

· Olanzapine 5mg nocte

786,

15.  Appearance and Behaviour

Well kempt and casually dressed slim gentleman in his early thirties Staring eye contact, remained seated throughout the interview.

Speech

Fast pace and very difficult to interrupt, normal volume and tone.

Mood

Subjectively ‘happy’, objectively appears quite irritable, reports sleeping well, good appetite, positive plans for the future, no plans or thoughts to harm self or others.

Thought

Evidence of tangentiality, struggled to stay on topic without repeated prompting. Overinclusive, spoke at length about minutiae of legal aspects of organising a festival, grandiose plans to help others across the country which were difficult to follow. Denied worries about the police, more focussed on health professionals and legal aspects of his admission to hospital and alleged wrongdoings

Perception

No evidence of responding to abnormal perceptions, denied same.

Cognition

Alert and orientated to time place and person.

Insight

Mr Cordell feels he does not have a mental disorder.

16. Factors affecting this hearing

· Mr Cordell has made recordings of assessments and other interactions with health professionals and police in the past and refers to this frequently. Mr Cordell has attempted to make recordings of encounters with staff during his admission, there is a chance he may attempt to make recordings of tribunal proceedings.

16.  opinion and Recommendations

· Mr Cordell is currently suffering from a mental disorder:

· He presents with persisting psychotic symptoms of paranoid persecutory delusions involving police and mental health services, he also presents with pressured speech, and has presented as elated and irritable, which may represent a mood disturbance Whilst Mr Cordell has indeed had several encounters with the police and has a forensic history, it is my opinion that his interpretation and experience of these encounters goes beyond reality into beliefs of a delusional nature. These beliefs have dominated Mr Cordell's life and his behaviour at the expense of his wellbeing and ability to function safely in the community.

· In the past these persecutory ideas have also focused on family members and neighbours, one of his neighbours was also a service user and needed to be rehoused as a result of encounters with Mr Cordell. Mr Cordell presents with evidence of thought disorder; his speech is pressured and tangential upon interview.

· His mental disorder is currently of a nature or degree to justify on­going detention in hospital.

787,

· If he insisted on leaving the ward, we would ask our home treatment team to monitor him at home and offer him medication - historically Mr Cordell has not engaged well with community services due to his lack of insight.

17.  If Mr Cordell is NOT discharged from his Section:

· We would encourage Mr Cordell to take antipsychotic medication, starting with a low dose and monitoring closely for response and any side effects.

· We would titrate the dose antipsychotic medication according to his mental state and side effect profile.

· Once regularly taking antipsychotic medication and stabilised in mental state we would start to introduce some leave from the ward initially escorted before moving to longer periods of unescorted leave.

· Once deemed stable in mental state we would look at discharge to his home with Home treatment team support and referral to community team.

Signed: Dr Rosemary Mills ST4 to Dr Julia Cranitch, Consultant Psychiatrist

Dated: 24th August 2016

788,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Copy of the Minutes of February’s assessment when a Section 135 was wrongfully issued

The Beeping sound starts of interview.

"Muttering" Simon: all of you people are not coming into my house.

"Muttering" Mother: Three two doctors and one social worker.

"Muttering" "Continues."

Mother: How do I turn this television down?

Katie: I am not sure.

Mother: Simon it's not going to work out when you are talking outside.

Katie: Simon stops shouting.

Simon: I want to go through all of the corruption.

Katie: Simon, Simon.

Katie: Lorraine how do you shut the door.

Mother: Shut what door.

Katie: That door.

Mother: Oh, hold on, how do you turn this down I am turning it up.

Simon: How are you all doing welcome to my home, I am not too happy.

Sam: There is a few of us I am afraid. Simon: I understand.

Sam: Where is the best place for us all to seat?

Simon: Just take a seat anywhere you are all welcome to sit anywhere there are seats available for everybody.

Sam: Then we will explain why we are here.

789,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: I am not impressed with your "referring to Elan" I see you and meet you before and I see what happened to you before.

Mother: How many people are actually coming in that is needed to do this assessment.

Mother: The police said that they will wait outside.

Unheard voice:

Katie: No, he didn't.

Mother: No, he didn't he said that the police was going to wait outside.

Sam: OK. Simon: I am not impressed with the way that use lot are using your Mental Health powers to obtain a warrant to come into my house under false allegations, stating of facts that are not true to obtain it.

Simon: you may take a sit anywhere you have been welcomed in now and like take a sit.

Sam: OK.

Simon: You have been welcomed in now like I would rather you lot take a sit rather than I take a sit.

Sam: OK.

Simon: Take a sit, sir please.

Mother: No Sam, can I talk to you for a moment you said the police was waiting outside.

Simon: The police are not coming into these premises, you're not coming in, and you can get out.

Sam: Simon.

Simon: It's a breach of conditions.

Simon: I am explaining to the police.

Katie: You're not going to get anywhere.

790,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Because right now I got conflicting cases going on with the police, and I do not want that having an effect on the ongoing because of this.

Mother: His got serious issues with police cases at the moment.

Sam: Could we just leave the door ajar and have the police at the entrance, is that OK with the police officers.

Sam: Yes, just leave the door open with the police not coming in, OK.

Katie: His exaggerated because of the police.

Simon: That is correct in practice and that is how it should be, that is professional.

Sam: OK.

Simon:

Sam: OK.

Sam: OK, sure.

Sam: So, Simon the reason that we're here today is because concerns have been raised.

"Noise in background made."

Sam: Oh, what's that?

Katie: Oh, it's all right, it part of the printer.

Sam: OK.

Sam: A bout your Mental Health and we have been asked to carry out something called a Mental Health Act assessment, so were her to decide whether or not you need to be detained.

Simon: Section 1 or 2 or 3 and maybe a 4 of the acts in an Emergency.

Sam: Err yes.

Simon: I understand your procedures.

791,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Sam: In order for that to happen and we have not decided anything yet that is why we want to talk to you.

Simon: There is no way that you can decide without being able to make an assessment of the case.

Sam: Let’s just explain the legal situation first thing you can do you hip hop or so myself.

Mother: Let him, just talk Simon.

Sam: Two Doctors so there is: -

Doctor: Albazaz

Sam: and~

Doctor: Amin

Simon: How you both doing.

Sam: For in order for the section to go ahead, they would both need to make medical recommendations and I would need to agree.

Sam: Err but we really just want to find out about how your mental health is two days.

Mother: So, who are all of the other people?

Sam: They are from.

Aman: I am from the Mental Health team.

Simon: So, I meet you the other day and I spoke to you on the phone and I got through, I got large concerns about yourself.

Alena: Yes OK.

Simon: Because this is how I am going to prove that you put wrong statements of facts in to get this yesterday I spoke to you and I spoke to you a couple of days ago and did I not say to you and you said to me at 14:22 I got you on the recording and I am going to play your voice to you in a second.

792,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: You do not need to.

Simon: And I would like you to honest did I not say to you that you are allowed access to my house whenever you would like on the phone last week and the week before.

Alena: Yep yes and that is what is in your notes.

Simon: So how has this court order was obtained under the grounds that I have not given you access, the form has been filled in and when you are filling that form in to get this court order it’s supposed to be filled in there is a statement of facts that is said under oath to a judge, someone has filled that in incorrectly and you have just absolutely admitted that I have said that it's OK to you as I have given you permission to come into my house now.

Simon: So that court order is a breach of violations.

Sam: That is the other thing we got a warrant to come into the flat.

Simon: No, the warrant is self is valid by a judge, but the fulfilment of that warrant is incorrect.

Simon: Am I correct in practice madam.

Alena: You have said that I can come to the house the issue is seeing the doctors.

Doctor xxx: We came last week, and you did not allow us in.

Mother: Hold on can I accurately say some think.

Simon: May I say some think to you two days before that before you attended my premises for a month prior I had a gentlemen phoning me called Goodie I was speaking to him and we was making good relations and I liked this persons attitude I liked how he was talking to me and I thought maybe this person might be able to help me prospect and go forward in my life so were building good relationships we arrange a meeting for him to come around to my address his says OK his coming round his going to bring a friend a colleague, I said that is perfect he said his bringing Sandra with him, they both coming to this house I invite them in perfectly my house is tidy its smells clean they check the fridge and that then they sit down on the chair, Sandra sits actually were your sitting today yes Allan two minutes later her phone rings she gets up and she walks into the hall way and then she is on the phone in

793,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

the corridor yes this door is slightly gets left ajar and Goodie is sitting here I talk to Goodie and I showed Goodie my business plan and I start to start showing him things that I am doing in my life and things like how I am going to help this community and I am going to be a good tenant and resident of the United Kingdom, his happy he was saying that he was amazed I am amazed Simon to see the good things that you are doing and to see all the management systems and to see all the files that you have here, five minutes later the woman walks back in and she goes Goodie we got to leave, so she stops the interview that me and Goodie are having personally and they both leave the premises two days later Goodie says to me, I shake Goodies hand, Goodie says when I get back in four weeks I am your case handler Simon I am going on holiday in four weeks I am going to come and I am going to visit you in four weeks I said Goodie that will be nice to see you in for weeks yes.

Simon: Two days later yourself Alena and another Sandra turns back up to my front door the woman who was so rude when she come in and cut our interview.

Katie: No notification at all.

Simon: She never writes any notes down, she never took any information. Katie: Why did you not contact him?

Simon: now can I speak to yourself and I explained to you lot at the door that I do not feel comfortable that you have turned up un-announced, I have got a visitor coming to my house and I do not want them to know my personal life, right now I am trying to make a good impression of myself to people and not show them that you are here, this could be a business prospect or a business chance I might be able to have in the future, so you lot might tarnish that chance for me by being here, so please can you make your self-announced when your turning up to my address, which is fair and you took offence and you threatened me I have you on camera as well because I explained to you that you was on it and I said to you, you said to me that I am going to go and get an order and I am going to bring the police and come into your house I said you do not have the right to go and use your Mental Health powers like that.

Doctor xx: I think I did explain to you, that was not disputed to be the facts I told you clearly if you do not allow us access.

Mother: But he has allowed you access his allowed two sets of Doctors.

Doctor xxx: Not to me.

794,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: No but he allowed two doctors.

Simon: No let him speak let him speak because I am going to listen to him no go on sir.

Simon: Sorry mother.

Katie: No stop.

Doctor xx: I told him that I am the independent psychiatrist and we were there to carry out a Mental Health assessment and you insist that we only talk to you outside and you did not want us to come in so we told you.

Katie: So should you not notify him beforehand.

Doctor xxx: with the mental health assessment we do not need, I do not have to.

Simon: They do not have to the amp do not have to do that because they're two separate bodies.

Sam: Si I think if you got complaints about what has happened up till now that is fine, and you can make that.

Simon: Procedures.

Simon: No it's not just complaints it’s you are in my house right now under a statement that this woman has clearly just said to you has been filled out wrongly and being handed to a judge to breech my private and family life.

Sam: Well we have used the warrant to gain access today.

Simon: Yes, but she is admitting that that warrant has been full filled wrong.

Simon: She is admitting that it has been filled wrongly to breach my Human Rights.

Sam: What I would like to focus on is your Mental Health at the moment and if you need any help with your Mental Health and what is going on with you, can we talk about that a bit for now Simon.

795,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: Sir I am happy to talk with you, sir I am happy to talk with you, I am happy to talk to a degree with yourself and I am just going to go this with you.

Sam: Because how what is your own view about your Mental Health.

Simon: My own Health my Mental Health I am of good Health right now I am of good mind body and soul, right now if you would like to see the work rat I am doing I will show you what I am committing myself to every single day I can show you what I do myself, I feel a bit of an offence with the way things have gone because I was building good relationships with Goodie there two separate departments and one does need to refer the other one to yourself to come into this house Sharon has not been.

Mother: Sharon,

Simon: Sharon.

Mother: No Sandra, sorry.

Simon: Has not had permission of the department of Simon Clark, whom is the manager and Debbie is the manager of the other one they did not have the correct protocols in place for Sandra to be able to go and get this court order, but even low I am going to continue with what you are saying let’s just forget about that it's finished.

Sam: At the moment you are talking quite fast, I know there are a lot of strangers that have come into your home and it must be a difficult situation.

Simon: I will speak fast.

Sam: Is this how you.

Katie: He is frustrated as well.

Sam: But is that, is this the usual self.

Simon: This is how I will find myself and I will explain my self simply if I find somebody who is of a higher profession and gets paid the living wage the same as you do when and got the education took to be able to look after myself or another member of the public I respect you the amount of time it would have took you to do that and the hardship it would take for you to get that stage so I know that I am educating myself an d that I am of a lower

796,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

education to you so I believe that you should be able to understand and keep up the pace your time is valuable to yourself and valuable 'to me so I want to use that to its most efficient as possible if you want me to slow down and speak to you a bit slower.

Sam: If you could slow down because it would also show us that ability to be calm because that would make us be able to understand your mental Health at the moment.

Mother: Yes, but he does speak fast.

Sam: He always speaks very so this is Simon's usually personality. Mother: Yes, he speaks fast.

Simon: I might be a bit happier in general.

Sam: Yes, this is a difficult situation right now I appreciate that right now.

Simon: What is a difficult situation right now?

Sam: The Mental Health assessment.

Simon: The only difficult situation is the that this is being paired off on to me in such a way, when I am sitting here right now every day working my hardest righting files to look after every other member of the public and I am being treated differently I am an equal to your self's and we are all equals.

Doctor: We can understand all that we can understand all of that, but there Is concern raised about you that is why we are here, to assess the situation to see how and if you need any help or if we could offer any help, that is the reason why we are here.

Sam: How is your sleep at the moment?

Sam: Sorry to interrupt you Doctor.

Doctor xxx: So, it is because there is concern about you and that is why we are here.

Sam: How is your sleep at the moment?

Simon: But why are there concerns about me at the moment if I have not spoken to my doctor in years and use lot are the only people that seem to

797,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

have that concern and that concern is based on this gentleman who has come to my door and I never gave him access.

Doctor xxx: No before that.

Simon: Before that the only other concern was that you lot came here on the 8th December 2016 and there was no issue there I explained to your self's and everybody was comfortable and you all left me and if there was a concern you would have raised that yourself s as professionals.

Doctor XX: Tell us a bit about your neighbours.

Simon: My neighbours I got a letters of every single one of my neighbours here right now I got a letter from my next doors I got a letter of them, I got a letter of every person here now saying that I have lived here for eleven years.

Doctor xxx: Please allow me to talk to please when we talk, listen to us and we will do the same to you.

Simon: Yes, for sure year for sure OK.

Doctor xx: Yes please, yes so there is concern about you regarding the neighbours you feel that the neighbours are harassing you.

Simon: Who.

Mother: No that is totally wrong.

Sam: I think it would be better if you let Simon talk.

Doctor: No let him sort this. Simon: The only issue that I have had with my upstairs neighbour.

Doctor: No please let him talk.

Simon: The only issue that I have had with my upstairs neighbour is that she is under your team of assessments, she accepts money from you and she is supposed to have a network in place such as your self's, now I have been living in this house for eleven years she moved in here seven years ago she did she come here she was already an alcoholic the alcoholism takes perception takes over the perception of her Metal Heath she was paying for herself to be drunk, you lot have got duty of care of her, she would not get a liver transplant in them situations that is why she does not really get much

798,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

assistance at the age she is of your self's I expect because there is other people who deserve the chance a lot more than what she does.

Sam: Have you had any difficulties with her.

Simon: Now what she does I have not had no conflicts with her.

Sam: OK.

Simon: But I have always helped her I pick her up and take her shopping yet I do like she would have her stuff coming in and I would lift her shopping upstairs, I would carry it up to her house I would see her and I would always be polite to her and say hello, bar, bar, bar I would lend her a Ł10.00 I would never let her In this house because I could feel something was wrong with her yet.

Katie: She used to knock and ask for money.

Simon: She used to knock on my door every day knocking, knocking, and knocking.

Simon: My last girlfriend used to be so paranoid for 13 years because of the amount she was knocking on my door and she being another female but I would never let this woman into my house I would keep her at arm’s length I knew that she was a bit of an alcoholic so I would keep a few beers in my fridge for her I do not drink alcoholic myself I am t a total.

Doctor: Have you ever had any conflict with her have you ever threaten her.

Simon: Why would I threaten her I would never threaten another person.

Doctor xx: Never.

Simon: I got a letter of her right here that I am the best neighbour in the world I am going to show you them.

Doctor xx: Were.

Katie: She is causing problems.

Mother: He is having some problems with her in the sense that.

Simon: She won't leave me alone.

799,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: basically, she won't leave him alone.

Simon: She keeps stalking me under the criminal justice act 1997.

Mother: She keeps putting the letters through his letter box.

Doctor: OK.

Mother: And basically, I have been trying to deal with the council with that and there is a year worth of emails.

Simon: And she is always drunk.

Doctor: What is the content of the letters?

Simon: I have some here, right now loads of them.

Mother: she is sorry, she is sorry for keep on banning.

Simon: No I am total I like to look after other people.

Doctor xx: We understand that in the past we have had some anti depression with depression and you.

Simon: I do not think that there is a person in this room that has not felt depression once before in their life's them self's.

Sam: No, No that's right.

Doctor xx: No, no talking about Mental Health issues, so you had depression.

Simon: When I was a kid, I hard upbringing in North London, Enfield but as you can see here right now, I have worked hard to keep myself up a float.

Doctor xx: Yes, yes that is good.

Simon: I keep myself clean I keep myself with every think I need.

Doctor xx: Have you taken any medication.

Simon: I got no need to take any medication.

800,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Doctor xx: Not in the past Simon.

Simon: No I have never taken medication.

Doctor: Never taken any medication.

Doctor: How was your desperation cured?

Simon: How was my depression cured, I meet and let the beautiful people in my life, and they have helped me along the road and every time somebody else might go somebody else new might come along and help me.

Doctor: And has recently had you been feeling low in mood and depressed.

Simon: Recently I just wanted to get my civil liberties back because they have been tarnished by the police because a section 63 what to a degree what they done is set me up for being my friends to black boys funny and I then knew that I could have not committed the crimes that I am being accused me of and another police officer knows this and he is coming as a witness a superintendent is coming to talk.

"shh"

Doctor xx: What crime are they.

Mother: We do not want the police to hear.

Simon: Listen there is serious issues there in a lot of trouble.

Sam: I mean we are not here to talk about all the criminal aspects, what we are really concerned about are your mental.

Simon: I am Mental.

Sam: What I want to do.

Simon: I am defiantly not mental.

Sam: Questions that we ask everybody to help us understand your mental Health at the moment do you, have you got any racing thoughts do you find your thoughts going very quickly.

801,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: No all I find myself doing is working every day on my business plan if you want to see that I will show you.

Sam: that is fine and answer, their questions afterwards.

Sam: How is your sleep at the moment Simon?

Simon: I sleep perfectly 8 hours a day sometime 9 and that is at the most sometimes I tend to stay up latter than what I do in the night, sometimes I tend to work better on the computer at night times when It is quite and everybody is not making so much noise and there is not so much banging about Because I am doing a lot of writing so I stay up late sometimes it can change I can stay up a bit latter at nights but I then come back to the day time and make sure that I manage and everything mi make sure that all my paper work and ever think Is In correct order things like that I need to do then I can go back to my place of work my place of comfort which is their some times.

Doctor: Are you eating.

Simon: yes, I am eating.

Sam: how is your appetite are you eating OK and any I no you said.

Simon: I am a size 36 jeans.

Sam: Are you feeling any low mood at all.

Simon: I just want civil liberties given back to me.

Mother: A bit stressed but it's due to the court case.

Sam: OK.

Simon: A Section 63 should not be, I basally won my case in court and I won it In court and the judge new I won it because the facts of the matter are a section 63 you must have trespass for it's a key element for that law to exist, I do not have tress pass on my criminal record so I explained this to the judge so she said do you know what you are right, then what her done was said do you know what you are right then what she has done I got the transcripts what she done was breaching my human rights she told me that there is no difference between private air and public air.

802,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: No know what she actual turned round her exact words was that basically the applicant the case was based on illegality by the applicant.

Simon: They darkened my name in the newspaper.

Mother: Yes.

Sam: Yes.

Sam: I just popped out to the police officers to let them know everything is all right so the only other thing, sorry to Interrupt that so the only other thing have you threatened any cops so I know you're stressed at the moment has it ever affected you to the point where you have felt life Is not worth living or other things.

Simon: No I just want to continue with all the things that I am writing, I when I show you what I am writing.

Sam: OK.

Simon: Wait a second, I got to wait for my computer to turn on.

Simon: Then you might be able to understand me.

Simon: This Is all the things I have been doing in my life I have been building a festival I been building my own constitution, learning everything that I need like getting all the systems that I need In place the health and safety files all of my food safety all the files I need to look after any other person all the support programs that are in the areas and stuff like that that can be done every think is all categorized then I got all like adult and youths files and all my congiguuancey plan I got everything that I need I got all my disability rights and all the rest of it.

Doctor xx: Can you tell us exactly what your work is all about.

Simon: I built a festival and I built err a website and that website is going too basically.

Simon: Built a company that I can manage that is a worth it and I will be able to.

Katie: Is an entertainment company.

803,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: Yes, it's an entertainment company.

Simon: But at the same time I built a charity, basically I got the business directory and what I have done Is written a constitution I wrote the memorandum of articles and articles of association basically so what I can do is define different people in different areas so rather than just having a community hall where someone like a government would sponsor to the general public or to somebody a team of people of beatifies, so I made my web site so I can have six different beatifies "Directors" in different places across London.

Doctor: How long have you been building?

Simon: I have been building my company for about 10 years in total it takes time like the website.

Mother: Well his been building it.

Doctor: Hold on please.

Doctor xx: How have you managed to get any jobs.

Simon: What do you mean within the website?

Doctor xx: Anywhere.

Simon: Yes I have had jobs, but slowly but it was in slow little pieces and I got shut down by the police as I explained, in the transcripts I got a judge saying to me that I have to have permission to have private party's like in my house.

Katie: It's an addiction.

Mother: I am sorry does anyone want a cup of tea or something.

Sam: And team: No were fine thanks.

Doctor: What do you do with the big printers?

Simon: There for part of the company.

Simon: There for graphics.

Simon: I will show you now.

804,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Katie: You know the sign writing that you 'put on vans.

Sam: Oh yes, I know.

Sam: It for poster's and things.

Katie: yes.

Mother: Yes posters and flyers and all that type of thing.

Sam: And like things for a festival.

Katie: Yes.

Mother: Yes.

Sam: OK.

Simon: No what It for is I got my catering trailer and so forth, which is going into my catalogue which is over there.

Sam: yes.

Simon: There are loads of sections and it is a bit hard to through with you.

Simon: You can have a look at it yourself; this is what I have been doing.

Sam: Hmm.

Simon: This is what I have been doing, this is the formation of the company which has to go to the commissioner and the director for CIC Company, now what this basically does is show how I am going to register the company and my interest in the company and how I would do it.

Simon: This is a description of company in which it intends to help.

Simon: Too Smooth's business directory it’s a CIC Community Interest Company Association representing residents living in the whole of the United Kingdom and those who are signed as a member to its online functions, this is achieved by governing its members who are signed in use of the Too Smooth Business Directory and form. Too Smooth Business Directory is hosted within the World Wide Web.

805,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: I will show you it I got a business directory and I got my own LTD company section, what I am going to do is donate the business directory section to 6 directors.

Doctor xx: So what your company can do is help people in the whole of the United Kingdom and those who are signed a member to it functions.

Simon: Yes that is correct.

Doctor: So who gave you the authority to do such a thing?

Simon: Who gave me the authority?

Simon: Who gave me the authority if I own my own building it’s up to me if I want to sponsor it, if I wanted to sponsor you some think I got the right to sponsor it if I own it it’s up to me.

Simon: I own my own website I built the code behind my own website.

Doctor xx: No sorry I am just asking you how you can delusion that you can represent the residents of the whole United Kingdom.

Simon: What it does what you can do yes this is the form that you can have I am going to show you quickly now yes what you have to do is have to fill out this form here, now what I am doing is letting six other people help manage my company now normally you would have them six people defined in one area which would be just this area but because I got the internet and I am governing the internet I can have six separate directors one for this borough one for this estate one up in south then one there and that means that there all managers in different areas so that does make it so that I have a constitutions and defined what sections I want, because I am not governing just one building like the old community halls used to do I have done the whole of the United Kingdom.

Simon: So now I got six people that are all directors that will all have access to a section of my business directory now what they have is they have the power to give the rest of the residents on the estates a login now they can all long in and it has a face book link and the rest and they can click on that to the Donor cause to be a Donor to any cause selected so one person say there is 33 boroughs in the surrounding areas I would have 6 of the boroughs that are company directors yes so this will be one my mum would hopefully be one I

806,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

would be one for this estate and there would be another one for another area and another one for another area and they will all have logins.

Sam: So it is a way of expanding your business.

Simon: No it's not a way of expanding my business what it does is expand a business in the community, not for myself. because what I do is give this to beneficial which is the commissioner of charity's for England and Wales, this is who I am writing this to now asking him or her and showing them this is my proposal to you this is what I built and this is how I want to help people and with this I will be one of the first people to govern the internet and I am going to sponsor my business directory to the people and that is how I move on.

Doctor: And then what is the benefit of this business of the people.

Simon: I will show you what they can do this is coming along and they can add a business card to a business card directory so that they can show other people their business new starting business and existing company profiles.

Mother: Here let me show you the website.

Simon: Why just let me just do what I am doing for a sec.

Mother: Then you can show them the business directory.

Simon: Look if you would like to take a read through it, but it is not some think that will take five minutes, it has taken a lot of work and a lifetime of work at that to be able to build it for the people exactly how was done, I am rewriting Glastonbury and others management system the same I am looking at the big people behind me and how they archived what they wanted to achieve I am achieving exactly the same goals but I am just doing it today in today's modern world year and that is it.

Sam: You mentioned before that before all of this happened that you was getting on quite well with Goodie is that some correct Simon, how would you be if you did not go the hospital today, would you be prepared to meet with Goodie again.

Simon: If I did not go to hospital.

Simon: Well year I would be happy to meet Goodie again of course, but it depends under what grounds there is no reason for me to worry about

807,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

meeting him over than the fact being that I am just a good person doing the correct things.

Katie: Is he not on leave at the moment.

Woman: In the background: Yes.

Sam: Yes I understand Goodie is on leave at the moment.

Mother: He is on leave. Mother: He has already agreed to meet Goodie again.

Sam: OK

Simon: "Referring to the doctor" If you would like to read a bit more sir, you just seem real interested and I love it when people are interested in my work yet.

Sam: I am just going outside to see how the police are. Mother: If you actually show him the website

Simon: He would probably understand a bit more.

Simon: Have you seen the website before.

Katie: No one would.

Simon: OK I am going to show the website now.

Katie: Basically you can hire out sound equipment.

Doctor: So why have the police stopped him.

Mother: and what he wants to do is community events, he has done a couple in 2013, like he has done Ponders End festival with the council he done, Lock to Lock.

Simon: what I own at present is an LTD company which Is Too Smooth Ltd, which is my Hire of provisions company now what I want to do is keep Too Smooth Ltd as an umbrella company I want to be able to maintain my limited foundation under that and manage a charity in co-Hurst, if anything it Is for the community, what they can do is advertise in the business directory it’s like 118 but It is a digital business directory.

808,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Doctor: So the charity is a business directory.

Simon: Yes that is what it is.

Simon: And what they can do is you can come along and advertise your business, what you would do is set fee and that money will go to a chatty bar at the top and It goes to the local community.

Simon: This is another folder that I have built this is a charity that I have been building.

Simon: And this is also what I have been building for Bliss a sponsored walk that I have been building for a company called Dem's working alongside Bliss.

Simon: "Referring to another binder".

Sam: Simon I just wanted to ask you a few more and I know its 100 questions and you got all these strange people In your living room, but if I could ask you a few more questions, do you ever hear voices when no one is around.

Simon: No.

Sam: And the police I know you got these ongoing court cases and I do not want you to talk about the specifics of them, but do you think the police have a kind of conspiracy going or something going on with the police:

Simon: I will show you one or two things that are going on at the moment.

Simon: These are the letters going on with Debbie I am going to go through a couple of them with you so you can see a bit of everything that we have talked about.

Simon: Take a look at this "I show letters of Debbie."

Mother: Keep your voice down Simon.

Simon: The National call centre is a million-pound centre yet and Met cc time stamps can't go backwards. For other start what colour am I, Can every one answer me what colour am I mixed race would everyone agree that I am mixed race or light skin for a start year now I would like to show you one little snip lit, here this is a 999 call.

Mother: Sh.

809,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: This is a 999 call and this is what I have been accused of, caller states on the day there were about 20 people pulling into this estate, I was in this house on this date yet I could never have done it, I could never have done It, I have not even done a house party for nothing for years, caller looks like they're planning to an illegal rave, caller states they have brought in alcohol and carrying decks, caller states they are carrying box's.

Katie: Who's that at the door?

Mother: I am just doing it because he is talking about the court case.

Katie: His not doing anything wrong.

Simon: Please stop for a Sec.

Simon: Caller states he can see them bring boxes into the building and states there defiantly all there.

Simon: Caller states they are all males and females and are all white people.

Katie: There trying to listen to you outside.

Mother: There coming in and they can hear him.

Simon: All white people.

Mother: Your trying to hear what he is saying and talking about his accepting a court case.

Doctor xx: Yes that is bad.

Simon: So that is impossible for me to have done as I am mixed race.

Simon: So that is one bad quite think yes but let me go to something else that is even worse that is a bigger problem yet.

Sam: I would Amal your part of the team could Goodie come.

Amal: It could be the way Goodie could come here or you could come to them.

810,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: Then what does this do this tarnishes my medical record, then when people what to see me looking after other people in life, it looks dead,

Because right now I got the cleanest name in the world apart from the police darkening my name in on the website to which I have not because I ha have the transcripts, I am going to prove that in a couple of weeks.

Sam: But Simon it won't all this is.

Simon: but I am going to have a clean name again and I do not want my name on no mental health charts yet.

Sam: But.

Simon: It won't all this is.

Sam: There is a difference between people carrying out an assessment to see if they have a Mental Health problem.

Simon: Yes but this is an assessment right now.

Sam: Yes this is an assessment.

Simon: But what we are talking about is as if I do have a problem and now you want me to go to meetings.

Sam: No but in order to have a proper understanding is whether or not, you got the illness. I need to see you a few times and for you to see a doctor.

Simon: Do you understand what that would do to your career if someone were to do that to you right now saying that, would put you under if someone come along and done that to you and your living, right now her then that would tarnish the rest of your career possibly.

Sam: Not necessary Simon because there is a difference between.

Simon: I am working hard.

Sam: I can see you have a really strong business face. What is there a difference between you being assessed and people cheeking that you are OK.

Simon: But it is not going to be the same as every time you have already done this. Same: No all I am saying is that is a few, perhaps have a meeting with one of the doctors in Goodies team.

811,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: Why would you want that from me?

Sam: Because doctors have a pacific skill to do a proper further assessment.

Simon: Well I feel that is what you done today, and you know that you are intelligent, and you know that you are going to leave me.

Sam: Well but I think it.

Simon: And you are going to know that I am healthy as any think.

Sam: Well I just think that tit is just not in you want, it will be in a period of times over a period of time.

Simon: So you say I need another assessment then another one in a few months, what you're telling me is that is not going to tarnish the rest of my life.

Sam: No because it may not be.

Simon: So I am not going to get my medical record and it going to say Simon should not look after 50 kids today because his slightly mentally ill.

Doctor: Simon.

Sam: Simon is not having a diagnoses which has some thought completely different no one was diagnosing you with any mental illness at this point there has been concerns raised so it is just a matter of people wanting to do a further assessment and this is part of it and what I think we would like to do after today is for you to see someone.

Simon: I am going to take your advice for a little while.

Simon: As long as you're not sectioning me, and you are not a doctor.

Doctor: Simon, Simon because of all the things like this you could get shot up again "Muttering" from the services if the team follow you and see you for a couple I do not know for how long.

Sam: If you do not see people and they have just got these concerns the people will just worry about you.

812,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: But there is no reason to worry about me.

Sam: Well it is just because they haven't had the chance the opportunity to do a report and assessment.

Simon: I got my court case coming up soon and I cannot wait to prove my innocents and then finish the rest of what I am doing and put every one right once justice is done I will be happier more than I am.

Doctor: So this is it you are most likely most likely most likely accurately you will be discharged at the end of this if they cannot prove that you are mentally ill.

Sam: Health services in the future they can have a look and they will receive a copy of the assessment OK, what I need to do is just have a quick chat.

Katie: His never had any problems in his life.

Simon: Yes, I have never had any problems in my whole life and I am 35 years old.

Sam: That is fine.

Katie: It is just how everyone going about it if you go about it the wrong way, you're going to be defensive and that is what has happened.

Sam: Yes, I can understand that people coming into your room with some really negative issues from mental Health services.

Katie: It is not just that.

Sam: OK.

Katie: It is not just that this guy has gone mad.

Katie: It was not necessary to bring all of the police today to be honest.

Sam: I know well, I walked into this situation for the first time today.

Katie: There dead, so you do not know any previous.

Sam: Previous.

813,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Sam: What I would like to do is just have a quick word outside with the doctors just to quickly decide what we want to do and come in and let you know which will take a couple of minutes OK.

Sam: OK

Sam: Simon we are just going to pop outside with the doctors for a couple of minutes and then we will come back and let you know the outcome of the Mental Health assessment OK.

Simon: You have left your bag here.

Sam: I am coming back in I am not leaving it, but you can hang on to it, I am sure it will be safe here.

Doctor: Have you been out on your motorbike.

Simon: No not for a little while now.

Mother: No he has not been using it.

Simon: I have just been staying indoors and relaxing for a little while, but I have kept it as an asset to be able to sell when I need to make some thinking constructive with it.

Marry: Simon my name is Mary I am one of the senior partions in the home treatment team

Colin: I am Colin

Simon: How are you both?

Marry: Both of us work in the home treatment team.

Simon: It must be a hard team to work in some time.

Mother: Can I ask a quick question.

Marry: Yes.

814,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: Err due to the conditions that he has been put under by the police he will not go out because he feels low the police are constantly on him and he's worried.

Katie: Is worried that he will get put into prison.

Mother: So he will not go out until all of this appeal is over with and everything else and he starts getting his life back.

Simon: I have actually been set up I never done anything.

Katie: Simon, Simon, Simon.

Mother: His got an assessment tomorrow with ESA and his no going to go up there until it is there anything the mental health team can do.

Simon: Have you got the warrant.

Mother: Yes.

Mother: And can say can you write on that and give us a copy that It was not executed and that he allowed you entry.

Sam: I suppose the best thing to say, well it is up to you, you let us in so I can suppose we can say that and then send it back to the court.

Katie: Yes.

Mother: Yes but can I keep a copy of it please.

Sam: Yes will give you a copy.

Mother: Yes wonderful, thank you.

Simon: Would use lot like a drink.

Marry: No thanks.

Gentlemen's voice: In answer to your question and I do not have a clear answer

Muttering"

815,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: No it is not basically his on six conditions at the present moment until this goes to the appeal.

Katie: It is not a curfew, but it is because he is not allowed to go to places.

Mother: Like to go out down the motorway after 10:00 pm he is not allowed onto industrial estates and can't even stop at a petrol station '

Simon: I have been looking in her for over three years and I have not even been found guilty or arrested.

Mother: His got an appointment tomorrow I have contacted them and said that it is going to need to be rearranged told them that he was getting an assessment today.

Marry: Yes.

Mother: Hmm you suggested that I have contact with them.

Marry: Hmm Hm.

Mother: And basically, they asked me to update them today as to what is going on err, they're open till 8:00 pm tonight.

Marry: Hmm.

Mother: High bury and Islington.

Katie: High bury.

Marry: Islington.

Simon: I am barred from the whole of the central London.

Mother: Err the building because it is classified.

Katie: His not allowed in any form of industrial estate like you know were. Salisbury is and toys r us Great Cambridge Rd he can't go to the McDonald's after 10:00 pm or any think.

Simon: I cannot go MC Donald's or any think. "Muttering

816,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: If I go into any night club I need permission any night club if I walk into a house party and you got more 20 people in your house I can go to prison the problem is normal you have got private air and public air I got freedom of speech in this house this is my private air and that Is what I believe this is our human right and what crated our statues of liberty's as human beings, now what they have done because the buildings are in side there treated as people private homes and that Is their way of living so now what they have done is breach all my human rights and all the rules and regulations and say that private air and public air are the same and that is what they have do to give me this application.

Simon: Now what the judge has written is she has write I am not allowed to have no private birthday parties in this house today if I give you an amp and you take an amp to your house if you have 20 people listening to music on that amp in your house then I can go to prison I full fit for your actions

Carl: Does it say 20.

Simon: Yes.

Katie: Yes.

Mother: Yes but that is what is written in the section 63.

Simon: But they're not allowed to do that in a house in a house I allow as many people as I want like normally you are allowed as many people as you want in here.

Simon: Section 63 is for outdoors unless tress pass has taken place, but they want to use it in to do me I am standing up for everybody.

Mother: It's absolutely wrong and there is an appeal, but the appeal taking

Marry: If it is your own place you can do what you want.

Katie: No he is not allowed under the. Marry: What is that a section 63.

Katie: I do not know the sections I just know what the Asbo restrictions cover.

Sam: Hmm Simon I will be showing you are pleased to hear that you are not going to be put under a section of the mental health Act today. Cheers in the room: -

817,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Sam: You are not going to the hospital what would in courage you to do is to meet up with goodies and see the doctor in the Goodies team because what I think is If we got some thinking on file to say that there has been an assessment no Mental Health illness was found so next time someone phones up we got that on our record because if you get some contact to say that there is concern about Metal Health we have a duty of care to check what is happening

Simon: A duty of care.

Sam: So having the assessment getting out of the way

Simon: So now that you have said that this is exactly 'the point that I wanted to raise her upstairs your team does have a duty of care of her, now these letters are the letters that she has been writing me, I was in a 13 year relationship and she was stalking me, following me around but I never paid her too much bother to me because I did not have all the court dates and orders on me so I was not in my house all the time.

Simon: Eventually any way I broke up with my partner and this woman started writing me letters all of a sudden this shows how clearly drunk she was and her mental state of mind in the letters

Simon: She is like dear Simon I thank you for your support through alcoholism Simon: So she is admitting that she is always drunk.

Simon: I was a where that I knocked on your door and borrowed money approximate Ł7 around 8 times.

Simon: So you can see that I am always giving her money.

Simon: I am always giving her money.

Katie: That is because she is asking for it.

Simon: Yes, she is knocking on the door.

Simon: And then she is like I do not have the way or the means of stalking you.

Simon: So she clearly understands that she is stalking me and I am saying to her please can you stop what you are doing to me, she keeps writing it when she is drunk, it is an intrusion of my life.

818,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: Now because of the case I am spending 24 hours a day in my home, do you know what she does, sir she comes here and she get the tap in her flat the manufacture intended it to be built for a purpose and that is not in the way she uses it, what she is doing is sitting there at the tap and I mean she sleeps at the tap " Description of her using the tap" going bang, bang, bang what it was like is someone had turned the pressure up by the stop cock.

Doctor: Can I stop you there please.

Simon: What it is I cannot even take my clothes off in my own home as she will stamp and follow me bang, bang, bang, bang on the floor all the way into the bathroom.

Mother: He has so many witnesses I been trying to get the council to help with no luck.

Sam: Have you raped I mean, surely the housing officers are aware that the. Mother: I have been I have been. Simon: the police will not do anything.

Mother: I have been trying to deal with it, I have gotten emails upon emails upon emails that I have sent begging the council to deal with lady upstairs.

Mother: Even when I am here, she follows me into the bathroom.

Simon: There are loads of them here she writes me so many letters so many letters.

Simon: Yes and none of my friends can take their clothes of in this house or nothing 'because of what she has been doing.

Mother: It feels like she is continuing on top of your banging.

Simon: What she does every time she hears a computer keyboard; what she does is she will stand there and she will (Mr Simon Cordell makes a loud banging sound)

Sam: And it sounds like there is no sound proofing here at all low.

Mother: No there is not.

Simon: I cannot even work in this house because of her I mean I have been sitting down in this house for the last year still just waiting for her to stop

819,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

banning and this can cause my sleep pattern to mess up a bit from time to time still.

Sam: No I am fine, I am fine.

Mother: And I got emails upon emails asking the council to address it because it is not fair on him, he feels as if he has no privacy in 'his own home.

Simon: Look Simon, thank you I think I have sorted it and I believe you and would bend over not to make an emissary of your life sorry I cannot see leaving just the wedged headboard.

Katie: There are plenty of people who have been here she has done it to me.

Simon: This is how drunk she is when she wrote this.

Katie: You can hear her.

Louise Brown: Do you live in this block too.

Katie: No but I am always here I am, here a lot and I am also here a lot when mum is not here, I mean a lot of things have happened.

Louise Brown: yes.

Katie: So it is not like he is making things up as it has been seen by a lot of other people and no one does anything as it is a council place for him.

Katie: I even told him that he should move away from here.

Louise Brown: Hmm.

Simon: But do you know what she means by the wedged head board yes like I said a Christmas last Christmas I brought her a box of chocolates yes and I gave everyone in the block a present yes times where hard for me as this time because I had not been up to much because I had been on curfew for two years all ready at that stage yes in this house Simon so I brought t them their boxes of chocolates then In a couple of months later in February she started doing all this banging on the tap on purpose and stamping bang, bang, banging but just before that she knocked on my door one day and asked me to go upstairs into her flat and help move her bed out this was the first time I had been into her flat I have not been in that flat for years since she has lived there but I still went up their as a gentlemen I went up there and I went in to

820,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

her house and the house did smell right it was clean but it did not just smell clean so I felt funny as I am one of them people that as if "She is lazy why is her house not clean" how could she invite me In to her house like that so I quickly moved the bed fast and UN-done it and got it out of the house and got out and got straight back to my own house yes and that is why she wrote that funny bit about the head board .

Simon: You are being the best neighbour in the world Debbie, and this is the sort of letters she keeps putting into my front door.

Mother: Even the council 'has turned around and said that she has a fashion- nation with my son, but they’re not doing nothing and it's driving him, he cannot even go into the toilet and have a bath as she is on top of him banging continued.

Louise Brown: Hmm OK.

Mother: Even when I am sitting here and I go to the toilet and she does not even know that it is me and she does the same to me and It does make you feel and the council are really not doing nothing about it what so ever.

Louise Brown: Hmm.

Mother: He knows that she has got problems.

Louise Brown: And this has been going on for how long a long time.

Mother: A year. Louise Brown: Oh right.

Mother: And I put a complaint in because dawn Alena is his council officer.

Louise Brown: Yes.

Mother: I was making phone calls and saying to dawn Alena, please try and address this you know please its going too far now.

Louise Brown: Yes.

Mother: And she wouldn't come out she wouldn't deal with it and wanted Simon to come up and visit her and basically I put a complaint in and the they said that they’re going to put it over to the anti-social team and they wouldn't do anything then a Louise brown took up the case after months of not doing any think and I am writing emails upon emails and then they come out she did

821,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

not take one note and he has video tapes recordings and every think and you can hear it and you can hear the taps were she was using the taps and they had the pressure up so high the noise that come into his flat was terrible the noise she was just turning it on and off on and off on and off.

Mother: He could not even sleep propel.

Louise Brown: How old is she Simon.

Simon: She is four years old now.

Mother: How old is Debbie.

Simon: Oh she is about 12 years older than me I would say.

Louise Brown: 12.

Katie: Oh what the dog.

Simon: Oh no the dog is four, four years of age.

Louise Brown: Arr.

"Muttering"45:14 till 45:34 Katie: She might be older than that.

Mother: And like I put a complaint in because the Anti-Social Behaviour team was not dealing with it and they was not taking the issue seriously and that was put in October of last year and we have not heard a thing, so I keep asking them when are we going to get a response from the formal complaint that was put in because you are not addressing thing correctly.

Louise Brown: And nothing.

Mother: nothing she actually phoned because I think she made a mistake, because he phoned Louise, and it now I mean Debbie was going off constant banging and he could not work or any think and it is annoying to him so he phoned Louise up and he always gives out my number so she actually phoned me by mistake and I turned round and said to Louise I said I said She said is Simon Cordell there I said no who is it she said it Louise Brown.

Louise Brown: I am Louise brown.

822,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Mother: Oh So you are Louise brown can you tell me why you have not responded to my formal complaint I sure you have and I know "Muttering" and I have not deleted them err, yet in another email you will have a response fast and directly but it is still going on now and it is now February and sill nothing.

Marry: No response.

Louise Brown: It can take up to four months later.

Mother: Yes, I Know.

Louise Brown: Any way.

Mother: And I have even been up because he has knocked on her door a few times when she was bad and really banging the council has

"Muttering" A bit so that you do not hear it so badly so bad when she is constantly banging.

Mother: I mean, even the other day he had his entire bathroom ceiling flooded and it knocked his entire electric out and basically, he had to call the Emergency.

Louise Brown: Yes, the Emergency.

Mother: And he went upstairs to say to her you have got a leak and it is all Flooding through my bathroom then and then the council come out and then she well it seems she has cleaned the mess up.

Louise Brown: Hmm.

Mother: And basically, they have re-laid the whole of her pipes like they have re-laid his heating because they were having issues with the heating systems, so they re-laid the pipes over the wall.

Katie: You can see them on the walls over there.

Louise Brown: Yes.

Mother: And basically, he turns round, and they turned round, then they phoned me, and they said has the ceiling dried out yet as they had to disconnect the whole light.

823,

Copy of the Minutes of February.pdf

Simon: My bathroom light is disconnected right now.

Mother: And.

Louise Brown: Yes.

Mother: And then I contacted them back the next day and I said to them the ceiling is still to wet to actually re connect that back up it would be dangerous.

Katie: So is there still no electric in the bathroom.

Mother: And I said you are going to need to leave to your going to need to let it dry out before you come and reconnect it back up, then I got a phone call from them say now they believe the leak is coming from 117 that is the third floor up.

Mother: Because it is privately leased their going to come down and speak to Simon today, so I said OK, no problem because they have then got to pay for the damage that was then done. Louise Brown:

Mother: Err so the people from 117 come down and they said we have got no leak we have had someone come in and check and there is no leak.

Katie: Simon.

Doctor: See you.

END of Conversion of Audio Transcripts:

A copy of the footage is available at request.

824,

Report - Reply.pdf

RESPONSE TO MENTAL HEALH REPORTS

Dated: 12/09/2016 Name: Mr Simon Cordell

Home Address: 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Email Address: Re_wired@ymail.com

Date of Birth: 26 Jan 1981

Hospital: St Ann’s Hospital, St Ann’s Road London N15 3TH MHA

Status: Mr Cordell had been on a Section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 since the 15th August 2016 that was then changed at Tribunal on the 26/08/2016 to a voluntary patient as the Tribunal panel did not feel a section 2 was needed. As of the 27th August 2016 I was discharged to my home from St Ann’s Hospital and I am being treated as a voluntary home patient, to date of this letter.

Responsible Clinician: Dr Julia Cranitch

Date admitted: 16th August 2016 is on the records and reports, but in the report of Dr Rosemary mills it clearly state on page number 5 Chapter 13 Progress on the Ward, that I was being detained from the 15th/8/2016.

On the 14/08/2016 the police attended my home address I was arrested around 20:00 hours and taken to Wood Green Police station for allegations that I had threaten someone, which is not true.

In the time I was in police custardy I did not see an FME doctor. I also did not see my solicitors who I had asked to see.

On the 15/08/2016 two Mental Health doctors and an amp worker did come to my cell door and told me I was being sectioned under section 2 of the Mental Health act this was around 16:30 hours. I was upset at this due to knowing I had not been legally assessed as no person had come in or out of my cell to do such an assessment as can be proved by the police Cell’s CCTV, I was not even served any paper work other than my bail form and therefore held illegally after I was bailed.

No official person would say what was going on throughout my detention and for what reasons they continued to hold me after being granted bail,

Throughout my whole stay all I wanted was to see my solicitor and be interviewed and then released as I had done nothing wrong. Just after this the police handed me a bail form at around 16:46 through my cell flap, I was bailed with no interviewed and I still did not still get to see my solicitor,

When given the bail form there was two doctor and a Mental health worker also standing outside the closed cell door, who said to myself that I was being held under section 2 of the Mental health act.

I said to the Doctor I know who you are I have you on CD from February coming into my home and I also have a complaint in against you and continued to state that I had done nothing wrong in my whole detention. I explained my rights and feelings and explained to them that they should not do this to me and every person outside the cell door walked away for a while, to come back five minutes later and say to myself through the cell flap once again you are being sectioned. Which a copy of the audio cd minutes is contained at the bottom of this document

1

825,

Report - Reply.pdf

I did not have an assessment with a doctor for my Mental Health at the police station which can be proved by CCTV and know I was then being held illegally, in the police cell under a section 2 without being served any official paper work to them doctors statements or being assessed.

On the 16/08/2016 an Amp worker visited me at the police station around 03:30 hours took me on his own and then said that I was then to be moved to St Ann’s hospital at around 04:00 hours, as he was going by what the two pervious doctors had reported.

When I was transferred to St Ann’s Hospital, I spoke to know one other than a single duty SHO with a nurse present.

I personally understand I had my first true assessment 72 hours later on the 17/08/2016 when I saw some doctors, my mother and uncle was also present at this meeting.

In response to an Inpatient psychiatric report, that was for a mental health assessment, inclusive of a related Tribunal, that was compiled on the 26/08/16 for Dr. Julia Cranitch.

· Preamble:

- 1.2 of Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

Dr Rosemary Mills a ST4 Doctor started to prepare her report for a Dr Julia Cranitch seven days after Mr S. Cordell was admitted to St Ann’s hospital, in regard to a Mental Health Tribunal as noted in chapter 1.2 on the date of the 22nd of August 2016.

If you then turn to the last page chapter 27 the date of completion was the 24th August 2016, and once again turn back to the first page of the report and take note to the top of the headed letter and read the 25th August 2016 as to be able to tell the correct times, of Dr Rosemary Mills processing her report.

Also on the 23/08/2016 my mother had made many calls to the ward to speak to a doctor to which none called back, so she travelled up to the hospital to speak to a doctor. When a doctor who is named Dr Rosemary Mills, effectually attended and spoke with my mother.

When she came on to the ward she explained to mother, that it was her 1st day working on the ward and for St Ann’s Hospital and that she had just taken over from Dr Humphreys and apologised due to this for not knowing a great deal about Mr Simon Cordell, she continued to explain that she would help my mother as much as she could.

So I question the truth of the date and accuracy of Dr Rosemary Mills report as she had not been working for St Ann’s Hospital as dated the start of her report and had never talked to me?

On the date of the 23/08/206, Dr Rosemary Mills was with another doctor that my mother had seen before.

The 1st time I Mr Simon Cordell had a meeting with Dr Rosemary Mills was on the 24/08/2016.

I Mr Simon Cordell was not served a copy of Dr Rosemary Mills report in the legal time limit required, so to be able to legally prepare myself for my tribunal, as I had previously requested.

I requested this information so to have been able to question the true facts of the statements of evidence, that are now contained within the context of Dr Rosemary Mills Inpatient Psychiatric Report and Goodies Adama Social circumstances report. I was only given the report a little while before my tribunal

2

826,

Report - Reply.pdf

was due to start so did not have time to read it before the tribunal started, I did say this to the tribunal panel.

I would also like to draw reference to amending Dr Rosemary Mills report and Goodies Adama report:

This is in high light towards my own personal records that are being held upon RIO system and any other form of electronic and paper format that any medical teams may use, so for them official people to be able to compile their reports, as referred to as any reports that may relate to the Doctor and clients personal & conferential information otherwise known as intelligence.

Dr Rosemary Mills clearly states in the short time of the two brief meetings held at St Ann’s hospital between herself and I that she used such personal information gained and studied from them meetings, this was also inclusive of information contained in or on RIO and any other sources that she may have used, that do relate towards myself so that she and he could conclude their reports, such information is largely incorrect to is evidence and I therefore request that information to be rectified as to being amended. Under the data protection act 1998 all information held about a person has to be 100% correct this is not the case in my records and so far, I only have limited information that was put in the report for the tribunal.

· History of Presenting Circumstances 2.1 - 2.2 of Dr Rosemary Mills report:

Dr Rosemary Mills report has been concluded in receipt for Dr Julia Cranitch.

I question the statement of facts that the Intel contained in the report regarding past history, not to be conclusive, as towards not being true to their facts.

On the 14/8/2016 I Mr Simon Cordell was arrested by police at my home address at around 20:00 hours and taken to Wood Green Police station, it was not the 15/08/2016 as stated in Dr Rosemary Mills report.

The reason for my arrest was allegations I had made threats to harm my neighbour, these are fake allegations and when I return to the police station for bail this will be proved as the police are already aware my home is covered by CCTV and this will prove I never left my home on this day so could not have made any threats to harm my neighbour.

In Goodies Report it is claimed that it was my mother who put the report into the police about these allegations; this is also not correct my mother never contracted the police and reported anything about me. It was me that called my mother at 18:41 and told her the police was at my home trying to get in, she rushed down to my home with my uncle where there was around 15 police officer at this point and they stated recording what was going on, as I told my mother through the door the police had ripped the wires out of my CCTV system to the front of my home.

I Mr Simon Cordell have yet to be interviewed, so to be able to find out who stated such false allegations about my mother and myself I am yet to find out, but I do NOT believe it to be my mother.

My mother was also asked if she had called the police at the Tribunal by the panel and she did not know what they were talking about and replied no she had not called the police. She has now had time to read the report and is very upset towards a lot of things that have been said and are contained in the report.

There is also the issue of concern in chapter 2.1 - 2.2 of Rosemary Mills report in regards to the wrongful truth in the statement being used relating to a police FME seeing myself, while I was being detained at the Wood Green Police Station, this is not true I never saw an FME doctor while at Wood green Police Station the cell camera evidence will clearly prove this once served by Wood green Police station, There has been a request put in for this information to the police, inclusive of all other notes legally made while being detained in cell number 3 and if granted which I could not understand why it would not be, this will prove what I have said.

3

827,

Report - Reply.pdf

Chapter 2.2 of Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

States that I was assessed by the Mental Health Teams AMP worker and Doctors at Wood Green Police Station, this is not true, I know to be assessed I would have needed to be spoken to by the doctors and AMP worker this was never done, I was never was taken out of the police cell and spoken to by two doctors or even asked if I would speak to the doctors or AMP worker.

I had been in detention for over 20 hours in a police cell waiting for my solicitor so I could have my interview. I never saw my solicitor in all the time I was held I only spoke to them once on the phone, and after over 20 hours two doctors and an AMP worker came to my cell door and told me throw the cell flap that I was being sectioned under the Mental Health act under section 2, I was never served any official paperwork to say I was being sectioned under the Mental Health act.

Chapter 2.2 of Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

The assessing doctors felt that Mr S. Cordell presented features suggestive of Mental illness, in particular paranoid precautionary some ideas about the police and his mother.

This is far from the true facts of events that took place on this date, I was left in my cell sleeping on camera with no problems of concern thought the whole of my detention, and this was while being recorded on police cell number 3 by camera, at the Wood Green Police Station.

I did also requested food to eat at three different times and the food was served with additional drinks. I asked for a blanket as I was cold, and I was also left with my shoelaces and belt on. I even remember I had to ask for toilet roll to which that was then given to myself, in my whole stay I never caused any concerns in regard to my Mental stability.

· Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

There is the matter of the wrongful information that is contained in the collateral history of Mr S.

Cordell records and those claims are more fictional as to their statements in weight in any sense.

· Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

Dr Rosemary Mills is wrong with her information as towards the truth of events at no point of time have I ever stated to anyone that I believe the Television is talking about me, I have been asked this a few times and also in the 72 hour assessment at St Ann’s hospital, my reply was “at no point of time do I believe the TV talks to myself or the radio and neither do I hear voices.” I have no symptoms of the kind they mention or asked me.

Of the report also states:

I have paranoid beliefs about my mother.

This statement could not be any further from the truth as throughout my whole life I have been raised with high standards of good statue and have a very close mother to son relationship, My mother and myself have always been close along with the rest of my family, we are always there for each other as a family should be, even at the age of 35 as I am on today’s date, as of headed at the top of this letter.

To my understanding my mother and I are both in disbelief of the blunt fabricated statements contained in the reports, that we do not trust one and other and the prospect of there being any truth in such unjustifiable personal Intel, making claims of my own self being and claims of my mother's statements proclaimed to be the evidence contained and supported by the reports.

In Goodies first statement of his report that is regarding, Social Circumstances that was for the Mental Health Act Tribunal that is dated 25th August 2016, I ask any reader to please take note on page 2 and of the 1st paragraph of that report, under the heading of circumstances leading to admission, it clearly states that I Mr Cordell was arrested at my home address after my mother raised concerns about my Mental

4

828,

Report - Reply.pdf

state- I know this not to be true as does she. the report goes on to say he was allegedly verbally threatening to his neighbours and (?) neighbours children and continues to state, Simon’s mother then called the police who arrested him, I have talked with my mother and asked her if she made up such statements or if she has even spoken to the police on the date of the 14/08/2016 and her reply was and still is no and I trust her.

As for the threats to kill and harm children this is not true at all. I did not leave my home address all day and would not harm or threaten a child, it is just not who I am. It continues to make wrongful claims such as I was seen by a police officer FME, which is not true at all.

There is a clear issue’s with misinformed intelligence, as to the claims of myself being verbal aggressive towards members of my neighbours, as the claims are not true, I have proof of a freedom of information request of myself, asking my local council if there was ever any issues relating to noise or any other complaints, in regards to my residence at, 109 Burncroft avenue for reference of the past 10 years that I have lived there and received the reply of no there has been no complaints so I exhibit proof of this as SC5, neither have I had any person knock at my front door with a negative view.

I once again question the accuracy of the intelligence report that does state:

That I use laughing gas recreationally, I Mr .Simon Cordell raises an issue with the date of such information, as for fact around the years of 2013 to 2014, I did experiment with some legal high’s and never touched them since, neither have I thought about them.

As for the statements of myself having ideas, about the police and being paranoid towards them, I would like to make note of my true feelings, I do not feel paranoid about police officers, I just feel an injustice has been served upon myself, this has been achieved in relations towards pervious cases, I have now proven my innocents towards.

I also still have one up and coming court appeal, that I await, so to be able to prove my innocents towards, I was not found guilty under the applicant's case at the magistrates court and have the court transcripts as evidence of this and the truth being, of many other facts that are yet still to be presented at court and because of this I have recently been preparing my defence for this appeal, so I may talk about this a bit at present, as this case is within the next up and coming four weeks. I do not feel that this is abnormal for any person to feel the way I do, especially about their freedom being taken away, when they are clearly in the right.

My mother has also confirmed in the meeting with the doctors that when I talk about the police it is not paranoid it is the truth. There is a long history with myself and the police they do not leave me alone, this has been going on for over 20 years, yes I agree some of it was justify by my actions at the time, but most was not justify. I am under no delusion that the police have a job to do, but I also know how I have been treated by the police and that is fact. In the report it is written I am paranoid but have the doctors ever asked me what I have gone through with the police to find out if it is paranoid or fact? I have not been asked once by any doctor.

· Mental State Examination on Admission:

Reference to Chapter 3.1:

In general I can agree with a vast amount of the information that was drafted and served; I am however concerned about the issues of: -

· Being classed as dishevelled, as for a general appearance, I do obtain my dress code so to be of the nature of clean and well-dressed person, but due to being arrested at my home address, without no prior warning, I was wearing casual everyday indoor clothing and please explain to me what does having 4

5

829,

Report - Reply.pdf

teeth missing has to do with anything I was in an accident and lost my upper two front teeth I had a bridge fitted so they had to file down my teeth beside the 2 front ones, the bridge came out and I lost it, Does this mean I have Mental Health issues?

· I do admit I have become irritable, but this was as I knew I had not been legally assessed and I had been detained in a police station, from the date of the 14th of august 2016, this was also with no ­interview or charge taking place while being detained. I was of no problem to any person; this does include myself.

· Speech I Mr Simon Cordell would be the first person to admit that I do speak fast, If asked why I speak fast I would explain as a child I was classed as being tongue tied having a malformation restricting the movement of the tongue, this had an effect on my speech as a child I was under north Middlesex hospital they did not do the operation and was placed under speech therapy throughout school, I have always had to speak fast to get my words out so people could understand me this is who I am and the way I learned to deal with being tongue tied and the majority of people that I do meet tend to get along with myself and do not have an issue with it and other people do understand me, as did the nurses and patients who were at St Ann’s Hospital during my stay, as noted in their reports, the assessments do state that I am a very polite person, I believe this to be as for my parents upbringing and life’s toils, as one may say throughout a person's life.

· I am usually in a good mood as I still do re-quote and may be found by some persons as being slightly elevated, but this is part of my personality and constitutes to a positive impact, rather than a negative impact.

· When I denied not having thought about harming myself or others inclusive of having any perceptions or hallucinations this was and still is true.

· I do listen and take advice from medical professionals and judge what is best for me, this must also be said to be inclusive of other close friends and persons and together we do not come to the wrong conclusions, together we clearly do not believe I suffer with any Mental illness as the reports claim I may.

1. Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I agree that I have been setting up a company and this has taken me some time to complete due to raising money that is needed, while studying and getting the help or support to achieve my goals. This may be classed by some people, to be acting in a manner that is slightly grandiose, but I believe every person should set their goals high and achieve them set goals, to which I intend to one day complete.

1. Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I do not agree with the DR Rosemary Mills statement, as when describing my company the truth seems to be slightly in tangled, as I do not recall saying that I intended on managing part of the Mental Health care’s facilities, I do in fact clearly remember explaining that I intend for my company to be able to support people as deprived as some of the NHS and Mental Health teams patients, that they have to manage on a day to day basis and that I would in Co Host like for my company to have a steady upkeep of its regime as the NHS does.

As for me stating that I intended to buy speakers for 50,000 pounds, I did not state this and this statement is therefore not true, what I did explain was that when introduced to a young gentleman a few years back, whom had half of his arm decapitated, whom did visit me on more than one occasion; we both seemed to have very similar ambitions, both towards the love of music and good sound systems not to forget good people.

6

830,

Report - Reply.pdf

One day my friend, explained that he had a sound system and asked me to visit him at his home address, as he explained where he lived, I noticed the distance of his travels, for whenever he had to visit me.

I found myself at this young gentlemen’s, tower blocks, he lived on the 18th floor. On being asked to follow my friend into his bedroom I see the problem he was having with space; this was due to the size of his speakers and his disabilities.

He explained that he had the same dreams as I do this was before he had been in an accident. We both talked and what was explained for a while and took the understanding together that he needed the space in his room, so that he could be able to sort his life out. I worked a price out with him and paid him the price of each speaker.

When they were new their price was Ł50,000 pounds each and they are now much cheaper, to buy.

We are both still very good friends to date; I still see him he still has the same dreams and knows when I sort everything out with my company, he can be part of it.

· Physical Examination on Admission:

I agree with this section of the report.

· Psychiatric History Regarding Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I am not happy with the Dr Rosemary Mills report due to the reasons being: Myself Mr Simon Cordell’s and family representatives, inclusive of civil partner and close net friends, who do support me and disagree with the negative statements used in the medical reports. We all therefore agree together, that a wide amount of information contained in RIO’S data base is widely inaccurate, such wrongful intelligence is amongst the statement that does quote; that I Mr Simon Cordell have previously been diagnosed as to be suffering from nonorganic psychosis f29, as dated with reference towards 2015, as for fact, any person who is truly suffering from Schizophrenia and Delusion F20-F29 Schizophrenia, schizotypal and delusional, and other non-mood psychotic disorders, do in fact suffer with different symptoms to what I have clearly shown, while being closely monitored by health professionals, in St Ann’s Care centre by their teams.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

Relating to a diagnosis of an Adjustment Disorder F35.2 in 2014, I Mr Simon Cordell also question, this.

· On the 25/06/2013 the police came to my home they arrested me for burglary which I knew I did not do.

· The police charged me, why I do not know. I was remanded to prison due to incorrect records that are contained on my PNC, which I can prove to be wrong, this is getting addressed.

· My mother and myself had to appeal the decision made by the judge who had remanded myself to prison at the crown court, which I was then granted bail under 6 conditions.

1.      Surety Ł1000 from Ms Lorraine Cordell, this is (To be surrendered to the nearest Police Station) - prior to release from Custody.

2.      Residence @ 109 Burncroft Road, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.

3.      Not to enter the London Borough of Southwark.

4.      Surrender Passport to nearest Police Station.

5.      Report daily to Edmonton Police between 1400 - 1600 hours.

6.      Curfew 8pm - 6am (doorstep condition - the Defendant should show himself too any officer upon requests.)

7

831,

Report - Reply.pdf

· Due to how much the police had kept tarnishing my life when I had clearly not done anything wrong, this caused stress in my long time relationship till we had to depart from one and other, as she could not take know more with the police harassment.

· The case took over a year to deal with as the CPS would not give the discloser that my solicitors was asking for and the judge ordered them to give.

· After a year and on the day the trial was due to start the Judge discharged the changes and found me not guilty in July 2014 this was before the trial started.

· In this time my brother had a life changing accident.

· My Nan was diagnosed terminal and passed away 30/08/2014

· A close friend of the family passed away in Dec 2013

· A close friend of the family passed away May 2014

· A close friend of the family was diagnosed terminal and passed away on the 29/08/2014 the day before my Nan.

Ř  Adjustment Disorder order means there is an event in your life one that you are not coping with. I admit that I had multiple things going on in my life but none that I was not coping with and I would not call this Adjustment Disorder.

Ř  The facts are that the police knew that I could not have done what they were saying is, the errors on the police PNC database caused me to go to prison, and I feel victim to the way in which I was being treated

Ř  by the courts, because of what was being told to the judge by the police and CPS, this is also inclusive

Ř  of the period of time leading to how long the case was taking due to myself not getting discloser from the police after the judge ordered it, we did not get disclosed until the trial date,

Ř  The reason why the prosecution would not give discloser was it because they knew that by giving me it they would have got the case dismissed much earlier and this is what did happen in the end, for reasons such as the information I and my family had obtained.

Ř  I could not do anything with my company and lost loads of contracts due to the bail conditions that I was under knowing and I knew that I had done nothing wrong so to be put under these conditions,

Ř  I lost my long-time partner due to this due to the wrongful facts that the police claimed.

Ř  Relating to a diagnosis of an Adjustment Disorder F35.2 in 2014, I Mr Simon Cordell also question the truth of this statement and understand it not to be true, as to the events that took place on the date did not relate to such a diagnosis.

Ř  I am again very concerned and unhappy with the following information being in breach of my rights that on the 11th /3/2014, it has been said that I Mr Simon Cordell was assessed by the DR Jarvis of the Enfield Triage Team this is said to be after a referral by my GP and while in that meeting I strongly disagree with the following:-

·         I was not suffering from any symptoms, anxiety for nine months as stated due to being Mentally ill, as for the truth being that I was feeling that the duration of time, leading towards the on goings of the court case, up and till the conclusion of the ongoing, was having an effect on my way of life, until I was found not guilty.

·         My Doctor did not refer me to Dr Jarvis, as to in reality, I personally arranged the meeting and went there of my own free will and told my doctor what I had planned to do.

·         I clearly was not suffering from a diagnosis of an Adjustment order, due to being correct and not been found guilty in regard to the issues I was having at the time.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

8

832,

Report - Reply.pdf

On the 19/11/2016, it is said that I was referring to the home treatment team; this was due to concerns, that I Mr Simon Cordell had become paranoid about my mother. I question the following: -

I question who referred me to the home treatment team and the pacific’s too the reason why?

I question who stated that I had become paranoid about my mother as me and my mother have always been very close. I have spoken with, my mother and she has explained to myself that she was at her home address when she received a phone call from the Mental Health team staying that the police were at my flat, this call was made while I did not know.

My mother told the Mental Health team that she did not know why the police was at my home. She told the Mental Health team that the police keep going to my home for no reason.

The Mental Health team spoke to the police but kept my mother on hold on the phone and she could hear what was being said.

The Mental Health team asked the police why they were at my home.

And the police replied that they have been called to my flat, the Mental Health team asked by whom, which the police did not seem to know as they gave the Mental Health team 3 door numbers which do not even belong to my block. The police stated to the Mental Health team since they got there I had started shouting.

The Mental Health team asked the police to leave my flat, the phone call cut of at this point with the Mental Health team and my mother, so she does not know if anything else what was said.

I was not upset and was watching some TV before the police came to my home again for no reason, I had not done anything wrong. I do not always open the door to police, due to how they are with me and sometimes shout through my door to them. Until one of my family, can get to my address so they can see what is going on.

When the Mental Health did try to talk to me this night I was upset due to what the police was doing they kept coming to my home for no reason I did not feel like speaking with anyone I just wanted to go back to watching some TV and having a rest and for the police to leave me alone,

I was not shouting and distressed so do not believe the police got a call from anyone on this day to be at my home.

The Mental Health team called back my mother and told her they would leave me alone that night and come see me again in a few days to see how I was feeling the Mental Health team did not say anything to my mother about it being unsafe to see me or feeling unsafe.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

25/11/2014 I do not dispute, the facts being that on the date in question, that I was calm and happy and my behaviour pattern, was one of a people whom is of good mind, body and soul.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

08/12/2015 I challenge the statements contained in the context of such report:

9

833,

Report - Reply.pdf

I do not feel on the 08/12/2015 I presented myself as unwell, I feel it is only human for any person to have a bad day.

As you can see above, I have a great deal of problems due to the police and I do not feel that this makes me paranoid or delusional. Some people may find it hard to believe that I have so many problems with the police, but I do it is the truth and my family and friends can also confirm this as well as many other people. I now feel I am being pushed in to not talking about the truth and what the police have done to me. Due to people stating and taking it as I am Mentality ill, I should not feel this way I should be able to talk about what is going on in my life as it is the truth. I have never been a danger to myself or towards any other person.

Rapid speech I do find that I tend to speak fast and this is the way I have always been, it does not have a negative effect in regards to my family and friends and peers or relating to any business partner & clients I meet; I however do take note to the comment and will think about and try to speak slower from now on. But with this still in mind as said above I am still tongue tied and this is how I learned to speak I feel I should not have to change this due to people thinking I have a Mental Health illness, all it should take is for someone to ask me why I speaking so fast then I could explain. But people have not done this they have just said that I have a Mental Health problem due to this.

Thought disorder: I do not understand, why this has been noted down, as I do manage to maintain a positive form of thinking and my thoughts are constructive thoughts that are not over calculated or overwhelming to their facts.

I spoke mostly about misdiagnosis and mistreatment by police, as I have explained before, I have had years of on goings with the police, I know for sure that I can prove my statements, as from a young age my cases have been mostly NFA’s regarding the police. I am in the process of an Appeal Court Case at the moment and that date is very near, I do not feel paranoid about the truth and I feel that I am looking forward to proving my innocents at court.

Paranoid persecutory delusions regarding conspiracies to damage my reputation and to kill me that have been organised by a global agency called Storm.

It seems there is a lot of information that has not been taken down correctly and then inputted on my Mental Health records and this is incorrect some people might say my Mental health records information is entangled, as for it is misleading to the true facts and the true understanding that should have been taken is yes, I do have issues with the police and as said before these issues are real. As also said, I have an upcoming Appeal in Sep 2016. Where the information that has been given directly from the police CAD system and them Cads I have been given seem to be misleading to the true facts due to the time stamps and other inaccurate information, which should never be able to happen in any database system. The Police CAD system is a software database, when people call the police via 999 or 101 there call goes to the police control centre, a member of the control centre takes the call and inputs the data into their CAD system and it is then time stamped so if the person needs a police office to their home there system can do this ETC. This police system is called Storm in Scotland and met CC in London which is our Emergency 999 call centres, I attach a copy of the on goings at court and any reader can make their own assumption, as contained in Regards towards opinion & Recommendations Chapter 17 pages 7 of this Report.

I also dispute the fact that I have ever said or referred to subliminal messages through my TV or any other way.

I have been asked this by the Mental Health team on a number of occasions and by the doctors and I explain to them the same thing every time. My TV including anything else, such as a radio has never spoken to me before.

My TV is something I watch to relax maybe I will watch a film or a program to cut of from work things I am doing for my company or before I go to sleep, so I dispute that I Mr Simon Cordell, referred to

10

834,

Report - Reply.pdf

subliminal messages through my TV: I once again question the stability and accuracy of this statement, as for fact I did not quote this neither do I suffer from any dilutions or psychoses.

Mr Cordell is said to have believed that upstairs neighbour was stalking him, the neighbour has since moved, and Mr Cordell felt she was still harassing him and had CCTV of this.

I have not said that my ex neighbour Debbie who once lived above me is still stalking me as I have not seen her since she moved.

I also believe what the Mental Health has on their system about this is incorrect.

My ex neighbours name was Debbie and yes, I did have some problems with her. When Debbie moved in I got along and looked after her for around 5 years, at this point of time in my life I was still in a long relationship with my Ex Partner and Debbie use to come to our front door and ask to borrow money from us, which if we could help we would and did as I am that sort of person and so was my Ex partner, like if I saw her trying to carry shopping up to her flat I would help her curry it to the door of her flat as I think this is the right thing to do but I never went into her flat.

After me and my partner ended in July 2013 Debbie started to come down to my flat more and more and trying to bring me drinks and also still asking for money, I never let Debbie inside my flat. I would not take the drinks of her, for one thing, I don’t drink and for a next reason I knew Debbie had a problem with drink so tried to say to her stop buying it and to stop drinking it.

Debbie started to send me letters and started banging on the floor in every room any were I went in my flat she was above me; our flats do not have any sound proofing so you can hear most things.

The banging got worse and worse and she started banging on the tapes and pipes also I could not sleep I could not even go to the toilet without Debbie being above me.

I asked my mother if she could call Enfield Council as it was getting too much, which my mother did and also sent emails to them, I even called them myself. Nothing was being done by the council I told them I had CCTV of what was going on but they never asked to see it, in the one and only meeting I had with them they did not even ask to see all the evidence I have, I did offer more than once in the meeting to show them, the lady did not even write anything down.

I said to her that Debbie even attacked me outside the flat all of this was told to the council.

Debbie was then moved out and I have not seen her since she moved.

I do state that I have many recordings of such past activates of me being victim to 113 Debbie and 117 Markandu’s actions.

I attach a copy of transcripts relating to a video that I acclaim in relation to the Mathiyalagan Markandu, family as dated 00/00/2016 who live at 117 Burncroft Avenue, in response to the allegations of threats to kill which I now have to attend the police station for bail on the 10/10/2016.

This is a copy of the transcripts of the video footage of when I went upstairs to 117 on the top floor from my own flat, due to my members of my neighbours banging on the walls and floors to intentionally make my self-victim to their actions, at around 19:42:43 on the 05th September 2016, 20:42:43 a few days after leaving the hospital.

The Start of transcripts when

Knocking on door of 117 Burncroft avenue Enfield En3 7jq

Knocking on the door: 0:35

Woman: Who is that? 0:37

Simon: Its Simon let me speak to your husband. 0:38

Woman: Sorry. 0:41

11

835,

Report - Reply.pdf

Simon: Its Simon let me speak to your husband.0:42

Woman: My husband is not home. 0:44

Simon: See the over day when I spoke to you yes. 0:47

Simon: are you listening to me, can you here me.0:51

Simon: see the over day when I spoke to you yes 0:55

Woman: What did you say? 0:59

Simon: I was just talking to you yes. 1:00

Woman: see the over day when I spoke to you yes. 1:01

Woman: Sorry.1:03

Simon: See the over day when I spoke to you. 1:05 Woman: yes. 1:06

Simon: You said that on the 14th August 2016. 1:08

Woman: Sorry. 1:10

Simon: On the 14th August 2016. 1:11

Woman: Sorry. 1:14

Simon: Can I open your letter box and talk to you yes. 1:15 Woman: Yes. 1:17 Simon: Yes ok. 1:18 Woman: Sorry.

Simon: On the 14th August 2016. 1:20 Woman: Yes. 1:18

Simon: You said that you never called the police yes.

Woman: Yes, yes.

Woman: Yes, yes, I ring police Sunday I am lonely I am not living here I called the phone calls not here Sunday night I just come here at 9 o'clock.

12

836,

Report - Reply.pdf

Simon: You did that on the 14th August 2016.

Woman: Yes someone told you, you called the called the police station I do not no.

Simon: Yes, the police said to me yes that on the 14th August 2016.

Woman: I am not Saturday morning I called I called my friend’s house Sunday night come in, morning Sunday or Saturday I was not here.

Simon: So you weren’t here I believe you I believe you if you tell me this, I believe you yes.

Woman: Yes.

Simon: If you tell me that I believe you what else can I say yes.

Woman: Yes.

Simon: But on the 14th August 2016 I know I never left this building.

Woman: Yes.

Simon: And I never looked up at no window and threatened you or your children.

Woman: Yes, yes, I am not here truth.

Simon: Because you are the only one with a child in this block and I would be I would not threaten child and wore I might say I might have an argument a dispute with you.

Woman: why are you please why are you please why your argument for I did not call the police.

Simon: I am not arguing with you I am not arguing with you.

Woman: I am after council I want to move the house; I push council that is why, I do not like you.

Simon: Yes you pushed to get a new flat of the council your two bedrooms so you can look after your kids.

Woman: Yes.

Simon: which is of course I have been telling your husband to do that for a long time to get his two beds to right a letter and I would give him some letters as well but on the 14th you agree I never left this building and never threatened you.

Woman: Yes.

Simon: yes that is perfect that all I needed.

Woman: I am not here Saturday and Sunday I am not here.

13

837,

Report - Reply.pdf

Simon: you were not even here you were not even here.

Woman: yes, yes, yes.

Simon: ok that is perfect all right thank you.

END of Conversion of Mobile Phone Video Transcripts:

A copy of the video footage is available at request.

My personal CCTV that I have installed is for my own safety, it is not there to invading other people’s personal life’s or privacies, it is installed for my personal use and it fixture is mounted and contained within the internal hallway and is not a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 “DPA”.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

19/01/2016 I challenge the statements contained in the context of such report in regard to:

On the 19/01/2016 I was due to have a meeting with Goodie from the early Intervention team Goodie came to my flat with a lady I believe her name to be Diana. We all said hello to each other and seat down to talk. At this point Diana phone ring and she took the call and went into my hallway to speak.

I and Goodie carried on speaking in my front room and a little while later the lady returned into the front room and said to Goodie sorry, but they would have to leave. Goodie got up to leave but did tell me he was going on leave for 4 weeks and would see me when he came back but if I needed any help, I could call the main team.

This chapter states that I am paranoid about people especially the police, as I have explained and supported evidence towards already, I am not wrongfully paranoid about a few members of the police, as I have overwhelming evidence of police corruption which they have caused.

And those matters are in the high courts and IPPC hands inclusive of my solicitor and self being.

I would like to strengthen the truth about myself not being paranoid about over people I have no worries about paranoia and never put myself in harm’s way to upset others, so I therefore feel no reason to be paranoid about other people inclusive of my mother and family.

But It seems due to talking about the police this makes me a paranoid person, maybe if someone seat down and heard what I was saying and read some of the reports I have, maybe they could see for themselves what I am saying is the truth.

But it seems when people are faced with something they do not want to or cannot understand, like something what I am face with in my life such as corruption in police cases can go on, this is wrong in today’s modern world.

When any person gets accused of being a paranoid person and said to and have a Mental Health issues. Who can show the documented articles of corruption to any person on request in turn stating the truth about what there being accused of being paranoid about.

Why because people see the police as people that do no wrong. So when a person says anything bad towards the police, they are the ones that have got to be in the wrong. It seems I can have all the paperwork in the world to prove what I am saying, yet in the eyes of the Mental Health team I have a Mental Health illness why because they will not open there eyes to the truth.

As for me not eating I eat very well I always have and my dog is also fed very well, I also look after my home and it is clean and tidy maybe there is lots of paperwork around as I am doing a lot for my

14

838,

Report - Reply.pdf

company and also my appeal case, but I know where everything is and most of my paperwork is in binders.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

On the 22/01/2016 I was at my flat doing my paperwork waiting for some people to attend for a meeting about an up and coming event that was due to take place.

I heard my door and was thinking the people had turned up a little early, when going to the door and opening it I see doctors and other people wanting to come in my home. I told them I did not know anyone was coming and I had a meeting arranged. I was told that they did not have to tell me they were coming and could just come.

I told them the meeting I was due to have was a business meeting and it would not look good if the people I had the meeting with showed up and saw doctors and Mental Health workers so could they do this a next day. I did not say they could not have access to my property I just said it could not be on that day.

I dispute the fact that anyone could have made a diagnosis I was paranoid, suspicious, and grandiose with flights of ideas in such a little time that they were at my door. As all we spoke about was my meeting and that it was not convenient that day and could it be done on a next day due to the meeting I had already arranged.

I dispute any negative thoughts and feel that achieving to be a young entrepreneur in today’s modern society may seem grandiose to some, but I know it to be a reality for many achievers.

I was shocked when I opened the door to see all these people.

I do not know why there was a need to apply for a 135 warrant as I had never not said they could not have access I just asked if this could be done on a next day due to my meeting which I do not think was to much to ask.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

On the 25/01/2016 the Mental Health team applied to the court for a 135 warrant to enter my home the warrant was valid for 3 months from the date of issue by the court.

The grounds that was used for the warrant was as below.

A person believed to be suffering from Mental disorder [has been] [is being] [ill~treated] [Neglected] [Kept otherwise than under proper control] [Being unable to take care of him/herself, is living alone] at My home address

How on earth could they say I was being [Neglected]?

How on Earth could they say I was [Kept otherwise than under proper control]?

How on Earth could they say I was [Being unable to take care of him/herself, is living alone] at My Home address?

In all the reports that have been made in regards to myself from Medical all intelligence data, prior to the teams requesting the section 135 warrant seem to say I had been Neglected, which I am sure if was true would be drafted in the reports.

In none of the reports, has it ever said I was out of control nor does it say while I have been living in my home there has been an incident relating to Mental health problems.

Also in none of the reports did it say I could not take care of myself due to living alone, in no reports did it say I was not eating, in no reports did it say I did not have food in my home and they did check this when they come to my home and always saw I had food, I was always clean and my dog was always feed and was in good condition.

It goes beyond words how they were able to get a section 135 warrant issued by the court.

15

839,

Report - Reply.pdf

On the 02/02/2016 is when they used the section 135 warrant to come to my home with police. On this date I was at home and had no visit of the medical team, as for this was the date when the section 135 of the Mental Health Act was applied for a court, as I have the true paper work served and the minutes for the meeting on CD.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I was contacted by the Mental health team and explained to them in a phone conversation that I had spoken to my civil partner and we both that together after the on goings in the meeting that we will both monitor any issues of concern about my Mental health, alongside the rest of my family and friends and if ever any problems arise we will contact the Mental health team as of date.

There have been no true problems other than the false allegation of threats to kill to date which I have proof of not leaving my home on the date in question on CD.

Past Medical History

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

6.2. While at the police station being held as a detainee on the 14/08/2016 until the 16/08/2016, I had no health issues this does include the 16/08/2016, while being detained at St Ann’s Hospital.

In St Ann’s Hospital I was in full good Health right up and till the 17/08/2016, when I went to use the hospital toilet as I walked in to use the toilet I slipped on the wet floor and fell forward causing both of my small index fingers to snap forward, this caused me a large amount of pain.

The toilet was left in a foul manner before I had arrived and had clearly not been maintained all day, as for there was large amounts of human waste otherwise known as urine around the floor and on the toilet seat, I clearly remember there being no safety signs up as I walked into the room and once I was inside so for any person to have been prior warned of such faults.

On noticing the damage caused to both my fingers on both separate hands I worried with concern as for the need I have for them. I care for my hands as they provide my abilities to earn a living.

I then got up and went straight to the staff room and reported the incident, I asked for it to be drafted into the Hospitals accident and report book and to have the Emergency medical provisions that I required, it was explained to myself that I will have to get the staff doctors to deal with the issue the next day.

On the 18/08/2016, I again asked for the incident report book to be updated, so as for any person to be able to explain the damage caused to my fingers, while I was under section 2 of the Mental health act 1983 while I was being detained at St Ann’s hospital.

When at around 11:00am I showed a doctor, the reason I was given the opportunity to show a doctor was because of he had asked me to take part in routine checks, such as checking my heart rate, I showed the doctor the damage to both my fingers, I also expanded to the doctor the pain I was in and therefore suffering and that I required emergency assistance such as an x ray.

It was then explained to me that even low my left finger looked snapped they believed it to be swollen, I knew this not to be fluid in my left finger but for it to be part of my bone snapped, it was also explained by the doctor to me, that my right finger will heal and gain movement over time, I challenged this to the maximum extent I could at the time.

When Comparing the snap to both of my small index fingers, I class my right finger to be a lot worse as for the reason being that I have lost full control of it and can no longer use it, not having any use of my right small finger has a large effect on my daily life for incidence I can no longer write with a pen as I once could and I have issues with picking anything up as I once could before.

16

840,

Report - Reply.pdf

I continued to report my concerns of my well-being in regard to my fingers with no true aid in emergency medical assistance apart from being prescribed ibuprofen an anti flamer tries and having my fingers taped together. I know that any person can clearly see the break in my left finger to date.

I am still in continuing pain due to the way it has repaired incorrectly, this lack of duty to care I believe has caused life time injuries to my abilities of my hand, in turn causing the absinth of any use from my left small finger, this really upsets me as I now feel disabled due to this accident and I know if I had my own liberty at the time I would have gone and received the medical help I needed, relating towards my Health.

· Medications Prior to Admission Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I agree to the fact that I have never had any medication prescribed to myself in regards to Mental health issues as there has never been a need, however since I have been getting assessed by the Mental health team I have now been prescribed tablets by the Teams Professionals.

· Family Histories:

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

My Nan did suffer from Mental Health problems from 1989 she suffered from manic depression, this surfaced when my Nan started to have her Menopause at the age of 52 and was put on treatment for this which was HRT.

She started to take HRT and the family noticed changes in her she was on HRT for around 6 months and due to how it affected her Mental Health she was taken off it, my Nan was never the same after this and did have admissions to hospital. My Nan last stay in hospital was longer then needed to be and she took it to Tribunal where the Judge ordered that she be released from the section 3 she had been on until this stage my Nan had always been diagnosed with manic depression and she had never showed any signs of a person with schizophrenia should have shown. After what the judge said my Nan’s diagnosed was changed to schizophrenia, I believe this was only done so she could be placed on the drug Clozapine as at this time only patients diagnosed with schizophrenia could be placed on this drug. My Nan stayed on Clozapine until her death on the 30/08/2014.

· Personal Histories:

9. Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I only draw an issue with this statement in regards to my Father, my father has never wanted bad for any of his children just for us all to act responsible and with dignity and pride, for he himself just had a strict up bringing, he has all ways been a working man and provided for his family and as a family we all love him very much.

· Forensic Histories:

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

·         I agree with the fact in this section of the report.

·         This Is a List of my full bail conditions and a short summary relating to some issues of concern, section section.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994 is for outdoor events all incidents I am are being accused of are all indoors and I did not commit.

The Defendant is prohibited from:

17

841,

Report - Reply.pdf

· Attending a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994.

· Being concerned in the organization of a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994.

· Knowingly using or supplying property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave as defined by s.63 of the criminal Justice and Public order Act 1994.

· Entering or remaining in any disused or abandoned building.

· Entering or remaining on non-residential private property on an industrial estate between the hours of 10pm and 7am without written permission from the owner and / or leaseholder of the property; and

· Engaging in any licensable activity in an unlicensed premise.

·         These conditions are for the whole of the UK, and I believe are a breach to my human rights under ASBO Legalisation.

·         It was asked in court by my Barrister if I needed to go to a petrol station as well as other places like to do shopping between the hours of 22:00 hours and 07:00 hours such as a 24 hour Mac Donald’s what will happen and it was explained that he would in fact be in breach of this ASBO the judge explained and said well he will be arrested and have to prove in court I was going to get petrol.

·         If I made a wrong turn when driving and turned into a non-residential private property on an industrial estate, I would be in breach of this ASBO.

·         My mother also tried to ask things about the conditions what if he needed to go and get milk from Tesco's or a shop and the judge said well he will be arrested I can’t even go to a shop between the hours of 22:00 hours and 07:00 hours without being in breach of this ASBO.

·         If I was to go out for a night out I would have to ask the owner to see if there licensed to make sure I am not in breach of my ASBO as I was told it is down to me to make sure they are licensed.

·         No one wanted to define the conditions the applicant which is the Met Police wanted to make this a life time ASBO and made sure the conditions were correct so that after the 5 years they can apply to put a next 5 years in place because the judge would only allow the 5 years and not the life time ASBO.

·         If illegal raves have not been proven which they were not, then why do my conditions for the ASBO still define illegal raves?

Part of my Barrister submissions that represented me, had been that the allegations were that I was involved in organizing illegal raves, but the applicant hadn’t adduced evidence of trespass which is a requirement for proving that an indoor rave was illegal.

The Deputy District Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality - all the needed to prove was I had acted in an anti-social manner, to which I had not acted in any anti-social manner within the whole case file.

In the view of my barrister this is a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the raves themselves and secondly, without proof of

18

842,

Report - Reply.pdf

illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus I being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

I have to agree with my barrister as when dealing with this case I was addressing the applicant case to prove that I had not been involved in organizing illegal raves, as this is what the application against me was.

The case was proven that I acted in an in an anti-social manner, but I don’t understand by doing what. As the case against me was that I had organized illegal raves, and this part was not proven so what did I do that cause harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as myself?

· Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

The report states that; Mr Simon Cordell has stated that he is currently on bail for making threats to harm his neighbours he has a court date relating to this on the 8th October 2016.

This is clearly misinformed information as the true facts are, I was arrested on the 14/08/2016 and not allowed to be interviewed as they said I was not fit for interview and placed on a section 2 of the Mental Health act. The police bailed me until the 04/10/2016 for alleged threats to kill to what person or persons I still am not quite sure, as I am still yet to be interviewed. I am on bail to the police station on the 04/10/2016 and this is not a court date, as I have not been charged and will not as I do have a video that provides the evidence that I never committed such crimes as I never left my home.

Drugs and Alcohol History:

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I dispute and there for challenge the statement that is contained in the reports and in RIO that is in regards to my use cannabis on a daily basis, as at the time of the incident I clearly remember explaining when questioned, my reply to be no I do not.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

It is said that when I was admitted into hospital in 2012 for assessment after allegedly using LSD and drinking a bottle of rum at a festival.

This is not true as on the date in question the truth being, I was passed by another person a drink of rum and it contained LSD to my surprise.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I was asked if I would do a drugs test and I agreed to do one. This never happened I asked about this more then once to be done which it was not.

Social History:

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

I do live in a one bedroom flat and deny ever saying that I or another person had paid to own it as I know this not to be true as of yet. I did however say that I would like to buy my flat from the council.

19

843,

Report - Reply.pdf

Diary of Events in Mr Simon Cordell’s Life Since 2012 till Date 2016

 

844,

845,

846,

847,

848,

849,

850,

851,

852,

853,

854,

855,

Report - Reply.pdf

not mean that is the case. Judging a person on their looks or what they seem to be is not always a good idea, what seems to have happened a great deal in the report.

Mr Cordell described owning a “City” and that it is his job to understand the various roles people have in society so that he can look after people.

When describing the true meaning of any conversations I may of had regarding the word city I would have been explaining about my life’s work and studies that I am building, a mini festival to which can be classed as its own city, regulated by HSE standards, legalisation and other needed professions to protect traders and public.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

16/08/2016 Mr Cordell refused routine blood tests,

At this stage of being detained in St Ann’s hospital I was not offered an ECG I was in fact only offered a blood sugar level test which showed 65 and was also weighed. I do also remember having a temperature test put into my ear then having a blood pressure check-up, which was an appliance put around my arm.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

17/08/2016 On this date I was in a lot of pain with the injuries to my fingers that I had received while being detained at St Ann’s hospital and could not receive the standard of medical care I would have normal received if I could have attended on my own accord to an emergency hospital that would have also had available surgeons with an x ray machine that I would have visited.

I now can’t use my right finger anymore, because of this neglect by professionals. I will agree I was upset at what was going on I think I had a right to be. I wanted the medical assistance I needed and wanted to know why I had been sectioned and under what grounds as I was not a risk to myself or any other person and I believe under section 2 you need to be a risk to yourself or others. I kept asking this and explained I was not a risk to myself or others which they replied that section 2 does not rely on this factor or have to be part of it even low I was mental stable.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

On the 18/8/2016, I had asked staff if I could get my partner and mother to bring me hair cutters and a shaver with additional cloths in her attendance on the following day, to which they did agree that this could be done.

I was still in pain with my finger and asking staff to take me to the hospital for an x ray my left finger was just taped together and I was told that my right finger should just repair its self, to which it still has not.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

19/08/2016 I woke up about an hour before my solicitor arrived unexpectedly; I was calm and happy all day, as my solicitor had arrived at the hospital to help me prepare for the tribunal. I was latter upset after she had left by being prescribed another new medication without no leaflet or assessment even low the medication had been prescribed wrong already the day before, I was still in pain with my finger, I still took the Lorazepam but was shocked to be put onto other medication again.

When my mum and partner came up, they had my haircutters and shaver. My partner cut my hair.

13.7 Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

21/08/2016 I do not dispute the statement of facts contained within the report.

32

856,

Report - Reply.pdf

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

22/08/2016 I have explained so many times in this document about why I speak fast. I was still upset as to how I had been sectioned and believed it to be incorrect. I agree I was settled and chatting with people on the ward. I agree I refused to take Olanzapine and I agree I did take Lorazepam.

Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

23/09/2016 I have explained so many times in this document about why I speak fast. And it was not over inclusive and tangential fashion.

I was not largely preoccupied with injustices of the past particularly the past by the police, this is ongoing and I had an Appeal case within a few weeks I did speak about this as this is a big factor in my life right now to make sure my case is ready for my Appeal case. So how can this be the past this is the present so how the doctors can say this is beyond me.

Again it has been said that I am grandiose in regard to my business plans but this to be the case.

I have worked for many years on what I want for my company as I believe many other people do the same, are they grandiose?

I agree I do not have any thoughts about harming anyone else or myself as this is the truth and I did also say I did not feel I had a Mental Health illness and did not feel unwell as I did not and still do not.

I also agreed I would try a trial of a small doses of Olanzapine as I felt this is all they wanted to give me tablets and I felt very pressured to take them as I felt if I didn’t I would not be allowed home.

· Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

24/08/2016 I do not dispute the statement of facts contained within this chapter of the report.

Current Medications:

14.1 And 14.2 Rosemary Mills Report:

I do not dispute the statement of facts contained within this chapter of the report.

·         Most Recent Mental State Examination (24/08/2016)

Rosemary Mills Report:

Appearance and Behaviour: I agree to this section in the report.

Speech: As stated many times in this report I do speak fast and the reason why I speak fast. Mood: I agree to this section in report.

Through: I do not agree with this section of the report. please read this document as this has been covered many times.

Perception: I agree with this section of the report.

Cognition: I agree with this section of the report.

Insight: I agree with this section of the report.

·         Factors affecting the Hearing:

16.1 Rosemary Mills Report:

I Mr Simon Cordell do not dispute the statement contained within the report but would like to high light the manner to which it is prevailed. At any professional meeting I obtain my right to take minutes of the meeting and under supreme courts previously trailed and tested cases it states I have the right to achieve

33

857,

Report - Reply.pdf

this in a digital format, I did not go around the ward recording at any time as I know this to be a breach of the hospitals policy.

Why would there be a need to make an attempt to make a recording of the Tribunal Proceedings any type of Court or Tribunal Proceedings I can obtained a copy of the report by asking, sometimes there is a fee to pay which is not a problem.

I also feel if any professional has not got anything to hide, they should not fear being recorded.

Please also see read below:

https://www.medicalprotection.org/uk/practice-matters-issue-7/digital-dilemmas—patients-recording- consultations

A patient does not require your permission to record a consultation. The content of the recording is confidential to the patient, not the doctor so the patient can do what they wish with it. This could include disclosing it to third parties, or even posting the recording on the internet. So what does this mean for doctors?

But you should read the full document from the link above as it shows a lot more information.

· Opinion Recommendations Rosemary Mills Report:

I question the accuracy of the intelligence report in relation towards:

1. Mr Simon Cordell presents himself with persisting psychotic symptoms of paranoid persecutory delusions involving police and Mental health services.

When a professional medical clinician is assessing any person so to be able to diagnose a Mental disorder, it is within the right and legalisation towards doctor and client that the correct judgments are made and I Mr Simon Cordell do not feel that this is the case in this report. I also feel that once I get my full medical records from the Mental Health teams, I will find a lot more errors within them.

As can be told by the diary of events date 2012 to 2016 I have had many NFA and no convections this does lead me to the right understanding that I have been pursued by members of the police for crimes and offences I have not committed, it has led to myself being detained on mutable bail conditions for numerous cases throughout a fast proportion of my life, having a continues negative effect on my life to which I should not have to undergo while establishing my own company. There is also the fact that my diary only covers 2012 to 2016 so in fact there is a lot more history I have not included due to the time this would take and also how long it would make this document.

As previously explained, I do have an up and coming appeal date to which I know the evidence to be incorrect which was put forward by the police in this case.

I educe a snip lit of such court on goings to which I have suffered an interim order and conditions imposed upon myself, in total I was detained for this case and another case on conditions since September 2013 with a 3 week release in 2015 till date 2016.

This has breached my human rights as I never committed the offences in the first place, as I can and will prove.

34

858,

Report - Reply.pdf

Some clear inaccuracies contained in my ongoing case lead to incorrect time stamps relating towards Emergency 999 calls contained within the Met Polices and applicants bundle as follows.

CAD

NUM

DATE

TIME

PAGE

CAD 999 call

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

CAD 999 call

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

CAD 999 call

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

CAD 999 call

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

CAD 999 call

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

CAD 999 call

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

Please note every day the met police call centre starts at CAD 01 and goes up to the average of 10,742 to 15,000 callers per day the clock is reset to 01 each day at 00:00 hours.

(We can tell this by the number of CAD incident numbers supplied, within the applicants ASBO bundle supporting the evidence supplied, for a standalone ASBO order to be gained against Mr. Simon Cordell.

On the average the Met police call centre will receive on the average of 300 callers per hour as marked and time stamped below.

Every half hour 150 calls are made to the emergency 999 call centre on the average Every 15 minutes is 75 callers on average- Every 7 half minutes is 33 callers on average- And 3 half minutes 17 callers on average.

Please take note to (CAD number / Incident Number 10481 7th June 14) this is the 10,481 Met police call of the 7th June 2014 time stamped 22:47 hours.

So it is incorrect for (CAD 10506 7th June 14) externally inputted 25 calls later, to have an earlier time stamp of the 7th June 2014 at 22:44 hours.

· Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

The report states in the past these persecutory ideas have also focused on family members and neighbours this information is also not correct.

2. Dr Rosemary Mills Report:

The report states: Mr Simon Cordell’s mental order is currently of a nature or degree to justify ongoing detention in hospital.

I Mr Simon Cordell disputes this not to be correct, since I have been realised after the tribunal and spending time in hospital as a voluntary patient before the doctors discharged me the day after the tribunal, I have settled in at home quite well and my family and friends are happy with me as well.

In Regards towards Opinions & Recommendations Chapter 17.2.1, Pages 8 of Rosemary Mills Report:

I disagree that I have shown any signs of psychotic disorder symptoms and believe I should not be diagnosed with such claims. Over the past two years I have been assessed as to be well and I have never been talk to in regards to such problems by any doctor until my assessment at St Ann’s hospital, to have been able to accept any treatment, to which I have now complied with and take the tablets which do make me suffer from bad side effects.

In Regards towards Opinions & Recommendations Chapter 17.2.2, Pages 8 of Rosemary Mills Report:

35

859,

Since being assessed on benzodiazepine I have continuously complained and explained that I know the medications I am taking does not having a positive impact but rather a much larger negative impact. I yet wait to talk to a doctor about this once again.

In Regards towards the Patient ought to be Detained in the interest of his health Chapter 18.1 Pages 8 of Rosemary Mills Report:

Since being released from the hospital I have continued to keep my word in my letter and work alongside the Mental health team I have allowed access to my home address every day and taken the medication that I have been prescribed, even low I understand that any person whom has been sectioned under the Mental health act, after an assessment or clinical care, does not need to comply with section 117.

I still however do take the medication but strongly agree with my own assessment of myself and do not feel the medication is having a positive impact.

In Regards Towards in the Interest of Safety of Others Chapter 18.2 Pages 8 of Rosemary Mills Report:

I have never been a danger to any other person(s) intentionally or otherwise. I am very concerned with the Electronic records as Doctor Rosemary Mills’s reports states she used and gained other wrongful contained information from and I would like them amended, such records state the following:

The electronic records document anti-social and verbally aggressive behaviour by Mr Cordell towards his neighbours, this is not true.

I do own a CCTV system this property doe’s gets used for my own personal reasons. I am very upset that I have been accused of using my CCTV so to be able to interpreting other people’s behaviour in a persecutory fashion.

My CCTV system is used in the accordance of the United Kingdom Laws.

In Regards towards Care Plan Chapter 20 Pages 8 and 9 of Rosemary Mills Report:

In reference to chapter 20.1 and 22, I did agree to stay on the ward informally and did do so this was for the duration of an extra two days, when I asked a member of staff if I can take section 17 leave of ward, I was told that I would need to speak to a doctor and when asked what my intentions were, I asked if I can stay at home the night as I missed my family and dog inclusive of my own bed so that I could if agreed come back to the hospital in the morning on explaining this to the Doctor, she explained to me that she was happy for me to work with the early prevention team from home after our conversation, to which I have been comply with.

In Regards towards Care Plan Chapter 22.1 Pages 9 of Rosemary Mills Report:

This plan has now been implemented and I have been noticing negative side effect from the medication prescribed, while being at home.

END OF REPORTS

Signed:

Dated: 31st August 2016

36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

105.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

105. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09- 2016 04- 05

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 860

 

 

105.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

105. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09- 2016 04- 05

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 860

--

860,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 04:05:01 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Hi Pleas read and reply.

Yes I agree it takes you away at some point which I understand to be the payment of a business card transfers to woohoo but I believe the advantage is after buying the plugin you get the app which is the part I want in the demo mode it has a down load to com widget and a payment widget I just want to delete or deactivate the add to cart button in the downloaded plugin then all else should be ok as the download button does not direct you to woohoo payment services. Cn you help me try to do this please.

On Saturday, 10 September 2016, 16:40, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

This is what I want to pay for but first I want to be sure that I can make the payment feature not charge the clients’ money for the service.

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer Design

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer

Design

If this plugin is useful, could you please help us to rate it? it will be a big encouragement to improve for us....

I would like to make the menu bar in the business directory the same as the word press menu so that it shows a link to the festival pages

Once this has been achieved then I believe I can sort the rest please can you help me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

106.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

106. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-05

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 861

 

 

106.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

106. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-05

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 861

--

861,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 04:05:01 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Hi Pleas read and reply.

Yes I agree it takes you away at some point which I understand to be the payment of a business card transfers to woohoo but I believe the advantage is after buying the plugin you get the app which is the part I want in the demo mode it has a down load to com widget and a payment widget I just want to delete or deactivate the add to cart button in the downloaded plugin then all else should be ok as the download button does not direct you to woohoo payment services. Cn you help me try to do this please.

On Saturday, 10 September 2016, 16:40, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

This is what I want to pay for but first I want to be sure that I can make the payment feature not charge the clients’ money for the service.

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer Design

WooCommerce Business Card & Flyer

Design

If this plugin is useful, could you please help us to rate it? it will be a big encouragement to improve for us....

I would like to make the menu bar in the business directory the same as the word press menu so that it shows a link to the festival pages

Once this has been achieved then I believe I can sort the rest please can you help me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

107.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

107. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-09

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 862

 

 

107.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

107. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-09

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 862

--

862,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 04:09:12 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Ink

Yes and Ł30 for food I got electric and gas till next sat

On Friday, 9 September 2016, 13:34, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Is there money to get the ink please

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

108.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

108. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-10

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 863

 

108.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

108. 1. 2

Too Smooth 12-09-2016 04-10

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 863

--

863,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 04:09:55 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: problems

Thank you can I have my files back now please love Si xx

On Saturday, 10 September 2016, 19:29, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

WooCommerce Product Designer:

Your PHP setting max_ file_ uploads is currently set to 20. We recommend to set this value at least to 100 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Your PHP setting max_ input_ vars is currently set to 1000. We recommend to set this value at least to 5000 to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Your PHP setting post_ max_ size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

Your PHP setting upload_ max_ file size is currently set to 64M. We recommend to set this value at least to 128M to avoid any issue with our plugin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

109.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

109. 1. 2

Too Smooth Ink - 12-09-2016 04-09

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 864

 

109.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

109. 1. 2

Too Smooth Ink - 12-09-2016 04-09

12/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 864

--

864,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/09/2016 04:09:12 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Ink

Yes and Ł30 for food I got electric and gas till next sat

On Friday, 9 September 2016, 13:34, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Is there money to get the ink please

 

 

 

 

 

 

110.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

110. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate - 14-09-2016 11-05

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 865

 

 

110.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

110. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate - 14-09-2016 11-05

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 865

--

865,

 

 

 

 

111.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

111. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -14-09-2016 10-32

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 866

 

 

111.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

111. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -14-09-2016 10-32

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 866

--

866,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 14/09/2016 11:05:34 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Documents I said I would send.

Simon,

Yes, I have received the documents. Thank you.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paiae.christie@voiceabilitv.ora

w: www.voiceabilitv.ora

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630

Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 14 September 2016 11:04

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: Documents I said I would send.

Dear Paige

I am writing this email as I am not sure that you got my email the other day with the documents, I sent to you as attachments. Could you please let me know that you have got this email please.

Regards Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

112.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

112. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -14-09-2016 11-07

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 867

 

112.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

112. 1. 2

NHS Complaint Advocate -14-09-2016 11-07

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 867

--

867,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 14/09/2016 03:10:32 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Documents I said I would send.

Simon,

I have looked through your documents - what next step do you want to take? It is always best if you take the lead as it is your complaint so let me know what you want to happen next.

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

t: 07918 561 868

e: paiae.christie@voiceabilitv.ora

w: www.voiceabilitv.ora

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 14 September 2016 11:04

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: Documents I said I would send.

Dear Paige

I am writing this email as I am not sure that you got my email the other day with the documents, I sent to you as attachments.

Could you please let me know that you have got this email please.

Regards Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

113.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

113. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 14-09-2016 11-34

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 868

 

 

113.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

113. 1. 2

NHS Complaints Advocate 14-09-2016 11-34

14/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 868

--

868,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 14/09/2016 11:33:45 AM

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: Documents I said I would send.

Dear Paige

Thank you for your reply.

In that meeting in Feb 2016 when they acted on the 135 warrant, it was recorded onto dual CD I have written the minutes from the CD.

Regards

Simon

On Wednesday, 14 September 2016, 11:07, Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org> wrote:

Simon,

Can I also ask, who took down those minutes?

Regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP t: 07918 561 868

e: paige.christie@voiceabilitv.org

w: www.voiceability.org

Voice Ability Winner

Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

From: Rewired

mailto: re_wired@ymail.com

Sent: 14 September 2016 11:04

To: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Subject: Re: Documents I said I would send.

Dear Paige

I am writing this email as I am not sure that you got my email the other day with the documents, I sent to you as attachments.

Could you please let me know that you have got this email please.

Regards Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

114.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

114. 1. 2

Asbo from Sally Gilchrist 16-09-2016 01-40

16/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 869,870

871,872,873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883

 

 

114.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

114. 1. 2

Asbo from Sally Gilchrist 16-09-2016 01-40

16/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 869,870

871,872,873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883

--

869,

From: Josephine Ward <josie@michaelcarroUandco.com>

Sent time: 16/09/2016 01:40:59 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: SIMON CORDELL

Attachments: c100781-130920164473_001.pdf.pdf

Lorraine / Simon

This is the disclosure that the Respondent states they sent to Michael Carroll & Co in August 2016. I made enquiries with staff at Michael Carroll & Co and I was told that this had not been received. This was sent to my email on Tuesday, but I do not have access to that email on my phone but have to be near a desk top computer. I am forwarding this to you now.

I am waiting for Andrew Locke's court note from today's hearing and I will revert to you in writing re the solicitor / barrister / client relationship and whether either Andrew Locke or I can continue to represent you in this matter.

Josephine

Original Message     

From: Sally.Gilchrist@met.pnnpolice.uk

To: josie@michaelcarrollandco.com

Date: 13 September 2016 at 14:56

Subject: SIMON CORDELL

Dear Sirs,

Please see attached correspondence sent to you by DX on 17th August 2016.

Yours faithfully Sally Gilchrist

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law.

Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook/metpolice.uk

870,

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

871,

872,

873,

874,

875,

876,

877,

878,

879,

880,

881,

882,

883,

 

 

 

 

 

115.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

115. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 19-09-2016 13-23       

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 884

 

 

115.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

115. 1. 2

Asbo Me to Josie 19-09-2016 13-23 

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 884

--

884,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time:19/09/2016 01:22:54 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: letter

Dear Josey / Michael

I am writing this email due to an email that was received today in receipt from Josey.

Today when I spoke on the phone to Josie as she called my phone I explained to her that I do not have any internet at home, so I could not login to my emails and therefore could not read what she had sent, Josey then asked me to contact my mother to tell me what was in the email.

Since this has happened, I have asked my mother to write this email to you confirming the below.

Josey has asked me to agree to have an assessment by a Psychiatrist; I do not see the need as I am not mental ill. I know this as I was just recently assessed on the 15/08/2016 under section 2 of the mental health act 1983 and then released due to a decision being made at a Tribunal that I had on the 26/08/2016, the Tribunal did not found me mentally ill to carry on holding me under a section 2.

When I was assessed under section two, I had been arrested for wrongful claims. Michael Carroll should already be aware as his company is my acting solicitor. I still have not been interviewed by the police as of yet and will prove I never did anything wrong – due - to CCTV I have when I return to the police station on the 04/10/2016.

In the time I had in a Hospital was an assessment and the conclusion where I am of well mind body and soul.

I agreed after the assessment to be mentored on release which is at its end of period, This was obtained Under section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983, Under section two I understand that I did not have to approve to carry on with the care facilities but I did agree to this. No one has had any concerns with me since as I am not a concern never is my mental stability.

I have had other assessments prior to this, and the same conclusion was found I have never been un-well with mental health issues of concern.

I feel at this late stage of my Appeal due to lack of disclosure that there is not any time left to prepare my defence, I have not had a meeting with my barrister for the appeal as of yet and there is less than a week till the appeal to start, I feel it is common sense that asking for an assessment is only going to put my Appeal off and I feel this is unfair as the start of the ongoing was 2014. I have only ever asked for things to be done for my Appeal and case with no disrespect for any other person, which I know should have been completed in good time. I have not been rude or disrespectful to my solicitor I have only ever asked for things to be done fair and right so to be achieved in good time for the Appeal.

I can send you the copy of the tribunal release from the section 2 if needed.

 

 

 

 

 

116.    

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

116. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re Plea and Michael 19-09-2016 12-10

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 885

 

 

116.    

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

116. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - Re Plea and Michael 19-09-2016 12-10

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 885

--

885,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 19/09/2016 12:09:54 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: Please read email to Josey and Michael.

Please confirm I can send you do not need to go into great detail the less the better this is why I wrote the email this way.

Dear Josey / Michael

I am writing this email due to an email I got from Josey today.

As I said to Josey when she called me I do not have any internet to login to my email so have not read the emails she sent, But Josey asked my mother to tell me what was in the email which she has done. And I asked her to write this email to you confirming the below.

Josey has asked me to agree to have an assessment by a Psychiatrist I do not see the need as I was put under a section 2 on the 15/08/2016 and released due to a Tribunal I had on the 26/08/2016.

Since being released I have the early intervention team coming to my home to check on my welfare.

I can send you the copy of the tribunal release from the section 2. And I can also ask a letter to be written from the early intervention team when they attend my home today, which can be forwarded to you. I believe this will tell you all that would be needed.

Regards

Simon / Lorraine

 

 

 

 

 

117.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

117. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE d Michael new 19-09-2016 12-47

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 886,887

 

 

117.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

117. 1. 2

Asbo Mother - RE d Michael new 19-09-2016 12-47

19/09/2016

/ Page Numbers: 886,887

--

886,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 19/09/2016 12:46:43 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Re: Please read email to Josey and Michael new

Dear Josey / Michael

I am writing this email due to an email I got from Josey today.

As I said to Josey when she called me, I do not have any internet to login to my email so have not read the emails she sent, But Josey asked my mother to tell me what was in the email. And I asked her to write this email to you confirming the below.

Josey has asked me to agree to have an assessment by a Psychiatrist I do not see the need as I was assessed under section 2 on the 15/08/2016 and released due to a Tribunal I had on the 26/08/2016 which the Tribunal did not found me Mentally ill to carry on holding me under a section 2.

When I was put on a section 2 I had been arrested which Michael Carroll will already be aware as they was my acting solicitor, I still have not been interviewed by the police as of yet and will prove I never did anything wrong due to CCTV I have when I return to the police station on the 04/10/2016.

In the time I was in Hospital I did have an assessment and still released under the Tribunal.

I agreed when released to be mentored on release which has been ongoing. Under section 117 I did not need to approve to carry on having home treatment, but I did agree to this. No one has had any concerns with me since I have been released.

I have had other assessments prior to this, and the same conclusion was found I was well.

I feel at this late stage of my Appeal there is not any time left, I have not had a meeting with my barrister yet and there is less than a week till the appeal is due to start, asking for an assessment is only going to put my Appeal off and I feel this is unfair. I have only ever asked for things to be done for my Appeal which should have been and in good time. I have not been disrespectful to my solicitor I have only ever asked for things to be done in good time for the Appeal.

I can send you the copy of the tribunal release from the section 2 if needed.

Regards Simon / Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 19 September 2016 12:10

To: 'Rewired

Subject: Re: Please read email to Josey and Michael.

Please confirm I can send you do not need to go into great detail the less the better this is why I wrote the email this way.

Dear Josey / Michael

I am writing this email due to an email I got from Josey today.

As I said to Josey when she called me I do not have any internet to login to my email so have not read the emails she sent, But Josey asked my mother to tell me what was in the email which she has done. And I asked her to write this email to you confirming the below.

Josey has asked me to agree to have an assessment by a Psychiatrist I do not see the need as I was put under a section 2 on the 15/08/2016 and released due to a Tribunal I had on the 26/08/2016.

Since being released I have the early intervention team coming to my home to check on my welfare.

887,

I can send you the copy of the tribunal release from the section 2. And I can also ask a letter to be written from the early intervention team when they attend my home today, which can be forwarded to you. I believe this will tell you all that would be needed.

Regards

Simon / Lorraine

 

 

 

 

118.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

118. 1. 2

Too Smooth C Panel 29-11-2016 09-58

29/11/2016

/ Page Numbers: 888

 

 

118.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

118. 1. 2

Too Smooth C Panel 29-11-2016 09-58

29/11/2016

/ Page Numbers: 888

--

888,

From: cPanel for too smooth on toosmooth.co.uk <cpanel@toosmooth.co.uk>

Sent time: 29/11/2016 09:16:58 AM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk;

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [toosmooth.co.uk] The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is about to exceed its bandwidth limit (6.17 GB/6.84 GB)

The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached 90% of its bandwidth limit (6.17 GB/6.84 GB).

Average bandwidth used per day: 217.85 MB Projected monthly bandwidth usage: 6.38 GB

At the current rate of usage:

• The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is not expected to exceed their bandwidth limit.

The system generated this notice on Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 9:16:57 AM UTC.

You can disable the “Bandwidth Limits” type of notification through the cPanel interface: https://fiorano.websitewelcome.com:2083/frontend/x3/contact/index.html

Do not reply to this automated message.

CP

Copyright© 2016 cPanel, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

Headers

2017

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

697. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ RE_ PTI URN_ 01YE0355816

04/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1,2

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

697. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ RE_ PTI URN_ 01YE0355816

04/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1,2

--

1,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 04 January 2017 15:14

To: 'London.magistrates@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: FW: RE: PTI URN: 01YE0355816

Attachments: Letter-to-CPS-01-12-2016.pdf

Dear A Parmar

I wrote and email to you on the 12/010/2016 with the attached letter asking for some information and I have not had a reply back from you about the missing paperwork I or my solicitors was never given would it please be possible for you to get back to me with the missing paperwork that has never been seen, I have attached the document sent to you in November 2016 please see attached I have also spoken to someone yesterday who said they would deal with obtaining the missing information that I have asked for.

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 01 December 2016 16:10

To: 'London.magistrates@cps.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: PTI URN: 01YE0355816

Dear A. PARMAR

Please see attached letter is regards to the above case number.

Regards

2,

FW: RE: PTI URN: 01YE0355816->Letter-to-CPS-01-12-2016.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ 01/12/2016

OPERATIONAL REFERENCE NO./PTI URN: 01YE0355816 DEFENDANT: Simon CORDELL (D.O.B. 26/01/1981)

Dear A. PARMAR

I am writing this letter due to the letter of discontinuance you sent to my solicitors dated the 15/11/2016.

I asked my solicitors to obtain my custody records for when I was arrested on the 14/08/2016 for Threats to kill, where I was taken to Wood Green Police station as Edmonton police station was closed due to ongoing work being carried out, which has never been supplied by the CPS or police to myself or my acting solicitors before this case was discontinued, for this case I was bailed until the 04/10/2016 as they classed me as unfit for interview.

I was charged on the 05/10/2016 for Section 4 POA for this case. The Office in charge of this case was PC Campbell PC 205732 he was the person that interviewed me for both the case of the 14/08/2016 and the 04/10/2016.

On the 04/10/2016 I was again arrested just before I was due to go to Edmonton Police station for the bail to return for the above case this time for Criminal damage, I was interviewed for both cases by the above named police officer and charged on the 05/10/2016 for both dates the charges where Section 4 POA and Criminal damage I have also asked for the my custody records for the 04/10/2016 and this has also not been supplied to myself or my acting solicitors.

I would still like a copy of the custody records so they can be filed with my paper work and was wondering if you could send me a copy of the custody records for the whole of my detention for the 14/08/2016 and the 04/10/2016 I would be most grateful if this could be done.

I believe custody record no for the 14/08/2016 is 01YD 6024 16 but I am not sure of the custody record no for the 04/10/2016.

I have also never had any paperwork for the Criminal damage charge and again would like copies of these and the statement from the person who said I done what I did. As my solicitors was only ever served the paperwork for the case for the 14/08/2016.

I like to keep all my paper work on file so without the missing papers work I cannot do this, I believe due to being charged I do have a right to the paper work and would be grateful if this could be sent via this email address I hope you can help in this matter.

If you cannot help in this matter could you please let me know via this email address lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Regards

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Mother FW SAR 

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 3,4,5,6

 

2.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Mother FW SAR       

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 3,4,5,6

--

3,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 January 2017 12:02

To: 'Dionne.grant@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: FW: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Attachments: Si-DWP-Assessment-New.pdf; Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Dear Dionne Grant

Please see the below emails and the attached documents.

I do get an auto reply which says

Thank you for your email. I will be back in the office on Monday

My emails are not being monitored during my absence. I will respond as soon as possible following my return to work. For any urgent matters which cannot wait until then, please contact Dionne.grant@enfield.gov.uk.

I work Mondays, Tuesday mornings and Wednesday.

Could you please address this as I did not get a reply back from my email, I sent on 22/12/2016 as of yet also

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 January 2017 11:54

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Concetta Nobile

As I have not heard back from you regarding the below email can you please see attached documents and confirm they are ok please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 22 December 2016 17:00

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Concetta Nobile

Thank you, for the update and information you will need I have my driving licence but since 08 June 2015 the paper part is no longer needed so I do not have this so do not have both parts only the card.

I have bills to show my address dated within the last 3 months so that should not be a problem.

As for the information I have asked for it is all the information that is held by Enfield Council within all departments.

This would not be limited to just things that I have put in this would also include any data that the police have passed to Enfield Council about me. Any meetings that were held with police and any other body and Enfield Council about me. and any other government body

4,

that has passed information to Enfield Council about myself.

The minutes from the meeting that was held about me by Enfield council on the 15/12/2016 with regard to the formal complaints that was put in. I did request minutes were taken when I was told I could not attend.

Any phone calls made by myself or my mother on my behalf to Enfield Council

All that were put in for Enfield Council to address this would include all comments made on any such report such as I have removed all my piping for my heating system.

All my housing benefit and anything to do with my rent account and council Tax.

Any complaints that have been put in about me this would include any neighbours or police or any other body that Enfield Council has received about me, I do understand that some sections names would need to have redaction added for names and addresses but the date and body of the complaint should be kept. and if it a governing body such as the police names or IDs should not need redaction.

If Enfield Council has any data, I want this subject access request to cover this data and if any data is going to be withheld, I would like to know this and the reason why it is being withheld.

As for dates this request would go back as far as possible with any data Enfield Council holds within all departments being released.

If you could get back to me about the ID, I would be grateful and get this emailed across to you so that this can be dealt with.

Regards Simon Cordell Lorraine Cordell

From: Concetta Nobile [mailto:Concetta.Nobile@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 21 December 2016 13:03

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your request dated. As it relates to personal information, we are treating it as a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

We have registered the request under reference number SAR 251, and you may quote this should you need to get back in touch with us.

Unfortunately we are unable to answer your request based on the details you have provided. To assist us in proceeding with your request, please could you provide us with further information to clarify the context in which information about you may have been processed and about the likely dates when processing occurred.

Under the Act, we are legally required to verify the identity of the data subject / requestor before we compile the data you have requested. In order to proceed with your request, please would you send us the following two forms of evidence of identity for the requestor:

·         One photographic - such as a passport or driving licence (both parts)

·         One address based - showing proof of name and current address (dated within the past 3 months), such as a utility bill or bank statement

5,

Do let us know if you need information about alternative forms of documentation which are acceptable as confirmation of identity.

Yours sincerely,

Concetta Nobile

Complaints and Access to Information - Gateway Services

Finance, Resources and Customer Services

Enfield Council

Thomas Hardy House

39 London Road

EN26DS

0208 379 3035

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole Borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

6,

Extra Page!

Driving Licence!

 

 

 

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

702. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL_PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE] _ (2)

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 7,8,9,10,11      

 

 3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

702. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL_PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE] _ (2)

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 7,8,9,10,11

--

7,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 January 2017 14:00

To: 'Dionne Grant'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Dionne Grant

Thank you for the reply, as this request was put in on the 24/11/2016 you are 10 days overdue and I do need this data as soon as possible so if this can be done, I would be most grateful.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Dionne Grant mailto: Dionne.Grant@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 13 January 2017 13:55

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dear Ms Cordell

Many thanks for your email below. I am sorry to hear you did not receive a reply back to your email of 22nd December.

I confirm that the documents you have provided are satisfactory and your subject access request should be progressed. Concetta will be back in the office on Monday so I will ensure to follow up matters with her then and will also ask her to make contact with you directly.

Kind regards

Dionne Grant

Statutory Complaints Manager - Gateway Services

Finance, Resources and Customer Services

Enfield Council

Thomas Hardy House

39 London Road

EN26DS

Tel: 0208 379 2806

Email: Dionne.grant@enfield.gov.uk www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole Borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

*THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT*

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 January 2017 12:02 To: Dionne Grant

Subject: FW: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Dionne Grant

8,

Please see the below emails and the attached documents.

I do get an auto reply which says

Thank you for your email. I will be back in the office on Monday

My emails are not being monitored during my absence. I will respond as soon as possible following my return to work. For any urgent matters which cannot wait until then, please contact Dionne.grant@enfield.gov.uk.

I work Mondays, Tuesday mornings and Wednesday.

Could you please address this as I did not get a reply back from my email, I sent on 22/12/2016 as of yet also

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 13 January 2017 11:54

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Concetta Nobile

As I have not heard back from you regarding the below email can you please see attached documents and confirm they are ok please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 December 2016 17:00

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Concetta Nobile

Thank you, for the update and information you will need I have my driving licence but since 08 June 2015 the paper part is no longer needed so I do not have this so do not have both parts only the card.

I have bills to show my address dated within the last 3 months so that should not be a problem.

As for the information I have asked for it is all the information that is held by Enfield Council within all departments.

This would not be limited to just things that I have put in this would also include any data that the police have passed to Enfield Council about me. Any meetings that were held with police and any other body and Enfield Council about me. and any other government body that has passed information to Enfield Council about myself.

The minutes from the meeting that was held about me by Enfield council on the 15/12/2016 with regard to the formal complaints that was put in. I did request minutes were taken when I was told I could not attend.

Any phone calls made by myself or my mother on my behalf to Enfield Council

All that were put in for Enfield Council to address this would include all comments made on any such report such as I have removed all

9,

my piping for my heating system.

All my housing benefit and anything to do with my rent account and council Tax.

Any complaints that have been put in about me this would include any neighbours or police or any other body that Enfield Council has received about me, I do understand that some sections names would need to have redaction added for names and addresses but the date and body of the complaint should be kept. and if it a governing body such as the police names or IDs should not need redaction.

If Enfield Council has any data, I want this subject access request to cover this data and if any data is going to be withheld, I would like to know this and the reason why it is being withheld.

As for dates this request would go back as far as possible with any data Enfield Council holds within all departments being released.

If you could get back to me about the ID, I would be grateful and get this emailed across to you so that this can be dealt with.

Regards Simon Cordell Lorraine Cordell

From: Concetta Nobile

mailto: Concetta.Nobile@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 21 December 2016 13:03

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your request dated. As it relates to personal information, we are treating it as a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

We have registered the request under reference number SAR 251, and you may quote this should you need to get back in touch with us.

Unfortunately we are unable to answer your request based on the details you have provided. To assist us in proceeding with your request, please could you provide us with further information to clarify the context in which information about you may have been processed and about the likely dates when processing occurred.

Under the Act, we are legally required to verify the identity of the data subject / requestor before we compile the data you have requested. In order to proceed with your request, please would you send us the following two forms of evidence of identity for the requestor:

·         One photographic - such as a passport or driving licence (both parts)

·         One address based - showing proof of name and current address (dated within the past 3 months), such as a utility bill or bank statement

Do let us know if you need information about alternative forms of documentation which are acceptable as confirmation of identity.

Yours sincerely,

Concetta Nobile

10,

Complaints and Access to Information - Gateway Services

Finance, Resources and Customer Services

Enfield Council

Thomas Hardy House

39 London Road

EN26DS

0208 379 3035

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole Borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

ENFIELD

Connected

IMPORTANT

Every Enfield resident should register for an online Enfield Connected account. Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time. Click here to get connected.

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

11,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

699. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL_PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE] _ (3)

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 12,13,14,15

 

4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

699. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL_PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE] _ (3)

13/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 12,13,14,15

--

12,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 January 2017 11:54

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Attachments: Si-DWP-Assessment-New.pdf

Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Dear Concetta Nobile

As I have not heard back from you regarding the below email can you please see attached documents and confirm they are ok please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 22 December 2016 17:00

To: 'Concetta Nobile'

Subject: RE: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Dear Concetta Nobile

Thank you, for the update and information you will need I have my driving licence but since 08 June 2015 the paper part is no longer needed so I do not have this so do not have both parts only the card.

I have bills to show my address dated within the last 3 months so that should not be a problem.

As for the information I have asked for it is all the information that is held by Enfield Council within all departments.

This would not be limited to just things that I have put in this would also include any data that the police have passed to Enfield Council about me. Any meetings that were held with police and any other body and Enfield Council about me. and any other government body that has passed information to Enfield Council about myself.

The minutes from the meeting that was held about me by Enfield council on the 15/12/2016 with regard to the formal complaints that was put in. I did request minutes were taken when I was told I could not attend.

Any phone calls made by myself or my mother on my behalf to Enfield Council

All that were put in for Enfield Council to address this would include all comments made on any such report such as I have removed all my piping for my heating system.

All my housing benefit and anything to do with my rent account and council Tax.

Any complaints that have been put in about me this would include any neighbours or police or any other body that Enfield Council has received about me, I do understand that some sections names would need to have redaction added for names and addresses but the date and body of the complaint should be kept. and if it a governing body such as the police names or IDs should not need redaction.

If Enfield Council has any data, I want this subject access request to cover this data and if any data is going to be withheld, I would like to know this and the reason why it is being withheld.

As for dates this request would go back as far as possible with any data Enfield Council holds within all departments being released.

If you could get back to me about the ID, I would be grateful and get this emailed across to you so that this can be dealt with.

Regards Simon Cordell

Lorraine Cordell

13,

From: Concetta Nobile [mailto:Concetta.Nobile@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 21 December 2016 13:03

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SAR 251 [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your request dated. As it relates to personal information, we are treating it as a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998.

We have registered the request under reference number SAR 251, and you may quote this should you need to get back in touch with us.

Unfortunately we are unable to answer your request based on the details you have provided. To assist us in proceeding with your request, please could you provide us with further information to clarify the context in which information about you may have been processed and about the likely dates when processing occurred.

Under the Act, we are legally required to verify the identity of the data subject / requestor before we compile the data you have requested. In order to proceed with your request, please would you send us the following two forms of evidence of identity for the requestor:

·         One photographic - such as a passport or driving licence (both parts)

·         One address based - showing proof of name and current address (dated within the past 3 months), such as a utility bill or bank statement

Do let us know if you need information about alternative forms of documentation which are acceptable as confirmation of identity.

Yours sincerely,

Concetta Nobile

Complaints and Access to Information - Gateway Services

Finance, Resources and Customer Services

Enfield Council

Thomas Hardy House

39 London Road

EN26DS

0208 379 3035

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole Borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

14,

RE: SAR 251

HEALTH ASSESSMENT ADVISORY SERVICE

Your appointment for an assessment with a healthcare professional

Dear Mr Cordell,

We have been asked by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to carry out an assessment in relation to your benefit claim. We have arranged an appointment for you at:

1:00 pm on Friday 27th January 2017

at:                                          

Highgate Assessment Centre

·         Centre for Health and Disability Assessments, 1st Floor, 1 Elthorne Road, j Upper Holloway, London, N19 4AL

·         It is important that you attend this assessment. If you don't attend, your benefit may be affected. If you are unable to attend, or if you will need any help whilst you are at the assessment centre, please inform the appointments help desk on 0800 2888777 as soon as possible.

·         Please only contact the appointments helpdesk in connection with your appointment. If you want to discuss your benefit claim, or if you would like more information about why you need an assessment, please contact the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) office that deals with your claim.

·         Please arrive 10 minutes before your appointment time. You should bring this letter and proof of your identity with you. If you have any medical reports that you wish us to see, please also bring them with you. For example, this could be a medical report from your doctor, consultant, or support worker.

·         We have enclosed a leaflet containing important information about what to bring to the assessment and how to claim expenses. We have also enclosed a map and directions explaining how to get to the assessment centre.

Yours sincerely,

Centre for Health and Disability Assessments

Centre for Health and Disability Assessments

AL1 02/15

Office address: WEMBLEY CENTRE FOR HEALTH AND DISABILITY

ASSESSMENTS

WEMBLEY ASC

1 OLYMPIC WAY

WEMBLEY

HA9ONP

Appointments 0800 2888777

help desk: If you have a textphone you can dial 18001 followed by the number shown above.

Reference: JH653811D

Date: 28th December 2016

Mr SIMON P CORDELL

109 BURNCROFTAV

ENFIELD 35800/50

MIDDSEX EN3 7JQ

15,

Driving Licence!

 

 

 

 

 

5.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

Mother 18-01-2017 -08-24

18/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27 

 

5.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

Mother 18-01-2017 -08-24

18/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27       

--

16,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 18/01/2017 08:24:52 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: here you go

Att simon-police-complaint-13-09-2014.doc

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

Property-Receipt-and-cad-information-for-handing-back- documents.pdf

see attached

17,

18,

19,

20,

21,

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

Your Horner

I am written this letter after yesterday 17/01/2017 being in court and felt as did 3 other people there is no point carrying on with this Appeal as you have already made you mind up before even hearing the Appeal.

This is not the only time you have brought up the conditions the lower court set Mr Cordell when they granted the ASBO order on the 04/08/2015 after the full hearing.

We felt you was only worried about the conditions so in fact had made your mind up there was only issues with the conditions when in fact you have not even heard the Appeal. So why are you even talking about the conditions and what you believed where problems with the conditions that where set by the lower court, before even hearing the Appeal.

There was more worrying issue such as my son having a solicitor and an acting barrister for the Appeal hearing and legal Aid in place for the acting solicitors.

Your Horner knew after the last solicitor was removed from record by yourself on the 21/09/2016 when we had notified the court we were going to be late to court by 5 or 10 minutes due to traffic, by the time we got to court you had already removed the solicitors while we were not there from record.

We were told this by the acting barrister the solicitor had sent who waited at court till we got there to inform us you had granted their application they could be removed from record.

We were told by the barrister to wait at court that you would call us into court to talk to us which we did and was called into court around 16:00 hours as you were dealing with other trial.

On being called into court you were told by the Respondent Barrister this was not the only time the solicitors had put an application to be removed from record this had been done on the 19/02/2016 again just before the trial was due to start on the 22/02/2016 and had been dismissed by His Honour Judge Morrison sitting that day and notes put by His Honour Judge Morrison, If any attempt is made to repeat this application the Court will require it to be made in person by the Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co. You said you could not force a solicitor to act against their will, but no acting Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co was in court.

We at this point we asked for an adjournment of the 3 day Appeal hearing that was due to start on the 26/09/2016 to get a new solicitor put in place which you refused to do and stated my son could do this himself, there was great concern with this due to my son’s learning problems not being able to read and write and health problems which you was aware of.

In fact my son could not even attend court due to this on the 26/09/2016 due to what this had done to him and made him so ill I had to write a letter to yourself which on the 26/09/2016 had to be addressed by you.

22,

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

At that hearing I told you I had spent days calling solicitors trying to get one put in place and no one would take the case on due to this being at appeal stage and how much legal Aid paid for appeal hearings and I was being told we would have to pay private to get a solicitor so my son could have a barrister put in place for the appeal hearing to act for him, you said due to the letter I had written you had 3 option open to you and believed this would go to judicial review.

1. Carry on with the Appeal hearing in the hope my son would turn up the next day 27/09/2016.

2. Dismiss the Appeal.

3. Adjourn the Appeal to a later date.

You choose to adjourn the Appeal to a later date to start on the 16/01/2017

Issues were also raised about the bundles we were working from which were old Respondent bundles and files being missing. We had worked that out when waiting to be called into court with the Respondent barrister. You order that the solicitor hand the bundles over to us that day. And set a date for us to come back to court to check we were all working from the same bundles. I believe this date was the 14/10/2016.

Upon getting the bundles from the solicitors it was noted that my own son’s bundle had not been updated since Dec 2015. I tried to add the documents that were missing myself and make new indexes up but knew there were still missing documents. It was also noticed that the Respondent bundles we were working from there was around 13 missing statements we had never seen before all dated before the full hearing on the 03/08/2015 and 04/08/2015 at the lower court that we had never seen before.

On the 14/10/2016 you were informed of this and ordered the solicitors to attend court I believe this date was for the 19/10/2016 the Appeal hearing date was also changed to start on the 17/01/2017 for 3 days.

I tried again to contact the solicitors to work out what was missing so I could add it and they did not get back to me.

On the 19/10/2016 the solicitors did not turn up at court which you were not please about I had tried to add and index as much documents as I could but could not be sure 100% if I had all the missing documents.

A new date was set when again you ordered the solicitors to attend and had also contacted the new company Miss Ward worked for. Later that day Miss ward contacted me, and we meet to go over my son’s bundle to check the documents and see if there were

23,

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

any missing documents left that needed to be added. Miss ward believed I had covered all the documents.

Each time this was in court after the 26/09/2016 I informed you I was having a great deal of trouble finding a new solicitor to take this case on due to it being at appeal stage. On the 19/12/2016 I wrote a letter to you saying I had tried everything and could not get a new solicitor and asking if the court could help. I got a reply from you from the court on the 21/12/2016 stating.

Good afternoon

Your emailed was placed before HHJ Pawlak who replies:

'We cannot help

1. The Appellants solicitor came off the record at your request not at the direction of the Court

2. This is the Appellants appeal and it first came before the Court in January 2016

3. The Appellant has had long enough to find a solicitor and/or counsel

4. The Court cannot force a solicitor to act against his will for a client.'

Regards

Susan Sloan Support Services Wood Green Crown Court Woodall House London N22 5LF 0208-826-4121

susan.sloan@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Point 1: is incorrect my son did not ask for his solicitors to be taken of record.

Point 2: I believe is also incorrect as this was listed before the court on 26/10/2015.

Point 3: I was doing all I could to find a solicitor and/or counsel. I also cannot force a solicitor and/or counsel to take an appeal case on and I could not afford to pay for one if I could have paid for one, I would have done so long ago.

On the 12/01/2017 late in the day as I did not give up trying to get a new solicitor to take this case on I was given a number for a company called MK-Law I broke down on the phone to them as they were the 1st solicitors who even wanted to hear about the case after I said it was at appeal stage.

They were willing to act as long as legal aid was put in place. I got an email sent to them on the 13/01/2017 re transferring legal aid as I believed it was still in place with the old

24,

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

solicitors from what I had been told by the court. They were also going to need time to get all the bundles and go over them and meet with my son. I do not have an office or an office printer to copy all the bundles and I was only sent one copy from the Respondent due to all the issues with the bundles.

On the 16/01/2017 I know that MK-Law contacted the court about legal aid.

On the 17/01/2017 the appeal hearing was due to start and MK-law sent a Barrister to the court to address the matters of legal aid and ask for an court adjournment so they had time to get the bundles in order have time to go over them and meet with my son and deal with the appeal in the correct way how it should be done.

There were issues with legal aid, and it was said it was granted but the old solicitors were saying it was revoked Legal aid was of little help as they could only say if it had been revoked or not.

You refused the court adjournment and said you would give MK-Law the 17/01/2017 to get updated with the case and meet my son and get the bundles in order and could not see a problem with legal aid. And the Appeal would start with them or not on the 18/01/2017. seeing as we did not get out of court until around 13:00 hours yesterday this was down to half a day to be ready for this appeal hearing on the 18/01/2017.

How is a new solicitor want to get involved in a case when they have not even had time to go over it in the correct way so once again my son has been left with no acting solicitors and is meant to deal with this on his own? My son has learning problems and health problems how is he meant to cope with this?

·         Issues from the start of this case from when it started in 2014

We have never been given any discloser which has been asked for many times.

The whole case relies on hearsay.

We know the Met police hold information on their systems that prove my son never done this and this has been said many times. This is being covered up.

PNC has information on it that is incorrect which has been said in the lower court and appeal court many times.

Statements of police have information in them that can be proven to be incorrect.

Witness statements being written and signed for by police.

CAD timelines being incorrect and so much redaction with them and covering up they have nothing to do with this case.

The list above is only a few of the issues yet this was meant to be a fair trial in the lower court and this appeal.

There are beaches of my son’s ECHR which both the court and the police have to follow, and this has not been done in this case.

25,

Letter-to-Judge-18-01-2017.doc

You know my son has health problems and the stress that is being put on him is not making these health problems any better he should not be subjected to what has been going on in this case.

I feel I only have one option left and that is to take this to judicial review due to what has gone on from the start of this case to date.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell

26,

simon-police-complaint-13-09-2014.doc

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this down for Simon Cordell to an incident that happen 12/09/2014 around the Time off around 12:00pm Of concern to all of many factors such as British Standards relevant to good business practice.

Human Rights, Laws protecting our community governed by the United Kingdom well as many other relevant factors. as of date prior explained in this chapter what happened leading up to events today at address. 109 Burncroft Avenue EN3 7JQ on the 12/09/2014

Mr Simon Cordell was at home making plans for positive future development in regard to his company and future proposals as well as relevant documents and data,

To the surprise of a knock on his front door, this was a surprise because he has no intercom and was expecting no visitors.

So with this all explained he was couscous to open the door, as he approached the door with caution of unexpected visitors he looked into the keyhole on his front door,

He could see it was the police through his keyhole. He asked them without opening the door what was wanted of him, they said they needed to talk to him. At this point Mr Simon Cordell opened his door a little to see what the police wanted to talk to him about, once the door was opened a little they then said to him that they wanted to serve some documents on him at which point Mr Simon Cordell replied he was not willing to accept anything and closed the door.

Upon closing his close he told the police he was not being rude but he was not willing to accept receipt of any documents due to him having learning difficulties as noted on the police national police system and other governing services, which he then heard the lady police officer say through the closed door I was again looking through the keyhole watching what the police officers was doing I heard the “ Lady police office say what should we do to the man police officer said just put it on the floor in front of the door and he took some letters from the lady police officer and posted them into my letter box”

The Man police officer posted 4 pages of papers in Mr Simon Cordell letter box and the lady police officer put a large blue file on Mr Simon Cordell front doorstep outside.

My son then called me and told me what had happened but due to a death in the family I was unable to attend his address until today the 13/09/2014 when I got to Mr Simon Cordell address I saw the blue folder that the police had left at his front door which was in plain view of anyone. It had been opened and left opened so anyone could have looked into it.

I was shocked to see that inside the document there was full details of Mr Simon Cordell and also other people names under the data protection act the police should have never left this folder outside Mr Simon Cordell address which would give anyone access to it.

I am going to the police station to hand this back to them as it was never served on Mr Simon Cordell and he will not accept it from the police. I am not sure if any papers are missing from the folder as I said it was opened on the floor when I got there.

I believe that the police when Mr Simon Cordell did not accept the documents they should have took them back with them and arranged for signed delivery or tried to again serve them on Mr Simon Cordell as the file is far too big to put into a letter box.

This is also a complaint due to the data protection issues that the police could have avoided by not leaving the folder on a doorstep that anyone had access to. The folder would have never fitted in a letter box and I do not feel that the police putting 4 bits of paper in a letter box is serving

27,

anyone the full paperwork which should have been done and not just left it on the doorstep for anyone to see and read and take data out of it if they so wished, this is a beach of the data protection act.

I have taken pictures of the folder and I am disgusted that the police could just leave a folder with such data on a doorstep.

Mr Simon Cordell will not accept the file or paperwork that was put in his letter box and there for have not be rightly served.

I would like this issue looked into and to be informed if there is any paperwork missing from the folder which have full details and information to Mr Simon Cordell and other people.

Regards

Miss L Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

Mother 18-01-2017 -09-24

18/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38

 

6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

Mother 18-01-2017 -09-24

18/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38

--

28,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 18/01/2017 09:24:18 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Re: Updated letter Letter-to-HHJ PAWLAK-18-01-2017.pdf

Property-Receipt-and-cad-information-for-handing-back-documents.pdf

Simon-police-complaint-

Attachments: 13-09-2014.pdf

here is what has been sent as I missed a few things out.

29,

Letter-to-HHJ PAWLAK-18-01-2017.pdf

18/01/2016

Your Horner HHJ PAWLAK

I am written this letter after yesterday 17/01/2017 being in court and felt as did 3 other people there is no point carrying on with this Appeal as you have already made you mind up before even hearing the Appeal.

This is not the only time you have brought up the conditions the lower court set Mr Cordell when they granted the ASBO order on the 04/08/2015 after the full hearing.

We felt you was only worried about the conditions so in fact had made your mind up there was only issues with the conditions when in fact you have not even heard the Appeal. So why are you even talking about the conditions and what you believed where problems with the conditions that where set by the lower court, before even hearing the Appeal.

There was more worrying issue such as my son having a solicitor and an acting barrister for the Appeal hearing and legal Aid in place for the acting solicitors.

Your Horner knew after the last solicitor was removed from record by yourself on the 21/09/2016 when we had notified the court we were going to be late to court by 5 or 10 minutes due to traffic, by the time we got to court you had already removed the solicitors while we were not there from record.

We were told this by the acting barrister the solicitor had sent who waited at court till we got there to inform us you had granted their application they could be removed from record.

We were told by the barrister to wait at court that you would call us into court to talk to us which we did and was called into court around 16:00 hours as you were dealing with other trial.

On being called into court you were told by the Respondent Barrister this was not the only time the solicitors had put an application to be removed from record this had been done on the 19/02/2016 again just before the trial was due to start on the 22/02/2016 and had been dismissed by His Honour Judge Morrison sitting that day and notes put by His Honour Judge Morrison, If any attempt is made to repeat this application the Court will require it to be made in person by the Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co. You said you could not force a solicitor to act against their will, but no acting Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co was in court.

We at this point we asked for an adjournment of the 3 day Appeal hearing that was due to start on the 26/09/2016 to get a new solicitor put in place which you refused to do and stated my son could do this himself, there was great concern with this due to my son’s learning problems not being able to read and write and health problems which you was aware of.

In fact my son could not even attend court due to this on the 26/09/2016 due to what this had done to him and made him so ill I had to write a letter to yourself which on the 26/09/2016 had to be addressed by you.

1

30,

Letter-to-HHJ PAWLAK-18-01-2017.pdf

At that hearing I told you I had spent days calling solicitors trying to get one put in place and no one would take the case on due to this being at appeal stage and how much legal Aid paid for appeal hearings and I was being told we would have to pay private to get a solicitor so my son could have a barrister put in place for the appeal hearing to act for him, you said due to the letter I had written you had 3 option open to you and believed this would go to judicial review.

1. Carry on with the Appeal hearing in the hope my son would turn up the next day 27/09/2016.

2. Dismiss the Appeal.

3. Adjourn the Appeal to a later date.

You choose to adjourn the Appeal to a later date to start on the 16/01/2017 and said for us to get a solicitor which you said you would help with and make sure legal aid was in place.

Issues were also raised about the bundles we were working from which were old Respondent bundles and files being missing. (It was not wonder the solicitors wanted to dismiss themselves) We had worked that out when waiting to be called into court with the Respondent barrister. You order that the solicitor hand the bundles over to us that day. And set a date for us to come back to court to check we were all working from the same bundles. I believe this date was the 14/10/2016.

Upon getting the bundles from the solicitors it was noted that my own son’s bundle had not been updated since Dec 2015. I tried to add the documents that were missing myself and make new indexes up but knew there were still missing documents. It was also noticed that the Respondent bundles we were working from there was around 13 missing statements we had never seen before all dated before the full hearing on the 03/08/2015 and 04/08/2015 at the lower court that we had never seen before.

On the 14/10/2016 you were informed of this and ordered the solicitors to attend court I believe this date was for the 19/10/2016 the Appeal hearing date was also changed to start on the 17/01/2017 for 3 days.

Again you were told the problems I was having trying to get a new solicitor to take this case on.

I tried again to contact the solicitors to work out what was missing so I could add it and they did not get back to me.

On the 19/10/2016 the solicitors did not turn up at court which you were not please about I had tried to add and index as much documents as I could but could not be sure 100% if I had all the missing documents.

2

31,

Letter-to-HHJ PAWLAK-18-01-2017.pdf

A new date was set when again you ordered the solicitors to attend and had also contacted the new company Miss Ward worked for. Later that day Miss ward contacted me, and we meet to go over my son’s bundle to check the documents and see if there were any missing documents left that needed to be added. Miss ward believed I had covered all the documents.

Each time this was in court after the 26/09/2016 I informed you I was having a great deal of trouble finding a new solicitor to take this case on due to it being at appeal stage. On the 19/12/2016 I wrote a letter to you saying I had tried everything and could not get a new solicitor and asking if the court could help. I got a reply from you from the court on the 21/12/2016 stating.

Good afternoon

Your emailed was placed before HHJ Pawlak who replies:

'We cannot help

1. The Appellants solicitor came off the record at your request not at the direction of the Court

2. This is the Appellants appeal and it first came before the Court in January 2016

3. The Appellant has had long enough to find a solicitor and/or counsel

4. The Court cannot force a solicitor to act against his will for a client.'

Regards

Susan Sloan Support Services Wood Green Crown Court Woodall House London N22 5LF 0208-826-4121

susan.sloan@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Point 1: is incorrect my son did not ask for his solicitors to be taken of record.

Point 2: I believe is also incorrect as this was listed before the court on 26/10/2015.

Point 3: I was doing all I could to find a solicitor and/or counsel. I also cannot force a solicitor and/or counsel to take an appeal case on and I could not afford to pay for one if I could have paid for one, I would have done so long ago.

On the 12/01/2017 late in the day as I did not give up trying to get a new solicitor to take this case on I was given a number for a company called MK-Law I broke down on the phone to them as they were the 1st solicitors who even wanted to hear about the case after I said it was at appeal stage.

They were willing to act as long as legal aid was put in place. I got an email sent to them on the 13/01/2017 re transferring legal aid as I believed it was still in place with

3

32,

Letter-to-HHJ PAWLAK-18-01-2017.pdf

the old solicitors from what I had been told by the court. They were also going to need time to get all the bundles and go over them and meet with my son. I do not have an office or an office printer to copy all the bundles and I was only sent one copy from the Respondent due to all the issues with the bundles.

On the 16/01/2017 I know that MK-Law contacted the court about legal aid.

On the 17/01/2017 the appeal hearing was due to start and MK-law sent a Barrister to the court to address the matters of legal aid and ask for an court adjournment so they had time to get the bundles in order have time to go over them and meet with my son and deal with the appeal in the correct way how it should be done.

There were issues with legal aid, and it was said it was granted but the old solicitors were saying it was revoked Legal aid was of little help as they could not say if it had been revoked or not.

You refused the court adjournment and said you would give MK-Law the 17/01/2017 to get updated with the case and meet my son and get the bundles in order and could not see a problem with legal aid. And the Appeal would start with them or not on the 18/01/2017. Seeing as we did not get out of court until around 13:00 hours yesterday this was down to half a day to be ready for this appeal hearing on the 18/01/2017.

How is a new solicitor want to get involved in a case when they have not even had time to go over it in the correct way so once again my son has been left with no acting solicitors and is meant to deal with this on his own? My son has learning problems and health problems how is he meant to cope with this?

• Issues from the start of this case from when it started in 2014

We have never been given any discloser which has been asked for many times.

The whole case relies on hearsay.

We know the Met police hold information on their systems that prove my son never done this and this has been said many times. This is being covered up.

PNC has information on it that is incorrect which has been said in the lower court and appeal court many times.

Statements of police have information in them that can be proven to be incorrect. Witness statements being written and signed for by police.

CAD timelines being incorrect and so much redaction with them and covering up they have nothing to do with this case.

The list above is only a few of the issues yet this was meant to be a fair trial in the lower court and this appeal.

There are beaches of my son’s ECHR which both the court and the police have to follow, and this has not been done in this case.

You know my son has health problems and the stress that is being put on him is not making these health problems any better he should not be subjected to what has been going on in this case.

4

33,

I feel I only have one option left and that is to take this to judicial review due to what has gone on from the start of this case to date. And therefore ask for a stay until this has been addressed.

At application will be put in under public funding for all court hearing transcripts for this case which I hope will be granted by the judges who have heard parts of this case and the issues in this case.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell

5

34,

35,

36,

 

99]

37,

simon-police-complaint-13-09-2014.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this down for Simon Cordell to an incident that happen 12/09/2014 around the Time off around 12:00pm Of concern to all of many factors such as British Standards relevant to good business practice.

Human Rights, Laws protecting our community governed by the United Kingdom well as many other relevant factors. as of date prior explained in this chapter what happened leading up to events today at address. 109 Burncroft Avenue EN3 7JQ on the 12/09/2014

Mr Simon Cordell was at home making plans for positive future development in regard to his company and future proposals as well as relevant documents and data,

To the surprise of a knock on his front door, this was a surprise because he has no intercom and was expecting no visitors.

So with this all explained he was couscous to open the door, as he approached the door with caution of unexpected visitors he looked into the keyhole on his front door,

He could see it was the police through his keyhole. He asked them without opening the door what was wanted of him, they said they needed to talk to him. At this point Mr Simon Cordell opened his door a little to see what the police wanted to talk to him about, once the door was opened a little they then said to him that they wanted to serve some documents on him at which point Mr Simon Cordell replied he was not willing to accept anything and closed the door.

Upon closing his close he told the police he was not being rude but he was not willing to accept receipt of any documents due to him having learning difficulties as noted on the police national police system and other governing services, which he then heard the lady police officer say through the closed door I was again looking through the keyhole watching what the police officers was doing I heard the “ Lady police office say what should we do to the man police officer said just put it on the floor in front of the door and he took some letters from the lady police officer and posted them into my letter box”

The Man police officer posted 4 pages of papers in Mr Simon Cordell letter box and the lady police officer put a large blue file on Mr Simon Cordell front doorstep outside.

My son then called me and told me what had happened but due to a death in the family I was unable to attend his address until today the 13/09/2014 when I got to Mr Simon Cordell address I saw the blue folder that the police had left at his front door which was in plain view of anyone. It had been opened and left opened so anyone could have looked into it.

I was shocked to see that inside the document there was full details of Mr Simon Cordell and also other people names under the data protection act the police should have never left this folder outside Mr Simon Cordell address which would give anyone access to it.

I am going to the police station to hand this back to them as it was never served on Mr Simon Cordell and he will not accept it from the police. I am not sure if any papers are missing from the folder as I said it was opened on the floor when I got there.

I believe that the police when Mr Simon Cordell did not accept the documents they should have took them back with them and arranged for signed delivery or tried to again serve them on Mr Simon Cordell as the file is far too big to put into a letter box.

This is also a complaint due to the data protection issues that the police could have avoided by not leaving the folder on a doorstep that anyone had access to. The folder would have never fitted in a letter box and I do not feel that the police putting 4 bits of paper in a letter box is serving anyone the full paper work which should have been done and not just left it on the door step for anyone to see and read and take data out of it if they so wished, this is a beach of the data protection act.

38,

I have taken pictures of the folder and I am disgusted that the police could just leave a folder with such data on a doorstep.

Mr Simon Cordell will not accept the file or paperwork that was put in his letter box and there for have not be rightly served.

I would like this issue looked into and to be informed if there is any paperwork missing from the folder which have full details and information to Mr Simon Cordell and other people.

Regards

Miss L Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

7.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Too Smooth the laminator -1-4014 21-01-2017 11-08

04/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 39

 

7.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Too Smooth the laminator -1-4014 21-01-2017 11-08

04/01/2017

/ Page Numbers: 39

--

39,

This message has been sent through Gumtree mail, which keeps your email address private. We recommend that you always reply this way and be wary of anyone asking you to use their private email addresses. If there is anything about the message that you think is suspicious, do not reply and report it to the Gumtree team. We will get back to you asap.

From: Gray via Gumtree Mail <Seller.2w7o2y8l2p20s@reply.gumtree.com>

Sent time: 21/01/2017 11:08:09 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Re: Simon replied to your ad: Easy mount 720mm cold roll laminator with stand

Hi Simon,

Thanks for getting in touch.

The laminator sold on eBay yesterday for Ł395 (pending payment)

If that falls through, I will email you if you'd like to purchase it.

Regards

Gray

This message will self-destruct in T-minus 3.14r seconds

On 21 Jan 2017, at 00:34, Simon via Gumtree Mail <Buyer. 1 sgplqhoxms68@reply. gumtree.com> wrote:

Dear Gray,

You have received a reply to your ad: Easy mount 720mm cold roll laminator with stand" posted in Other Office Equipment for Sale in "Bordon" .

From: Simon

Hello, I was just wondering if you still have the cold roll laminator with stand for sale and if you would be so kind to email such information.

Many Regards Simon

This message has been sent through Gumtree mail, which keeps your email address private. We recommend that you always reply via Gumtree messenger instead of private email addresses. If there is anything about the message that you think is suspicious, do not reply and make sure to report it to us. We want to look out for you, so we look into all reports and get back to you asap.

To make sure you have the best experience with us, here are a few top safety tips when buying and selling on Gumtree:

·         Try to meet face to face to have a look at the item you are buying and check the payment you are receiving

·         If you can't meet face to face use the PayPal 'Pay for goods and services' option to transfer money. This is covered by PayPal's Buyer Protection scheme.

·         Never click on links sent in an email or to login to Gumtree. These could be fraudulent so we always recommend to avoid - you should always access your account via the Gumtree homepage

·         Always check out our Stay Safe pages for more tips and latest safety info

From

The Gumtree Team

 

 

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Too Smooth - 01-02-2017 04-16

01/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 40        

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Too Smooth - 01-02-2017 04-16

01/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 40  

--

40,

From: C Panel for too smooth on toosmooth.co.uk <cpanel@toosmooth.co.uk>

Sent time: 01/02/2017 04:16:16 AM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [toosmooth.co.uk]

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is about to exceed its bandwidth limit (6.16 GB/6.84 GB)

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached 90% of its bandwidth limit (6.16 GB/6.84 GB).

·         Average bandwidth used per day: 203.41 MB

·         Projected monthly bandwidth usage: 6.16 GB

At the current rate of usage:

• The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is not expected to exceed their bandwidth limit.

The system generated this notice on Wednesday, February 1,2017 at 4:16:15 AM UTC.

You can disable the “Bandwidth Limits” type of notification through the cPanel interface: https://fiorano.websitewelcome.com:2083/frontend/x3/contact/index.html

Do not reply to this automated message.

CP

Copyright© 2017 cPanel, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

9.                    

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell02/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 41,42,43,44,45,46,47

 

9.                    

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell02/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 41,42,43,44,45,46,47

--

41,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: 2nd Letter to Simon Cordell, 31.1.17.pdf

Letter to Mr Simon Cordell, 28.11.16.docx

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Classification: OFFICIAL

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

42,

43,

 

 

 

 

 

44,

45,

46,

47,

 

 

 

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Sarah Fletcher Copy of letter sent to Mr Simon Cordell 

02/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 48,49,50

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Sarah Fletcher Copy of letter sent to Mr Simon Cordell       

02/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 48,49,50

--

48,

From: Sarah Fletcher <Sarah.Fletcher@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 February 2017 13:08

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL Copy of letter sent to Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Attachments: Access letter for 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of a letter hand delivered to Mr Simon Cordell at 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JQ yesterday regarding access to investigate low water pressure issue in the block.

Kind regards,

Sarah Fletcher

Neighbourhood Officer Neighbourhood Team 2 Edmonton Centre 36-44 South Mall

Telephone: 0800 40 80 160

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

49,

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL Copy of letter sent to Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE]

Access letter for 109 Burncroft Avenue

ENFIELD

Council

Council Housing the Edmonton Centre 35-44 South Mall Edmonton Green N9 OTN 0800 ,40 80 160

Date: 1st February 2017

Dear Mr Cordell

Re: Loss of water pressure/supply to neighbouring property Letter Hand Delivered

I called today in response to a report of loss of water pressure/supply into a flat and/or area above your property.

We urgently need to gain access into your property within the next 24 hours. We need to establish the source of the loss of water pressure/supply to the flat/area above, and which we believe may be emanating from your property.

What you must do:

Please contact the Repairs team in Customer Services on 0800 40 80 160 or 020 8379 1000 by 5.00pm Thursday 2nd February 2017 to make an appointment for our Contractor/Surveyor to inspect your property. Please quote reference no. 1772024/1.

Please be aware that in accordance with your tenancy agreement you will be liable for any damage caused by you or from your property to other properties, personal property or to the fabric of the building.

You will also be liable for our reasonable costs in dealing with this matter. EMERGENCY ACCESS

If we are unable to agree an appointment with you within the timescales we set and to prevent any further damage to neighbouring properties, to the block or to personal property* we reserve the right to gain emergency access to your property,

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver Street     

Phone: 0800 40 80 160

Enfield EN1 3XY      

Website: www.enfield.aov.uk

If you need this document in another language or format call Customer Services on 0800 40 80 160, or email

Simon Cordellcouncil.housing@enfield.gov.uk

109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield

Middlesex

EN37JQ

50,

ENFIELD

Council

which may involve a locksmith. You will be responsible for all of our reasonable costs if this action is required.

Please take immediate steps now to avoid further action and charges being incurred and to resolve the water pressure/supply issues as speedily as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Sarah Fletcher Neighbourhood Officer

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver Street

Enfield EN1 3XY

Phone: 0800 40 80 160

Website: www.enfield.Gov.uk

If you need this document in another language or format call Customer Services on 0800 40 80 160, or email

council.housing@enfield.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

731. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] (2) 1. 7 Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov Behaviour Allegations against Mr

06/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 51,52

 

 11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

731. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] (2) 1. 7 Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov Behaviour Allegations against Mr

06/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 51,52

--

51,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:56

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] (10.0 KB)

[Campaign]

http://www.enfield.gov.uk    

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

52,

Read: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]-> Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:55:40

Subject: Read: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Your message

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Chief Executive

Daniel Ellis

joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

joan@joanryan.org.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Sent: 06/02/2017 13:32

was read on 06/02/2017 13:55

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi FW Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

08/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61

 

12.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi FW Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

08/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61

--

53,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 08 February 2017 16:56

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Incident Diary.doc

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thank you for your email.

We have made enquiries with the Repairs Team and our contractors and they have advised that they did not send a contractor to 109 Burncroft Avenue this morning. We do not know who knocked on Mr Cordell's door and I can confirm that no Council official went to his flat at 8am this morning. Could you please provide the vehicle registration number to enable us to take up the matter with the police to try and identify who this person is.

I have also attached an anti-social behaviour incident diary for Mr Cordell to log any further incidences of noise disturbances and anti-social behaviour from his neighbours. He should please return completed logs to me by 23 February 2017. You also mentioned that you are keeping a full history of what has been going on, could you please forward a copy to me so that I can investigate accordingly.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 08 February 2017 10:38

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sarah Fletcher

Sarah.Fletcher@enfield.gov.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Joan@ioanryan.org.uk

Joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

Just an update email that I wanted to put to you today as it is very worrying, this morning at around 08:00 my son Mr Cordell's door knocked he was not expecting anyone, but went and shouted who was it without opening his door. the male replied I am from the council about the water, my son was not expecting anyone from the council and something did not feel right to my son and he asked the person to wait, he then made a call to the council to be told no one had been sent to his address by them, after the call to the council the male was not at his door, but my son heard people talking, one was his neighbour, just after this the male who came to my son's door went out of the block and got into a car which my son has got the registration for.

He does know which neighbour the person was talking to as I do. But at this time he feels too unsafe to give the person's door number.

Why should my son be made to feel so unsafe in his own home, please tell me why someone would come to my son's door and say they were the council?

This is getting way too much now, and Enfield Council needs to do something about it before my son gets hurt.

54,

My son is lucky he does not open the door to people and calls before opening his door to see who it is and does not go outside his flat as I feel something would have already happened to him.

And yes, we are keeping full history of what has been ongoing.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 07 February 2017 17:02

To: 'Lemmy Nwabuisi

Sarah.Fletcher@enfield.gov.uk

sallv.mcternan@enfield.gov.uk

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

Joan@joanryan.org.uk

Daniel Ellis

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

Thank you for the reply to my email and I look forward to getting the information by the 10/02/2017, I know that Dionne Grant is now dealing with the subject access request as Concetta who was dealing with it has had to take some leave.

Mr Cordell has not been up to his neighbours at 117 in fact he has only tried to help in the last few weeks by allowing people into his home due to the low water pressure. (Which I will state has nothing to do with my son flat)

The other day also another neighbour got around 7 of his friends to come and intimidate and harass my son for no apparent reason.

We will be asking for evidence which substantiates your allegations as to what the neighbours are stating in their complaints.

As clearly it seems from your below email as if you in fact believe what 117 is saying before even having addressed the issues. Does this mean you have seen evidence which substantiates 117 complaints?

Due to the complaints and how they have been set out this should be a matter for the police and my son should have been arrested.

Mr Cordell has been arrested and dismissed for some of accusation that you have wrote in your letters, So I hope there is evidence which substantiates these allegations.

We just need to see if any of the other complaint has been addressed by the police.

In fact my son has put a lot of complaints about his neighbours into the police himself, which also seem to never get addressed by police just like they never get addressed by Enfield Council, yet the neighbours’ complaints always get followed up instantly, I wonder why?

You have not again said what you will be doing about no flooring on the 2 flats above my son. Is anything ever going to be done or does he need to live being tormented, intimidate, and harassed by the neighbours with nothing being done by Enfield Council every day he lives there?

It is not Mr Cordell harassing his neighbours it is the neighbours tormenting, intimidate and harassing him and Enfield Council is doing nothing about, it is starting to seem like a witch hunt until they and Enfield Council get him out of his flat.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 07 February 2017 14:09

To: Lorraine Cordell

55,

Cc: Sarah Fletcher

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thank you for your email.

I will put the complaints in the format you have requested and emailed same to you by Friday 10 February 2017 and a copy will be sent to Mr Cordell's address. I will also schedule another appointment as we need to discuss these allegations with Mr Cordell.

In the meant time, we are continuing to receive reports from the residents of 117 Burncroft Avenue that Mr Cordell is coming up to their front door to shout abuse and threaten them. Could you please ask Mr Cordell to refrain from doing this. He should contact his neighbourhood officer, the Anti-Social Behaviour Team, or the Enfield Council noise team if he has any complaints about noise disturbances or any other type of anti-social behaviour against his neighbours instead of confronting them. If the behaviour persists then the council will have no option but to take out an injunction against him to stop him from harassing his neighbours.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

Joan@ioanryan.org.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email to say you have stated in your last letter the subject access request has been dealt with, but we are still waiting for the data.

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and yet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

·         Complaint from A on date and Time: Body of complaint from A.

·         Complaint from B on date and Time: Body of complaint from B.

·         Complaint from C on date and time: Body of complaint from C

And it can carry on like this until all complaints are listed. As at this time you have just listed complaints, and failed to supply

56,

any other information.

If I can get this back today, I would be most grateful, as it has been asked for before.

Also we have said this before more than once on calls and emails, the person's living at 113 and 117 I believe which is the 2 people living on top of my son, 113 has since he moved in no carpet put down and also his floor broads needs fixing, 117 which is the top floor has laid wooden flooring, due to the way these flats have no sound proofing in between floors and only wooden flooring due to how they were built, we were thinking this would have already been addressed and has not and the

neighbours have been allowed to keep the flooring the way it is, my son can hear everything and only feels nothing has been done as Enfield Council wants my son health to get worse and also to make him suffer.

As for the date of the 09/02/2017 as stated before until we have had all dates and times and body of complaints and the subject access request, I still do not feel it is justified my son has a meeting as he will be walking into a meeting only with very limited information, and due to his health which is being caused by his neighbours and Enfield Council doing nothing I feel my son is only being setup due to issues and the colour of my son's skin. And this is why no one from Enfield council has ever taken a report from him about what has been ongoing form a long time ago.

We want to clear this up as much as you do, but it seems Enfield Council is not fulfilling what we have asked for in order to be able to do this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

57,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

58,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

59,

60,

61,

12856 12.7.12

SE NOTE -UNSIGNED/ INCOMPLETE LOGS WILL BE RETURNED FOR COMPLETION

 

 

 

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

745. x2 Lemmy Nwabuisi _Re_ Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (3)

08/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70

 

 13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

745. x2 Lemmy Nwabuisi _Re_ Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (3)

08/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70

--

62,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 08 February 2017 16:56

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Incident Diary.doc

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thank you for your email.

We have made enquiries with the Repairs Team and our contractors and they have advised that they did not send a contractor to 109 Burncroft Avenue this morning. We do not know who knocked on Mr Cordell's door and I can confirm that no Council official went to his flat at 8am this morning. Could you please provide the vehicle registration number to enable us to take up the matter with the police to try and identify who this person is.

I have also attached an anti-social behaviour incident diary for Mr Cordell to log any further incidences of noise disturbances and anti-social behaviour from his neighbours. He should please return completed logs to me by 23 February 2017. You also mentioned that you are keeping a full history of what has been going on, could you please forward a copy to me so that I can investigate accordingly.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 08 February 2017 10:38

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sarah Fletcher

Sarah.Fletcher@enfield.gov.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Joan@ioanryan.org.uk

Joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

Just an update email that I wanted to put to you today as it is very worrying, this morning at around 08:00 my son Mr Cordell's door knocked he was not expecting anyone, but went and shouted who was it without opening his door. the male replied I am from the council about the water, my son was not expecting anyone from the council and something did not feel right to my son and he asked the person to wait, he then made a call to the council to be told no one had been sent to his address by them, after the call to the council the male was not at his door, but my son heard people talking, one was his neighbour, just after this the male who came to my son's door went out of the block and got into a car which my son has got the registration for.

He does know which neighbour the person was talking to as I do. But at this time he feels too unsafe to give the person's door number.

Why should my son be made to feel so unsafe in his own home, please tell me why someone would come to my son's door and say they were the council?

63,

Same as Above!

64,

Same as Above!

65,66,67,68,69,70,

 

 

 

 

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

Mother Bit Coins 09-02-2017 --03-17

09/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 71,72   

 

14.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

Mother Bit Coins 09-02-2017 --03-17

09/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 71,72

--

71,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 09/02/2017 03:17:53 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: see docs not sure let me know

Attachments: Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Passport-Police.pdf

Here see attached licence and passport

I am not sure what to do here maybe you just have to attach your ID Simon I no good with bit coins mum

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 09 February 2017 12:06

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Can u please take a look

I need to sign up to this for bitcoins and need to send my id can you please help as you have the only copy

Password is: A

Account details are: re_wired@ymail.com

web site URL is: https://spectrocoin.com

Get free bitcoin wallet

Bitcoin exchange, bitcoin wallet and bitcoin debit card. Buy and sell bitcoins anywhere

Instructions once logged in : https://spectrocoin.com/en/how-to-buy-bitcoin.html I would be grateful if you can help me thanks Si

72,      

Driving Licence!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 1

Lemmy NWABUISI @enfielviour Allegations against Mr S

16/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 73,74,75,76,77,78       

 

15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 1

Lemmy NWABUISI @enfielviour Allegations against Mr S

16/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 73,74,75,76,77,78 

--

73,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 16 February 2017 14:13

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: 3rd Letter to Mr Cordell, 16.2.17.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of a letter inviting Mr Simon Cordell to meet with me at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 to discuss the allegations made against him by some of his neighbours.

The original copy of the letter will be hand delivered to his home address today.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Sent: 10 February 2017 16:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see below as requested the details of recent allegations made against Mr Simon Cordell. I have listed the complainants as Complainant A, B and C.

1.      On 6th August 2016 Complainant A reported that Simon Cordell, his neighbour at flat 109 is threatening him and his wife and aggressively demanding money from him. He alleged that Mr Cordell called his wife 'a bitch' and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat. He also alleged that in July 2016, someone used a knife to puncture his tyres, all 4 of them, that he believes that the tyres were slashed by Simon, that although he did not see Simon do it but he was quite certain that it was him. He also alleged that Mr Cordell damaged the lock to his electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity.

2.      On 5th October 2016 Complainant B reported that Mr Cordell has been harassing him for a while in relation to alleged noise disturbances from his flat. He alleged that the previous day on 4/10/16, Simon was banging on his ceiling and later came upstairs and started kicking his door and shouting aggressively. He alleged that Simon then went downstairs dragged his motorbike from where he parked it and started smashing it up. He then called the police. He also stated that Mr Cordell had previously slashed his motorbike tyres with a knife, that he did not report it as he did not see him do it.

3.      On 31st October 2016 telephone call received from another resident on behalf of Complainant C. He alleged that

74,

Complainant C's neighbour, Simon was using threatening, abusive, and insulting words towards Complainant C. He stated that he witnessed an incident that happened in September 2016 outside the block when Simon shouted abuse at Complainant C and made threats towards him.

4.      On 4th November 2016 met with Complainant C to discuss his concerns following the report from another resident. He stated the first incident happened sometime in July 2016, that he cannot remember the exact date. He alleged that he was approached by Mr Cordell as he came out of his front door and he started shouting abuse at him and threatened to burn down his flat. He alleged that the second incident happened in September 2016. He stated that he was on his way to meet a friend when Mr Cordell came at him 'ranting and raving' and said to him 'I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk'. He stated that two other neighbours witnessed the incident and that one of them told Mr Cordell to leave him alone. Complainant C also complained that Mr Cordell have installed a CCTV on the internal communal door and that he believes that he is monitoring his every move. He asked that the camera be removed as it is making him to feel very nervous, vulnerable, and uncomfortable and is an invasion of his privacy.

5.      On 11th November 2016 the Neighbourhood Officer met with Complainant A to discuss his allegations against Mr Cordell. He stated that some of the recent incidents happened on 6/8/16 at 6pm, 27/9/16 at 11.45pm and 28/9/16 at 5.30pm. He stated that the incidents include, threatening behaviour, intimidation, and aggressively demanding money. He alleged that Mr Cordell has physically threatened him in the past with a piece of wood. He also alleged that Mr Cordell has a big dog that always barks when someone comes into the block. He complained that Mr Cordell has a camera in the internal communal door facing the main entrance door to the block. He stated that he believes that Mr Cordell is using the camera to monitor when people come in or out of the block and that it makes him very uncomfortable and requested for the camera to be removed.

6.      On 8/12/16 Complainant A reported that Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door, shouted abuse, and threats at him and accused him of making noise.

7.      On 12/1/16 Complainant B reported that on 11/12/16, Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door on three different occasions and accused him of banging on the pipes. He alleged that he also shouted abuse and threats at him.

8.      On 14/12/16 Complainant C reported that one of his neighbours visited him and as she rang his doorbell Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse at her. He also alleged that Mr Cordell shouted that he would take some action when his ASBO expires.

9.      On 23/12/16 Complainant A reported that his wife was at home alone with their child between 3.45pm when Mr Cordell came and knocked on his front door, started to shout abuse and asked his wife to go in the bathroom and turn off the tap. He also alleged that Mr Cordell later removed his electricity fuse thereby cutting their power supply.

10.  On 10/1/17 Complainant A telephoned to report that on 26/12/16 at about 12 to 1pm he was going out with his family when Mr Cordell ran up the stairs with a towel round his waist and started shouting abuse and threats at him and his wife. He alleged that Mr Cordell accused him of tampering with his water supply and tried to stop them from leaving the block. He also stated that on 3/1/17 at 10.47pm, he was coming back from a family outing and as soon as they entered the block, Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse and threats at him.

11.  On 23/1/17 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 6.24pm on 21/1/17. He alleged that his wife was at home with their child when Mr Cordell come and started banging on his front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused them of making noise.

12.  On 1st February 2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 5.10pm on 31/1/17. He alleged that his wife was alone with his child at home when Mr Cordell came and banged on his door and started shouting abuse and threats and accused them of banging on the floor.

13.  I will write to Mr Cordell next week to arrange for him to meet with me and another colleague at the Civic Centre to discuss the allegations made against him.

75,

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

Joan@ioanryan.org.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTeman@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email to say you have stated in your last letter the subject access request has been dealt with, but we are still waiting for the data.

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and yet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

·         Complaint from A on date and Time: Body of complaint from A.

·         Complaint from B on date and Time: Body of complaint from B.

·         Complaint from C on date and time: Body of complaint from C

And it can carry on like this until all complaints are listed. As at this time you have just listed complaints and failed to supply any other information.

If I can get this back today, I would be most grateful, as it has been asked for before.

Also we have said this before more than once on calls and emails, the person's living at 113 and 117 I believe which is the 2 people living on top of my son, 113 has since he moved in no carpet put down and also his floor broads needs fixing, 117 which is the top floor has laid wooden flooring, due to the way these flats have no sound proofing in between floors and only wooden flooring due to how they were built, we were thinking this would have already been addressed and has not and the

neighbours have been allowed to keep the flooring the way it is, my son can hear everything and only feels nothing has been done as Enfield Council wants my son health to get worse and also to make him suffer.

As for the date of the 09/02/2017 as stated before until we have had all dates and times and body of complaints and the subject access request, I still do not feel it is justified my son has a meeting as he will be walking into a meeting only with very limited information, and due to his health which is being caused by his neighbours and Enfield Council doing nothing I feel my son is only being setup due to issues and the colour of my son's skin. And this is why no one from Enfield council has ever taken a report from him about what has been ongoing form a long time ago.

We want to clear this up as much as you do, but it seems Enfield Council is not fulfilling what we have asked for in order to be able to do this.

Regards

76,

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain

77,

privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

78,

 

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20719 22-02-2017 14-34

22/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 79,80

 

 

16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20719 22-02-2017 14-34

22/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 79,80

--

79,

From: customerservice@colorgate.com

Sent time: 22/02/2017 02:34:28 PM

To: Simon Cordell <re_wired@ymail.com>

Cc: stephanie.brown@colorgate.com

Subject: [RE:] Contact – Color GATE

Dear Simon,

thanks for your email and your interest in our RIP-Software.

My colleague, Stephanie Brown, takes care about your request.

Kind regards

Jennifer Wecke Customer Service

Flexibility, performance and Color Management - All highlights of Version 10 https://www.colorgate.com/version-10-highlights/

10th GENERATION

Rapid Spectro Cube - an extremely fast Color measurement and profiling system https://www.colorgate.com/rapid-spectro-cube-rsc/

Color GATE Digital Output Solutions

Ph: +49 511 942 93 0

Fax: +49 511 942 93 40

Email: jennifer.wecke@colorgate.com

Thank you for visiting: www.ColorGate.com

Visit us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ColorGATE

Hannover - HRB 56616 VAT-No.: DE 190 902156 /Managing Director:

Thomas Kirschner

80,

Simon Cordell re wired@ymail.com

am: 20.02.2017 15:20:29

Contact: Color GATE

Color GATE GmbH contactform-processors@colorgate.com

Company TS Enterprise Salutation Mr.

First name Simon

Name   Cordell

Department Print Service Provider (PSP)

Country UK Email re_wired@ymail.com

RIP Software PS

 

 

 

 

 

 

17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26350 23-02-2017 14-29

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 81        

 

 17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26350 23-02-2017 14-29

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 81

--

81,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 02:28:49 PM

To: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Subject: Re: Re software

OK thank you, but I feel as if you have yet to answer my questions, is there a trial version available to the general public so that any person can test the software before purchasing it and is there a discount for the use of ps10 for educational purposes.

Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 14:20, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

I will put you in touch with a reseller of our software. Jan Edgecombe sells P10 and can provide you with a quote for a product best suited to your needs.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:57

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re software

Dear Stephanie

I am grateful for your offer in relation towards the courses that Colgate supply I am however reluctant and have to decline. I have however spent much time in studying the management and development of icc profiles and the nesting of images and no I have learnt a fair understanding so to understand what I need to no "to get around" and therefore believe with the support available that is online that I will be able to achieve the basics I need within in using Colgate software's, so to manage my goals set, this is to say that one day I may take one of the courses available if I find any hardship. please if possible, can you answer my last questions emailed to yourself s in the past email.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-4816 23-02-2017 13-39

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 82,83

 

 18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-4816 23-02-2017 13-39

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 82,83

--

82,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 01:39:21 PM

To: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Subject: Re: Color GATE - Contact request - TS Enterprise

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 13:23, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

It might be an idea for you to attend this course - follow link. There are only three remaining places. This will give you an excellent overview of what our products offer.

http://www.digital2business.co.uk/digital-academv/the-digital-academv-colorgate-productionserver-10-highlights-

workshop

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:13

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re: Color GATE - Contact request - TS Enterprise

Hello I hope all is well for you, I am interested in a trial version of your software ps10 as I would like to be able to test it, so to be able to provide the best of quality prints on media such as canvas and high quality paper this is to be inclusive of adhesive vinyl, this is for car warping and such activity's.

I am soon to be a starting company but am not yet, in the printing industry that is to say. I have obtained two printers fully re serviced there makes and models are canon w8400 d and a canon w8400 PGI am also questioning whether you provide a discount with the ps10 software when purchased for educational purposes and if so, what would the price be.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

On Wednesday, 22 February 2017, 15:51, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@coloraate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

Thank you for your interest in our Color GATE products. How can I be of assistance?

Best regards Stephanie

Flexibility, performance and Color Management - All highlights of Version 10 https://www.coloraate.com/version-10-hiahliahts/

10th GENERATION

Rapid Spectro Cube - an extremely fast Color measurement and profiling system https://www.colorgate.com/rapid-spectro-cube-rsc/

83,

RAPID “SPECTRO CUBE

Color GATE

Stephanie Brown Strategic Account Manager

Mobile: +44 (0) 7778 146387

Landline: +44 (0)1732 674729

E-Mail: stephanie.brown@colorgate.com

Thank you for visiting www.ColorGATE.com

Visit us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ColorGATE

Head office

Color GATE Digital Output Solutions

phone: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 0 –

Fax: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 40

Thank you for visiting www.colorgate.com

Hannover - HRB 56616

VAT-No: DE 190 902 156

Managing Director: Thomas Kirschner

 

 

 

 

 

19.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20721 23-02-2017 13-24

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 84,85

 

 19.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20721 23-02-2017 13-24

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 84,85

--

84,

From: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 01:23:45 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Color GATE - Contact request - TS Enterprise

Dear Simon

It might be an idea for you to attend this course - follow link. There are only three remaining places. This will give you an excellent overview of what our products offer.

http://www.digital2business.co.uk/digital-academv/the-digital-academv-colorgate-productionserver-10-highlights-

workshop

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:13

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re: Color GATE - Contact request - TS Enterprise

Hello I hope all is well for you, I am interested in a trial version of your software ps10 as I would like to be able to test it, so to be able to provide the best of quality prints on media such as canvas and high quality paper this is to be inclusive of adhesive vinyl, this is for car warping and such activity's.

I am soon to be a starting company but am not yet, in the printing industry that is to say. I have obtained two printers fully re serviced there makes and models are canon w8400 d and a canon w8400 PGI am also questioning whether you provide a discount with the ps10 software when purchased for educational purposes and if so, what would the price be.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

On Wednesday, 22 February 2017, 15:51, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@coloraate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

Thank you for your interest in our Color GATE products. How can I be of assistance?

Best regards Stephanie

Flexibility, performance and Color Management - All highlights of Version 10 https://www.coloraate.com/version-10-hiahliahts/

10th GENERATION

Rapid Spectro Cube - an extremely fast Color measurement and profiling system https://www.colorgate.com/rapid-spectro-cube-rsc/

85,

RAPID “SPECTRO CUBE

Color GATE

Stephanie Brown Strategic Account Manager

Mobile: +44 (0) 7778 146387

Landline: +44 (0)1732 674729

E-Mail: stephanie.brown@colorgate.com

Thank you for visiting www.ColorGATE.com

Visit us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ColorGATE

Head office

Color GATE Digital Output Solutions

phone: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 0 –

Fax: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 40

Thank you for visiting www.colorgate.com

Hannover - HRB 56616

VAT-No: DE 190 902 156

Managing Director: Thomas Kirschner

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20722 23-02-2017 14-21

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 86

 

 20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20722 23-02-2017 14-21

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 86

--

86,

From: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 02:20:52 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Cc: Jan Edgecombe <sales@revolutiontransfers.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Re software

Dear Simon

I will put you in touch with a reseller of our software. Jan Edgecombe sells P10 and can provide you with a quote for a product best suited to your needs.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:57

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re software

Dear Stephanie

I am grateful for your offer in relation towards the courses that Colgate supply I am however reluctant and have to decline. I have however spent much time in studying the management and development of icc profiles and the nesting of images and no I have learnt a fair understanding so to understand what I need to no "to get around" and therefore believe with the support available that is online that I will be able to achieve the basics I need within in using Colgate software's, so to manage my goals set, this is to say that one day I may take one of the courses available if I find any hardship. please if possible, can you answer my last questions emailed to yourself s in the past email.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20723 23-02-2017 14-46

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 87

 

 21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20723 23-02-2017 14-46

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 87

--

87,

From: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 02:45:59 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Cc: Jan Edgecombe <sales@revolutiontransfers.co.uk>; customer service customerservice@colorgate.com

Subject: RE: Re software

Dear Mr Cordell

We have offers for established educational organisations that we partner with. We have test licenses of our software.

Jan would be able to establish your requirements and produce a quote. If you feel that the product specification is appropriate and the quote is affordable, we will offer a 30-day trial of the software. Our strategy is designed to be cost and time efficient for all parties.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 14:29

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re: Re software

OK thank you, but I feel as if you have yet to answer my questions, is there a trial version available to the general public so that any person can test the software before purchasing it and is there a discount for the use of ps10 for educational purposes.

Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 14:20, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

I will put you in touch with a reseller of our software. Jan Edgecombe sells P10 and can provide you with a quote for a product best suited to your needs.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto:re wired@vmail.com

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:57

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re software

Dear Stephanie

I am grateful for your offer in relation towards the courses that Colgate supply I am however reluctant and have to decline. I have however spent much time in studying the management and development of icc profiles and the nesting of images and no I have learnt a fair understanding so to understand what I need to no "to get around" and therefore believe with the support available that is online that I will be able to achieve the basics I need within in using Colgate software's, so to manage my goals set, this is to say that one day I may take one of the courses available if I find any hardship. please if possible, can you answer my last questions emailed to yourself s in the past email.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

22.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20724 23-02-2017 17-06

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 88,89

 

 22.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-20724 23-02-2017 17-06

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 88,89

--

88,

From: Jan Edgecombe <sales@revolutiontransfers.co.uk>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 05:05:35 PM

To: Stephanie Brown <stephanie.brown@colorgate.com>

Cc: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com

customer service customerservice@colorgate.com

Subject: Re: Re software

Dear Mr Cordell

Please call me if you need to discuss the trial and how I can help you.

Kind regards Jan

Jan Edgecombe - Managing Director

Mob. 07973 131 665

Ph. 01530 510080

Free. 0800 298 5086

Email. sales@revolutiontransfers.co.uk

Web.   revolutiontransfers.co.uk

Transfers Heat Press Garment Supply

The Factory, 43 North Avenue, Coalville, Leics, LE67 3QX

Revolution

Transfers

On 23 Feb 2017, at 14:45, Stephanie Brown <stephanie.brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

We have offers for established educational organisations that we partner with. We have test licenses of our software.

Jan would be able to establish your requirements and produce a quote. If you feel that the product specification is appropriate and the quote is affordable, we will offer a 30-day trial of the software. Our strategy is designed to be cost and time efficient for all parties.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired mailto: re wired@vmail.com

Sent: 23 February 2017 14:29

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re: Re software

OK thank you, but I feel as if you have yet to answer my questions, is there a trial version available to the general public so that any person can test the software before purchasing it and is there a discount for the use of ps10 for educational purposes.

Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 14:20, Stephanie Brown

Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

89,

I will put you in touch with a reseller of our software. Jan Edgecombe sells P10 and can provide you with a quote for a product best suited to your needs.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired mailto: re wired@ymail.com

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:57

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re software

Dear Stephanie

I am grateful for your offer in relation towards the courses that Colgate supply I am however reluctant and have to decline. I have however spent much time in studying the management and development of icc profiles and the nesting of images and no I have learnt a fair understanding so to understand what I need to no "to get around" and therefore believe with the support available that is online that I will be able to achieve the basics I need within in using Colgate software's, so to manage my goals set, this is to say that one day I may take one of the courses available if I find any hardship. please if possible, can you answer my last questions emailed to yourself s in the past email.

Kind regards

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26347 23-02-2017 13-13

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 90

 

 23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26347 23-02-2017 13-13

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 90

--

90,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 01:13:01 PM

To: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Subject: Re: Color GATE - Contact request - TS Enterprise

Hello I hope all is well for you, I am interested in a trial version of your software ps10 as I would like to be able to test it, so to be able to provide the best of quality prints on media such as canvas and high quality paper this is to be inclusive of adhesive vinyl, this is for car warping and such activity's.

I am soon to be a starting company but am not yet, in the printing industry that is to say. I have obtained two printers fully re serviced there makes and models are canon w8400 d and a canon w8400 pg. I am also questioning whether you provide a discount with the ps10 software when purchased for educational purposes and if so, what would the price be.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

On Wednesday, 22 February 2017, 15:51, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

Thank you for your interest in our Color GATE products. How can I be of assistance?

Best regards Stephanie

Flexibility, performance and Color Management - All highlights of Version 10 https://www.colorgate.com/version-10-highlights/

10th GENERATION

Rapid Spectro Cube - an extremely fast Color measurement and profiling system https://www.colorgate.com/rapid-spectro-cube-rsc/

Color GATE

Stephanie Brown Strategic Account Manager

Mobile: +44 (0) 7778 146387

Landline: +44 (0)1732 674729

E-Mail: stephanie.brown@colorgate.com

Thank you for visiting www.ColorGATE.com

Visit us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ColorGATE

Head office

Color GATE Digital Output Solutions

Phone: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 0 –

Fax: +49/ (0) 511 942 93 40

Thank you for visiting www.colorgate.com

Hannover - HRB 56616

VAT-No.: DE 190 902 156

Managing Director:

Thomas Kirschner

 

 

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26351 23-02-2017 14-54

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 91

 

 24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Color GATE -1-26351 23-02-2017 14-54

23/02/2017

/ Page Numbers: 91

--

91,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 23/02/2017 02:54:17 PM

To: Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com>

Subject: Re: Re software

Thank you, I now understand what I need to know and I now ask can you please forwarded me Jan's contact details as I would like to place my order with yourself if all goes well.

Kind regards

Mr Simon Cordell

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 14:46, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

We have offers for established educational organisations that we partner with. We have test licenses of our software.

Jan would be able to establish your requirements and produce a quote. If you feel that the product specification is appropriate and the quote is affordable, we will offer a 30-day trial of the software. Our strategy is designed to be cost and time efficient for all parties.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 February 2017 14:29

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re: Re software

OK thank you, but I feel as if you have yet to answer my questions, is there a trial version available to the general public so that any person can test the software before purchasing it and is there a discount for the use of ps10 for educational purposes.

Thanks

Mr Simon Cordell

On Thursday, 23 February 2017, 14:20, Stephanie Brown <Stephanie.Brown@colorgate.com> wrote:

Dear Simon

I will put you in touch with a reseller of our software. Jan Edgecombe sells P10 and can provide you with a quote for a product best suited to your needs.

Best regards Stephanie

From: Rewired [mailto:re wired@vmail.com

Sent: 23 February 2017 13:57

To: Stephanie Brown

Subject: Re software

Dear Stephanie

I am grateful for your offer in relation towards the courses that Colgate supply I am however reluctant and have to decline. I have however spent much time in studying the management and development of icc profiles and the nesting of images and no I have learnt a fair understanding so to understand what I need to no "to get around" and therefore believe with the support available that is online that I will be able to achieve the basics I need within in using Colgate software's, so to manage my goals set, this is to say that one day I may take one of the courses available if I find any hardship. please if possible, can you answer my last questions emailed to yourself s in the past email.

Kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 2.

Shiraz Software 08-03-2017 -07-40

08/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 92

 

 25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 2.

Shiraz Software 08-03-2017 -07-40

08/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 92

--

92,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 08/03/2017 07:40:19 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: [ORDERS #49122]: RE: Student Discount Shiraz Focus

Here is the information for download and activate

From: Shiraz Software [mailto: orders@shiraz-software.com]

Sent: 08 March 2017 11:43

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: [ORDERS #49122]: RE: Student Discount Shiraz Focus Thank you for your recent order.

You can download the required software from the links below:

Win:

http://storage.shiraz-software.com/Focus/Focus-V4.1.17010-windows-installer.zip

Mac:

http://storage.shiraz-software.com/Focus/Focus-V4.1.17010-osx-installer.zip To activate the new software please use the following License ID code:

343600

Should you have any questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind Regards

Shiraz Software

info@shiraz-software.com

www.shiraz-software.com

Ticket Details

Ticket ID: 49122

Department: Orders

Type: Task

Status: Open

Priority: High

Helpdesk: http://shiraz.helpserve.com/Default

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Too Smooth -1-3987 12-03-2017 04-19

12/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 93

 

 26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Too Smooth -1-3987 12-03-2017 04-19

12/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 93

--

93,

From: cPanel for too smooth on toosmooth.co.uk <cpanel@toosmooth.co.uk>

Sent time: 12/03/2017 04:18:58 AM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk;

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [toosmooth.co.uk]

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is about to exceed its bandwidth limit (6.38 GB/6.84 GB)

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached 90% of its bandwidth limit (6.38 GB/6.84 GB).

Average bandwidth used per day: 593.69 MB Projected monthly bandwidth usage: 17.97 GB

At the current rate of usage:

· The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is expected to reach its bandwidth limit on 3/11/17.

· The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is expected to exceed its bandwidth limit by 11.14 GB.

The system generated this notice on Sunday, March 12, 2017 at 4:18:57 AM UTC.

You can disable the “Bandwidth Limits” type of notification through the cPanel interface: https://fiorano.websitewelcome.com:2083/frontend/x3/contact/index.html

Do not reply to this automated message.

Copyright© 2017 cPanel, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Too Smooth -1-3988 13-03-2017 03-17

13/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 94        

 

 27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Too Smooth -1-3988 13-03-2017 03-17

13/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 94  

--

94,

From: cPanel for too smooth on toosmooth.co.uk <cpanel@toosmooth.co.uk>

Sent time: 13/03/2017 03:16:42 AM

To:  lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk; re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [toosmooth.co.uk]

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached its bandwidth limit (7.34 GB/6.84 GB)

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached its bandwidth limit (7.34 GB/6.84 GB).

·         Contact your system administrator as soon as possible.

The system generated this notice on Monday, March 13, 2017 at 3:16:41 AM UTC.

You can disable the “Bandwidth Limits” type of notification through the cPanel interface: https://fiorano.websitewelcome.com:2083/frontend/x3/contact/index.html

Do not reply to this automated message.

CP

Copyright© 2017 cPanel, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

16/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104

 

28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

16/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104

--

95,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 16 March 2017 14:12

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: 4th Letter to Mr Cordell, 16.3.17.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Simon Cordell inviting him to a meeting with me and my line manager to discuss the allegations made against him by his neighbours. The original copy will be sent to Mr Cordell.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354 Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:51

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi, I will get back to you with a date.

But I am very upset at what is on file within the subject access request it seems as if you put everything onto Mr Cordell and large amounts of data is missing.

Like the information about Deborah Andrews this is incorrect, and the only reason we have found out about this is due to the subject access request.

But there are lots of emails that are missing that I sent about Deborah Andrews and what the neighbours were doing, that are dated before any complaints went in from Deborah Andrews and the neighbours. yet nothing was done for Mr Cordell about this.

Also there is missing dates and times of complaints, as to when things were meant to have happened and what time they were meant to have happened why?

I do have many issues, with the report and why no emails are in the subject access request that was put in by me that are dated well before the neighbours put complaints in yet Enfield Council done nothing about this, There is also no phone calls I made or my son made, but as soon as the neighbours put complaints in these were taken up right away by Enfield Council.

I will get back to you with a date I am due to see someone on the 09/03/2017 when I will be showing them all the information. So it will need to be after this date. Dionne Grant has also got until the 02/03/2017 to deal with the subject access request and if I have not heard anything by this date, I will pass this on to the ICO.

Regards

96,

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:18

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thanks for your email.

Could you please confirm when you and Mr Cordell are able to meet with me within the next 14 days. As stated in my previous letters, the allegations are serious breach of tenancy conditions and we need to give Mr Cordell the opportunity to respond to them before a decision is made on how to proceed.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 10:06

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am sorry for the late information, but we will not be able to attend today at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 due to private family reasons.

I am also very upset to see how the subject access request has been handled, as I said to you last week, I have not had use of my main computer due to work being carried out on my home. I have sent Dionne Grant giving 14 days or I will take it to the ICO and have not had a reply yet to the email I sent.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 16 February 2017 14:13

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

97,

Please find attached a copy of a letter inviting Mr Simon Cordell to meet with me at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 to discuss the allegations made against him by some of his neighbours.

The original copy of the letter will be hand delivered to his home address today.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Sent: 10 February 2017 16:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see below as requested the details of recent allegations made against Mr Simon Cordell. I have listed the complainants as Complainant A, B and C.

· On 6th August 2016 Complainant A reported that Simon Cordell, his neighbour at flat 109 is threatening him and his wife and aggressively demanding money from him. He alleged that Mr Cordell called his wife 'a bitch' and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat. He also alleged that in July 2016, someone used a knife to puncture his tyres, all 4 of them, that he believes that the tyres were slashed by Simon, that although he did not see Simon do it but he was quite certain that it was him. He also alleged that Mr Cordell damaged the lock to his electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity.

· On 5th October 2016 Complainant B reported that Mr Cordell has been harassing him for a while in relation to alleged noise disturbances from his flat. He alleged that the previous day on 4/10/16, Simon was banging on his ceiling and later came upstairs and started kicking his door and shouting aggressively. He alleged that Simon then went downstairs dragged his motorbike from where he parked it and started smashing it up. He then called the police. He also stated that Mr Cordell had previously slashed his motorbike tyres with a knife, that he did not report it as he did not see him do it.

· On 31st October 2016 telephone call received from another resident on behalf of Complainant C. He alleged that Complainant C's neighbour, Simon was using threatening, abusive, and insulting words towards Complainant C. He stated that he witnessed an incident that happened in September 2016 outside the block when Simon shouted abuse at Complainant C and made threats towards him.

· On 4th November 2016 met with Complainant C to discuss his concerns following the report from another resident. He stated the first incident happened sometime in July 2016, that he cannot remember the exact date. He alleged that he was approached by Mr Cordell as he came out of his front door and he started shouting abuse at him and threatened to burn down his flat. He alleged that the second incident happened in September 2016. He stated that he was on his way to meet a friend when Mr Cordell came at him 'ranting and raving' and said to him 'I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk'. He stated that two other neighbours witnessed the incident and that one of them told Mr Cordell to

98,

leave him alone. Complainant C also complained that Mr Cordell have installed a CCTV on the internal communal door and that he believes that he is monitoring his every move. He asked that the camera be removed as it is making him to feel very nervous, vulnerable, and uncomfortable and is an invasion of his privacy.

· On 11th November 2016 the Neighbourhood Officer met with Complainant A to discuss his allegations against Mr Cordell. He stated that some of the recent incidents happened on 6/8/16 at 6pm, 27/9/16 at 11.45pm and 28/9/16 at 5.30pm. He stated that the incidents include, threatening behaviour, intimidation, and aggressively demanding money. He alleged that Mr Cordell has physically threatened him in the past with a piece of wood. He also alleged that Mr Cordell has a big dog that always barks when someone comes into the block. He complained that Mr Cordell has a camera in the internal communal door facing the main entrance door to the block. He stated that he believes that Mr Cordell is using the camera to monitor when people come in or out of the block and that it makes him very uncomfortable and requested for the camera to be removed.

· On 8/12/16 Complainant A reported that Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door, shouted abuse, and threats at him and accused him of making noise.

· On 12/1/16 Complainant B reported that on 11/12/16, Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door on three different occasions and accused him of banging on the pipes. He alleged that he also shouted abuse and threats at him.

· On 14/12/16 Complainant C reported that one of his neighbours visited him and as she rang his doorbell Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse at her. He also alleged that Mr Cordell shouted that he would take some action when his ASBO expires.

· On 23/12/16 Complainant A reported that his wife was at home alone with their child between 3.45pm when Mr Cordell came and knocked on his front door, started to shout abuse and asked his wife to go in the bathroom and turn off the tap. He also alleged that Mr Cordell later removed his electricity fuse thereby cutting their power supply.

· On 10/1/17 Complainant A telephoned to report that on 26/12/16 at about 12 to 1pm he was going out with his family when Mr Cordell ran up the stairs with a towel round his waist and started shouting abuse and threats at him and his wife. He alleged that Mr Cordell accused him of tampering with his water supply and tried to stop them from leaving the block. He also stated that on 3/1/17 at 10.47pm, he was coming back from a family outing and as soon as they entered the block, Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse and threats at him.

· On 23/1/17 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 6.24pm on 21/1/17. He alleged that his wife was at home with their child when Mr Cordell come and started banging on his front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused them of making noise.

· On 1st February 2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 5.10pm on 31/1/17. He alleged that his wife was alone with his child at home when Mr Cordell came and banged on his door and started shouting abuse and threats and accused them of banging on the floor.

I will write to Mr Cordell next week to arrange for him to meet with me and another colleague at the Civic Centre to discuss the allegations made against him.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

99,

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmv.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

joan.rvan.mp@parliament.uk

ioan@ioanrvan.org.uk

Sally McTernan

Sallv.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email to say you have stated in your last letter the subject access request has been dealt with, but we are still waiting for the data.

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and vet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

·         Complaint from A on date and Time: Body of complaint from A.

·         Complaint from B on date and Time: Body of complaint from B.

·         Complaint from C on date and time: Body of complaint from C

And it can carry on like this until all complaints are listed. As at this time you have just listed complaints and failed to supply any other information.

If I can get this back today, I would be most grateful, as it has been asked for before.

Also we have said this before more than once on calls and emails, the person's living at 113 and 117 I believe which is the 2 people living on top of mv son, 113 has since he moved in no carpet put down and also his floor broads needs fixing, 117 which is the top floor has laid wooden flooring, due to the wav these flats have no sound proofing in between floors and only wooden flooring due to how they were built, we were thinking this would have already been addressed and has not and the

neighbours have been allowed to keep the flooring the way it is, mv son can hear everything and on^ feels nothing has been done as Enfield Council wants mv son health to get worse and also to make him suffer.

As for the date of the 09/02/2017 as stated before until we have had all dates and times and body of complaints and the subject access request, I still do not feel it is justified mv son has a meeting as he will be walking into a meeting only with very limited information, and due to his health which is being caused by his neighbours and Enfield Council doing nothing I feel mv son is on^ being setup due to issues and the colour of mv son's skin. And this is why no one from Enfield council has ever taken a report from him about what has been ongoing form a long time ago.

We want to clear this up as much as you do, but it seems Enfield Council is not fulfilling what we have asked for in order to be able to do this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

100,

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should

perform their own virus checks.

101,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should

perform their own virus checks.

102,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

103,

104,

 

 

 

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

Double1   

21/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114

 

29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

Double1         

21/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114

--

105,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 21 March 2017 16:26

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thanks for your email.

I sorry to hear learn that you have been unwell, I wish you speedy recovery.

The first letter I wrote to Mr Cordell was dated 29 November 2016 and not 29 December so apologies for the mistake and the first meeting was 6 December 2016 and not 6 January 2017 as you stated in your email below.

I am not aware that Mr Cordell is unable to leave his flat due to health reasons as he has not provided us with a letter from his Doctor to support this claim. Also when Mr Cordell telephoned me on 17 February 2017 following my letter to him dated 16 February 2017, he informed me that he will not come to the Civic Centre or the council offices in Edmonton Green because there are gang members looking for him in these areas. I cannot recall him saying anything about him not being able to leave his flat due to health reasons. Also Mr Cordell chased my car down the road when I went to deliver my last letter to his flat on 17 March 2017, this is not the attitude of someone who cannot leave his flat for health reasons.

I am inviting Mr Cordell to a formal meeting to discuss the allegations made against him and due to the serious nature of the allegations, the meeting will have been held in the council offices with a minute taker present. However if Mr Cordell presents a letter from his doctor stating that he is unable to leave his flat for health reason, then we can discuss an alternative venue. I am happy for Mr Cordell to bring someone with him to the meeting.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354 Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 March 2017 14:08

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

18/03/2017

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I'd like to apologise for the late reply to this email, I've just come out of hospital after undergoing two operations and only got released from hospital late on the 17 March 2017.

You stated in your letter to Mr Cordell, that the first letter you wrote was dated 29 December 2016, and that you set a meeting for 6 December 2016 this is incorrect, as the date for the meeting was set for 6 January 2017, yes this meeting was cancelled, you've then

106,

stated you wrote a letter on 31 January 2017 to arrange a meeting for 9 February 2017, this meeting was also cancelled, the reason these two meetings were cancelled was due to the ongoing complaint that was being addressed by Enfield council that still needs addressing but due to the data that came back from the subject access request and it not being completed properly this letter still needs to be reply to, there was also a subject access request that was put in to Enfield Council that we was waiting to be addressed and to receive the data back which as you are aware did take a considerable amount of time, and also the complaint also was delayed in a reply. As stated to you via email we felt it was unjustified to hold a meeting when there was an ongoing complaint, and a subject access request that we was waiting for, as you are aware there are still issues regarding the subject access request, which does need to be addressed.

You then stated that she wrote again on 16 February 2017 and arranged a meeting for 22 February 2017 which was also cancelled, but you was also notified there was still issues with the subject access request, and that I had a meeting regarding the issues which was set for the 9 March 2017, I stated to you that I would get back to you with a convenient date for the meeting to take place, but due to illness things have got delayed.

You have also stated that it is very unfortunate that there have been repeated refusals to meet in regards to the issues with the neighbours, I feel that this is very misleading we have not refused once to have a meeting with you, but due to ongoing issues meetings have had to be cancelled with a justified reason, so how you can take this as a refusal is beyond me, we have kept you informed at every stage of every letter that you send out giving you reasons as to why the meetings could not take place. Therefore I do not understand how you can interpret this as a refusal.

You will also be aware that my son does have health problems and that he does not leave his flat, not once have you thought in all the letters that you sent out how someone that does not leave his flat is going to be able to attend a meeting at the Civic Centre, therefore I am asking for the meeting to take place at Mr Cordell's home address, due to Mr Cordell's health, arrangements will need to be made that someone is at the meeting with Mr Cordell, and under no circumstances will Mr Cordell be addressing the issues while he is on his own.

You have also stated that if Mr Cordell does not attend or set a new date that you will be putting an application seeking possession of his home, it seems that Enfield Council have already made their mind up that Mr Cordell is guilty of what has been alleged in the complaints, you also state that if any further allegations are made against Mr Cordell that you can take legal action, since your last update with the dates has there been any more allegations against Mr Cordell?

Next week I have a number of hospital appointments so it will really be hard to do the 22 March 2017, if you could get back to me with some dates that the meeting can take place at Mr Cordell's home address I would be most grateful. or if there is any problem with this please let me know.

Regards

Miss L Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 16 March 2017 14:12

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Simon Cordell inviting him to a meeting with me and my line manager to discuss the allegations made against him by his neighbours. The original copy will be sent to Mr Cordell.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi Anti-Social Behaviour Team Community Safety Unit Environmental & Community Safety

107,

B Block North Civic Centre Enfield EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:51

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmv.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi, I will get back to you with a date.

But I am very upset at what is on file within the subject access request it seems as if you put everything onto Mr Cordell and large amounts of data is missing.

Like the information about Deborah Andrews this is incorrect, and the only reason we have found out about this is due to the subject access request.

But there are lots of emails that are missing that I sent about Deborah Andrews and what the neighbours were doing, that are dated before any complaints went in from Deborah Andrews and the neighbours. yet nothing was done for Mr Cordell about this.

Also there is missing dates and times of complaints, as to when things were meant to have happened and what time they were meant to have happened why?

I do have many issues, with the report and why no emails are in the subject access request that was put in by me that are dated well before the neighbours put complaints in yet Enfield Council done nothing about this, There is also no phone calls I made or my son made, but as soon as the neighbours put complaints in these were taken up right away by Enfield Council.

I will get back to you with a date I am due to see someone on the 09/03/2017 when I will be showing them all the information. So it will need to be after this date. Dionne Grant has also got until the 02/03/2017 to deal with the subject access request and if I have not heard anything by this date, I will pass this on to the ICO.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:18

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thanks for your email.

Could you please confirm when you and Mr Cordell are able to meet with me within the next 14 days. As stated in my previous letters, the allegations are serious breach of tenancy conditions and we need to give Mr Cordell the opportunity to respond to them before a decision is made on how to proceed.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

108,

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 10:06

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am sorry for the late information, but we will not be able to attend today at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 due to private family reasons.

I am also very upset to see how the subject access request has been handled, as I said to you last week, I have not had use of my main computer due to work being carried out on my home. I have sent Dionne Grant giving 14 days or I will take it to the ICO and have not had a reply yet to the email I sent.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 16 February 2017 14:13

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of a letter inviting Mr Simon Cordell to meet with me at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 to discuss the allegations made against him by some of his neighbours.

The original copy of the letter will be hand delivered to his home address today.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Sent: 10 February 2017 16:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

109,

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see below as requested the details of recent allegations made against Mr Simon Cordell. I have listed the complainants as Complainant A, B and C.

1.      On 6th August 2016 Complainant A reported that Simon Cordell, his neighbour at flat 109 is threatening him and his wife and aggressively demanding money from him. He alleged that Mr Cordell called his wife 'a bitch' and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat. He also alleged that in July 2016, someone used a knife to puncture his tyres, all 4 of them, that he believes that the tyres were slashed by Simon, that although he did not see Simon do it but he was quite certain that it was him. He also alleged that Mr Cordell damaged the lock to his electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity.

2.      On 5th October 2016 Complainant B reported that Mr Cordell has been harassing him for a while in relation to alleged noise disturbances from his flat. He alleged that the previous day on 4/10/16, Simon was banging on his ceiling and later came upstairs and started kicking his door and shouting aggressively. He alleged that Simon then went downstairs dragged his motorbike from where he parked it and started smashing it up. He then called the police. He also stated that Mr Cordell had previously slashed his motorbike tyres with a knife, that he did not report it as he did not see him do it.

3.      On 31st October 2016 telephone call received from another resident on behalf of Complainant C. He alleged that Complainant C's neighbour, Simon was using threatening, abusive, and insulting words towards Complainant C. He stated that he witnessed an incident that happened in September 2016 outside the block when Simon shouted abuse at Complainant C and made threats towards him.

4.      On 4th November 2016 met with Complainant C to discuss his concerns following the report from another resident. He stated the first incident happened sometime in July 2016, that he cannot remember the exact date. He alleged that he was approached by Mr Cordell as he came out of his front door and he started shouting abuse at him and threatened to burn down his flat. He alleged that the second incident happened in September 2016. He stated that he was on his way to meet a friend when Mr Cordell came at him 'ranting and raving' and said to him 'I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk'. He stated that two other neighbours witnessed the incident and that one of them told Mr Cordell to leave him alone. Complainant C also complained that Mr Cordell have installed a CCTV on the internal communal door and that he believes that he is monitoring his every move. He asked that the camera be removed as it is making him to feel very nervous, vulnerable, and uncomfortable and is an invasion of his privacy.

5.      On 11th November 2016 the Neighbourhood Officer met with Complainant A to discuss his allegations against Mr Cordell. He stated that some of the recent incidents happened on 6/8/16 at 6pm, 27/9/16 at 11.45pm and 28/9/16 at 5.30pm. He stated that the incidents include, threatening behaviour, intimidation, and aggressively demanding money. He alleged that Mr Cordell has physically threatened him in the past with a piece of wood. He also alleged that Mr Cordell has a big dog that always barks when someone comes into the block. He complained that Mr Cordell has a camera in the internal communal door facing the main entrance door to the block. He stated that he believes that Mr Cordell is using the camera to monitor when people come in or out of the block and that it makes him very uncomfortable and requested for the camera to be removed.

6.      On 8/12/16 Complainant A reported that Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door, shouted abuse, and threats at him and accused him of making noise.

7.      On 12/1/16 Complainant B reported that on 11/12/16, Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door on three different occasions and accused him of banging on the pipes. He alleged that he also shouted abuse and threats at him.

8.      On 14/12/16 Complainant C reported that one of his neighbours visited him and as she rang his doorbell Mr Cordell came

110,

out of his flat and started shouting abuse at her. He also alleged that Mr Cordell shouted that he would take some action when his ASBO expires.

9.      On 23/12/16 Complainant A reported that his wife was at home alone with their child between 3.45pm when Mr Cordell came and knocked on his front door, started to shout abuse and asked his wife to go in the bathroom and turn off the tap. He also alleged that Mr Cordell later removed his electricity fuse thereby cutting their power supply.

10.  On 10/1/17 Complainant A telephoned to report that on 26/12/16 at about 12 to 1pm he was going out with his family when Mr Cordell ran up the stairs with a towel round his waist and started shouting abuse and threats at him and his wife. He alleged that Mr Cordell accused him of tampering with his water supply and tried to stop them from leaving the block. He also stated that on 3/1/17 at 10.47pm, he was coming back from a family outing and as soon as they entered the block, Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse and threats at him.

11.  On 23/1/17 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 6.24pm on 21/1/17. He alleged that his wife was at home with their child when Mr Cordell come and started banging on his front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused them of making noise.

12.  On 1st February 2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 5.10pm on 31/1/17. He alleged that his wife was alone with his child at home when Mr Cordell came and banged on his door and started shouting abuse and threats and accused them of banging on the floor.

I will write to Mr Cordell next week to arrange for him to meet with me and another colleague at the Civic Centre to discuss the allegations made against him.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

ioan@ioanryan.org.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email to say you have stated in your last letter the subject access request has been dealt with, but we are still waiting for the data.

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and yet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

1.      Complaint from A on date and Time: Body of complaint from A.

111,

2.      Complaint from B on date and Time: Body of complaint from B.

3.      Complaint from C on date and time: Body of complaint from C

And it can carry on like this until all complaints are listed. As at this time you have just listed complaints and failed to supply any other information.

If I can get this back today, I would be most grateful, as it has been asked for before.

Also we have said this before more than once on calls and emails, the person's living at 113 and 117 I believe which is the 2 people living on top of my son, 113 has since he moved in no carpet put down and also his floor broads needs fixing, 117 which is the top floor has laid wooden flooring, due to the way these flats have no sound proofing in between floors and only wooden flooring due to how they were built, we were thinking this would have already been addressed and has not and the

neighbours have been allowed to keep the flooring the way it is, my son can hear everything and only feels nothing has been done as Enfield Council wants my son health to get worse and also to make him suffer.

As for the date of the 09/02/2017 as stated before until we have had all dates and times and body of complaints and the subject access request, I still do not feel it is justified my son has a meeting as he will be walking into a meeting only with very limited information, and due to his health which is being caused by his neighbours and Enfield Council doing nothing I feel my son is only being setup due to issues and the colour of my son's skin. And this is why no one from Enfield council has ever taken a report from him about what has been ongoing form a long time ago.

We want to clear this up as much as you do, but it seems Enfield Council is not fulfilling what we have asked for in order to be able to do this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi Anti-Social Behaviour Team Community Safety Unit Environmental & Community Safety B Block North

112,

Civic Centre Enfield EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

113,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

114,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

Double2   

21/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124

 

30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

Double2         

21/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124

--

115,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 21 March 2017 16:26

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thanks for your email.

I sorry to hear learn that you have been unwell, I wish you speedy recovery.

The first letter I wrote to Mr Cordell was dated 29 November 2016 and not 29 December so apologies for the mistake and the first meeting was 6 December 2016 and not 6 January 2017 as you stated in your email below.

I am not aware that Mr Cordell is unable to leave his flat due to health reasons as he has not provided us with a letter from his Doctor to support this claim. Also when Mr Cordell telephoned me on 17 February 2017 following my letter to him dated 16 February 2017, he informed me that he will not come to the Civic Centre or the council offices in Edmonton Green because there are gang members looking for him in these areas. I cannot recall him saying anything about him not being able to leave his flat due to health reasons. Also Mr Cordell chased my car down the road when I went to deliver my last letter to his flat on 17 March 2017, this is not the attitude of someone who cannot leave his flat for health reasons.

I am inviting Mr Cordell to a formal meeting to discuss the allegations made against him and due to the serious nature of the allegations, the meeting will have been held in the council offices with a minute taker present. However if Mr Cordell presents a letter from his doctor stating that he is unable to leave his flat for health reason, then we can discuss an alternative venue. I am happy for Mr Cordell to bring someone with him to the meeting.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354 Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 March 2017 14:08

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

18/03/2017

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I'd like to apologise for the late reply to this email, I've just come out of hospital after undergoing two operations and only got released from hospital late on the 17 March 2017.

You stated in your letter to Mr Cordell, that the first letter you wrote was dated 29 December 2016, and that you set a meeting for 6 December 2016 this is incorrect, as the date for the meeting was set for 6 January 2017, yes this meeting was cancelled, you've then

116,

stated you wrote a letter on 31 January 2017 to arrange a meeting for 9 February 2017, this meeting was also cancelled, the reason these two meetings were cancelled was due to the ongoing complaint that was being addressed by Enfield council that still needs addressing but due to the data that came back from the subject access request and it not being completed properly this letter still needs to be reply to, there was also a subject access request that was put in to Enfield Council that we was waiting to be addressed and to receive the data back which as you are aware did take a considerable amount of time, and also the complaint also was delayed in a reply. As stated to you via email we felt it was unjustified to hold a meeting when there was an ongoing complaint, and a subject access request that we was waiting for, as you are aware there are still issues regarding the subject access request, which does need to be addressed.

You then stated that she wrote again on 16 February 2017 and arranged a meeting for 22 February 2017 which was also cancelled, but you was also notified there was still issues with the subject access request, and that I had a meeting regarding the issues which was set for the 9 March 2017, I stated to you that I would get back to you with a convenient date for the meeting to take place, but due to illness things have got delayed.

You have also stated that it is very unfortunate that there have been repeated refusals to meet in regards to the issues with the neighbours, I feel that this is very misleading we have not refused once to have a meeting with you, but due to ongoing issues meetings have had to be cancelled with a justified reason, so how you can take this as a refusal is beyond me, we have kept you informed at every stage of every letter that you send out giving you reasons as to why the meetings could not take place. Therefore I do not understand how you can interpret this as a refusal.

You will also be aware that my son does have health problems and that he does not leave his flat, not once have you thought in all the letters that you sent out how someone that does not leave his flat is going to be able to attend a meeting at the Civic Centre, therefore I am asking for the meeting to take place at Mr Cordell's home address, due to Mr Cordell's health, arrangements will need to be made that someone is at the meeting with Mr Cordell, and under no circumstances will Mr Cordell be addressing the issues while he is on his own.

You have also stated that if Mr Cordell does not attend or set a new date that you will be putting an application seeking possession of his home, it seems that Enfield Council have already made their mind up that Mr Cordell is guilty of what has been alleged in the complaints, you also state that if any further allegations are made against Mr Cordell that you can take legal action, since your last update with the dates has there been any more allegations against Mr Cordell?

Next week I have a number of hospital appointments so it will really be hard to do the 22 March 2017, if you could get back to me with some dates that the meeting can take place at Mr Cordell's home address I would be most grateful. or if there is any problem with this please let me know.

Regards

Miss L Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 16 March 2017 14:12

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Simon Cordell inviting him to a meeting with me and my line manager to discuss the allegations made against him by his neighbours. The original copy will be sent to Mr Cordell.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi Anti-Social Behaviour Team Community Safety Unit Environmental & Community Safety

117,

B Block North Civic Centre Enfield EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:51

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmv.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi, I will get back to you with a date.

But I am very upset at what is on file within the subject access request it seems as if you put everything onto Mr Cordell and large amounts of data is missing.

Like the information about Deborah Andrews this is incorrect, and the only reason we have found out about this is due to the subject access request.

But there are lots of emails that are missing that I sent about Deborah Andrews and what the neighbours were doing, that are dated before any complaints went in from Deborah Andrews and the neighbours. yet nothing was done for Mr Cordell about this.

Also there is missing dates and times of complaints, as to when things were meant to have happened and what time they were meant to have happened why?

I do have many issues, with the report and why no emails are in the subject access request that was put in by me that are dated well before the neighbours put complaints in yet Enfield Council done nothing about this, There is also no phone calls I made or my son made, but as soon as the neighbours put complaints in these were taken up right away by Enfield Council.

I will get back to you with a date I am due to see someone on the 09/03/2017 when I will be showing them all the information. So it will need to be after this date. Dionne Grant has also got until the 02/03/2017 to deal with the subject access request and if I have not heard anything by this date, I will pass this on to the ICO.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 11:18

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thanks for your email.

Could you please confirm when you and Mr Cordell are able to meet with me within the next 14 days. As stated in my previous letters, the allegations are serious breach of tenancy conditions and we need to give Mr Cordell the opportunity to respond to them before a decision is made on how to proceed.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

118,

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 22 February 2017 10:06

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am sorry for the late information, but we will not be able to attend today at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 due to private family reasons.

I am also very upset to see how the subject access request has been handled, as I said to you last week, I have not had use of my main computer due to work being carried out on my home. I have sent Dionne Grant giving 14 days or I will take it to the ICO and have not had a reply yet to the email I sent.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 16 February 2017 14:13

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of a letter inviting Mr Simon Cordell to meet with me at 2.30pm on Wednesday 22nd February 2017 to discuss the allegations made against him by some of his neighbours.

The original copy of the letter will be hand delivered to his home address today.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Sent: 10 February 2017 16:01

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

119,

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see below as requested the details of recent allegations made against Mr Simon Cordell. I have listed the complainants as Complainant A, B and C.

13.  On 6th August 2016 Complainant A reported that Simon Cordell, his neighbour at flat 109 is threatening him and his wife and aggressively demanding money from him. He alleged that Mr Cordell called his wife 'a bitch' and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat. He also alleged that in July 2016, someone used a knife to puncture his tyres, all 4 of them, that he believes that the tyres were slashed by Simon, that although he did not see Simon do it but he was quite certain that it was him. He also alleged that Mr Cordell damaged the lock to his electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity.

14.  On 5th October 2016 Complainant B reported that Mr Cordell has been harassing him for a while in relation to alleged noise disturbances from his flat. He alleged that the previous day on 4/10/16, Simon was banging on his ceiling and later came upstairs and started kicking his door and shouting aggressively. He alleged that Simon then went downstairs dragged his motorbike from where he parked it and started smashing it up. He then called the police. He also stated that Mr Cordell had previously slashed his motorbike tyres with a knife, that he did not report it as he did not see him do it.

15.  On 31st October 2016 telephone call received from another resident on behalf of Complainant C. He alleged that Complainant C's neighbour, Simon was using threatening, abusive, and insulting words towards Complainant C. He stated that he witnessed an incident that happened in September 2016 outside the block when Simon shouted abuse at Complainant C and made threats towards him.

16.  On 4th November 2016 met with Complainant C to discuss his concerns following the report from another resident. He stated the first incident happened sometime in July 2016, that he cannot remember the exact date. He alleged that he was approached by Mr Cordell as he came out of his front door and he started shouting abuse at him and threatened to burn down his flat. He alleged that the second incident happened in September 2016. He stated that he was on his way to meet a friend when Mr Cordell came at him 'ranting and raving' and said to him 'I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk'. He stated that two other neighbours witnessed the incident and that one of them told Mr Cordell to leave him alone. Complainant C also complained that Mr Cordell have installed a CCTV on the internal communal door and that he believes that he is monitoring his every move. He asked that the camera be removed as it is making him to feel very nervous, vulnerable, and uncomfortable and is an invasion of his privacy.

17.  On 11th November 2016 the Neighbourhood Officer met with Complainant A to discuss his allegations against Mr Cordell. He stated that some of the recent incidents happened on 6/8/16 at 6pm, 27/9/16 at 11.45pm and 28/9/16 at 5.30pm. He stated that the incidents include, threatening behaviour, intimidation, and aggressively demanding money. He alleged that Mr Cordell has physically threatened him in the past with a piece of wood. He also alleged that Mr Cordell has a big dog that always barks when someone comes into the block. He complained that Mr Cordell has a camera in the internal communal door facing the main entrance door to the block. He stated that he believes that Mr Cordell is using the camera to monitor when people come in or out of the block and that it makes him very uncomfortable and requested for the camera to be removed.

18.  On 8/12/16 Complainant A reported that Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door, shouted abuse, and threats at him and accused him of making noise.

19.  On 12/1/16 Complainant B reported that on 11/12/16, Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door on three different occasions and accused him of banging on the pipes. He alleged that he also shouted abuse and threats at him.

20.  On 14/12/16 Complainant C reported that one of his neighbours visited him and as she rang his doorbell Mr Cordell came

120,

out of his flat and started shouting abuse at her. He also alleged that Mr Cordell shouted that he would take some action when his ASBO expires.

21.  On 23/12/16 Complainant A reported that his wife was at home alone with their child between 3.45pm when Mr Cordell came and knocked on his front door, started to shout abuse and asked his wife to go in the bathroom and turn off the tap. He also alleged that Mr Cordell later removed his electricity fuse thereby cutting their power supply.

22.  On 10/1/17 Complainant A telephoned to report that on 26/12/16 at about 12 to 1pm he was going out with his family when Mr Cordell ran up the stairs with a towel round his waist and started shouting abuse and threats at him and his wife. He alleged that Mr Cordell accused him of tampering with his water supply and tried to stop them from leaving the block. He also stated that on 3/1/17 at 10.47pm, he was coming back from a family outing and as soon as they entered the block, Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse and threats at him.

23.  On 23/1/17 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 6.24pm on 21/1/17. He alleged that his wife was at home with their child when Mr Cordell come and started banging on his front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused them of making noise.

24.  On 1st February 2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 5.10pm on 31/1/17. He alleged that his wife was alone with his child at home when Mr Cordell came and banged on his door and started shouting abuse and threats and accused them of banging on the floor.

I will write to Mr Cordell next week to arrange for him to meet with me and another colleague at the Civic Centre to discuss the allegations made against him.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 06 February 2017 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Daniel Ellis

Daniel.Ellis@enfield.gov.uk

joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

ioan@ioanryan.org.uk

Sally Mc Ternan

Sally.McTernan@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email to say you have stated in your last letter the subject access request has been dealt with, but we are still waiting for the data.

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and yet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

4.      Complaint from A on date and Time: Body of complaint from A.

121,

5.      Complaint from B on date and Time: Body of complaint from B.

6.      Complaint from C on date and time: Body of complaint from C

And it can carry on like this until all complaints are listed. As at this time you have just listed complaints and failed to supply any other information.

If I can get this back today, I would be most grateful, as it has been asked for before.

Also we have said this before more than once on calls and emails, the person's living at 113 and 117 I believe which is the 2 people living on top of my son, 113 has since he moved in no carpet put down and also his floor broads needs fixing, 117 which is the top floor has laid wooden flooring, due to the way these flats have no sound proofing in between floors and only wooden flooring due to how they were built, we were thinking this would have already been addressed and has not and the

neighbours have been allowed to keep the flooring the way it is, my son can hear everything and only feels nothing has been done as Enfield Council wants my son health to get worse and also to make him suffer.

As for the date of the 09/02/2017 as stated before until we have had all dates and times and body of complaints and the subject access request, I still do not feel it is justified my son has a meeting as he will be walking into a meeting only with very limited information, and due to his health which is being caused by his neighbours and Enfield Council doing nothing I feel my son is only being setup due to issues and the colour of my son's skin. And this is why no one from Enfield council has ever taken a report from him about what has been ongoing form a long time ago.

We want to clear this up as much as you do, but it seems Enfield Council is not fulfilling what we have asked for in order to be able to do this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 02 February 2017 10:45

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Miss Cordell,

Please find attached letter to Mr Cordell regarding ongoing reports of anti-social behaviour, verbal abuse and threatening behaviour made against him by his neighbours. It is very important that we meet with Mr Cordell to discuss these allegations and agree on the best way to resolve them.

I have also attached a copy of my letter to Mr Cordell dated 29th December 2016 regarding allegations of anti-social behaviour made against him by his neighbours. Copies of both letters will be sent to Mr Cordell's address.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi Anti-Social Behaviour Team Community Safety Unit Environmental & Community Safety B Block North

122,

Civic Centre Enfield EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

123,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

124,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate - 23-03-2017 15-01

23/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 125,126

 

 31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate - 23-03-2017 15-01

23/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 125,126

--

125,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 23/03/2017 03:00:57 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Transfer

Attachments: Consent for Transfer.DOCX

Mr Cordell,

We are writing to let you know that, from 1st April 2017 we will no longer be providing the NHS Complaints Advocacy Service in your borough.

From 1 April 2017, the NHS Complaints Advocacy Service will be provided by Power. We have included some contact details for Power below but would request that you do not contact them regarding your complaint until after the start of the new contract on 1 April 2017.

Power: -

Telephone: 0300 456 2370

Minicom: 0300 456 2364

Email: pohwer@pohwer.net

Skype: power. advocacy

Fax: 0300 456 2365

Post: PO Box 14043, Birmingham, B6 9BL

If you wish for information regarding your referral to be transferred to Power, in order for them to support you with it, we would ask that you complete the attached consent form and send it back to us in the prepaid envelope by 29 March 2017.

Should you not wish to consent to the transfer of your information, your referral will be closed with Voice Ability on 31 March 2017.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any queries.

Yours sincerely,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London My working hours are Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

T: 0300 330 5454

M: 07918 561 868

e: paiae.christie@voiceabilitv.ora

w: www.voiceabilitv.ora

Voice Ability

Voice Ability Advocacy I Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Registered Address: Mount Pleasant House, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 0RN Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

126,

Consent for Transfer.DOCX

Consent to Transfer Information

Name of person whose Referral is to be transferred

 

Name of Patient (if different)

 

·         Yes, I consent to information regarding my referral and data held by Voice Ability being transferred to Power by the 1st of April 2017.

·         No, I do not consent to information regarding my referral and data held by Voice Ability being transferred to Power and understand my file with Voice Ability will be closed as a result

Signature:

 

Date:

 

strengthening voice,

championing rights,

changing lives Mount Pleasant House,

Huntingdon Road, Cambridge,

CB3 ORN

info@voiceability.org

www.voiceability.org

Registered Charity 1076630

Limited Company 3798884

 

 

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 0. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate -1-20730 29-03-2017 11-27

29/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 127,128

 

 32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 0. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate -1-20730 29-03-2017 11-27

29/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 127,128

--

127,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 23/03/2017 03:00:57 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Transfer

Attachments: Consent for Transfer.DOCX

Mr Cordell,

We are writing to let you know that, from 1st April 2017 we will no longer be providing the NHS Complaints Advocacy Service in your borough.

From 1 April 2017, the NHS Complaints Advocacy Service will be provided by Power. We have included some contact details for Power below but would request that you do not contact them regarding your complaint until after the start of the new contract on 1 April 2017.

Power: -

Telephone: 0300 456 2370

Minicom: 0300 456 2364

Email: pohwer@pohwer.net

Skype: power. advocacy

Fax: 0300 456 2365

Post: PO Box 14043, Birmingham, B6 9BL

If you wish for information regarding your referral to be transferred to Power, in order for them to support you with it, we would ask that you complete the attached consent form and send it back to us in the prepaid envelope by 29 March 2017.

Should you not wish to consent to the transfer of your information, your referral will be closed with Voice Ability on 31 March 2017.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any queries.

Yours sincerely,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London My working hours are Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

T: 0300 330 5454

M: 07918 561 868

e: paiae.christie@voiceabilitv.ora

w: www.voiceabilitv.ora

Voice Ability

Voice Ability Advocacy I Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Registered Address: Mount Pleasant House, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 0RN Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

128,

Consent for Transfer.DOCX

Consent to Transfer Information

Name of person whose Referral is to be transferred

 

Name of Patient (if different)

 

·         Yes, I consent to information regarding my referral and data held by Voice Ability being transferred to Power by the 1st of April 2017.

·         No, I do not consent to information regarding my referral and data held by Voice Ability being transferred to Power and understand my file with Voice Ability will be closed as a result

Signature:

 

Date:

 

strengthening voice,

championing rights,

changing lives Mount Pleasant House,

Huntingdon Road, Cambridge,

CB3 ORN

info@voiceability.org

www.voiceability.org

Registered Charity 1076630

Limited Company 3798884

 

 

 

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 0. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate -1-20731 30-03-2017 12-15

30/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 129

 

 33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 0. 2.

NHS Complaints Advocate -1-20731 30-03-2017 12-15

30/03/2017

/ Page Numbers: 129

--

129,

From: Paige Christie <paige.christie@voiceability.org>

Sent time: 30/03/2017 12:15:01 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: transfer

I have made several attempts to call you but have not been successful. If you do wish to continue with your complaint, and therefore wish for your data to be transferred please respond to this email by copy and pasting the following sentence and inserting your name in the space:

(YOUR NAME) consent to information regarding referral and data held by Voice Ability being transferred to Power by the 1st April 2017

Kind regards,

Paige Christie

NHS Complaints Advocate, East London My working hours are Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm

a: United House, 39-41 North Road, London N7 9DP

T: 0300 330 5454

M: 07918 561 868

e: paiae.christie@voiceabilitv.org

w: www.voiceabilitv.ora

Voice Ability

Voice Ability Advocacy I Charity No. 1076630 I Company No. 3798884 (England and Wales)

Registered Address: Mount Pleasant House, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 0RN Disclaimer: www.voiceability.org/contact us/#Email

 

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canva Plus -1-20735 04-04-2017 13-52

04/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 130

 

 34.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canva Plus -1-20735 04-04-2017 13-52

04/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 130

--

130,

From: Get Canvas Plus <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 04/04/2017 01:51:40 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Get Canvas Plus - Order 5323

Get Canvas Plus

Get Canvas Plus

Thank you for your interest in Get Canvas Plus products. Your order has been received and will be processed once payment has been confirmed.

Order Details

Order ID: 5323

E-mail: re wired@ymail.com

Date Added: 04/04/2017

Telephone: 020824

Order Status: Complete

Payment Address / Shipping Address

Simon Cordell Simon Cordell

109 Burncroft avenue

London en37jq           

Greater London

United Kingdom        

Payment Method: Credit Card / Debit Card (Sage Pay) Shipping Method: UK mainland

Product Price Total

24" Inkjet Polyester Canvas 280gms - Matte

18m Roll Ł24.10 Ł24.10

Model: 191

24" Inkjet Matte

Polyester Canvas 280gms -

Extra-long 30m Roll 2 x Ł40.10 Ł80.20

Model: 302

Sub-Total Ł104.30

UK mainland   Ł8.00

VAT (20%) Ł22.46

Total Ł134.76

The comments for your order are:

Hello, I have an entry code to my front door what is c1230 thanks Simon Please reply to this e-mail if you have any questions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

Too Smooth 25-04-2017 10-03

25/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 131

 

 35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

Too Smooth 25-04-2017 10-03

25/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 131

 

--

131,

From: cPanel for too smooth on toosmooth.co.uk

cpanel@toosmooth.co.uk

Sent time: 25/04/2017 10:02:37 AM

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [toosmooth.co.uk]

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is about to exceed its bandwidth limit (6.16 GB/6.84 GB)

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” has reached 90% of its bandwidth limit (6.16 GB/6.84 GB).

·         Average bandwidth used per day: 252.23 MB Projected monthly bandwidth usage: 7.39 GB

At the current rate of usage:

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is expected to reach its bandwidth limit on 4/27/17.

·         The account “too smooth” with primary domain “toosmooth.co.uk” is expected to exceed its bandwidth limit by 566.89 MB.

The system generated this notice on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 9:02:36 AM UTC.

You can disable the “Bandwidth Limits” type of notification through the cPanel interface: https://fiorano.websitewelcome.com:2083/frontend/x3/contact/index.html

Do not reply to this automated message.

Copyright© 2017 cPanel, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-26354 25-04-2017 11-38

25/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 132,133

 

 36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-26354 25-04-2017 11-38

25/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 132,133

--

132,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/04/2017 11:37:54 AM

To: service@morgana.co.uk

Subject: To Mat in regards towards a Pur 150

Dear Mike and Mat

Hello how are you doing, I hope all is well I spoke to a gentleman on the 24/04/2017 on the phone called mike in regards to a Morgana Pur 150 that I am interested in purchasing from another person, mike then passed the phone to a man called Mat, who then asked me to send this reply. The machine I am able to buy seems to come with its own problems and I request your help in solving the issues.

Diagnostic; when the machine is first turned on it allows any user to go to the first stage which is; “Are you trained to operate this machine” once ticked in agreement the power to the machine will flip the main distribution power supply but does not blow the machines internal fuses.

On a diagnostic of the problem you have to take the two covers of the back of the machine and bypass the safety mechanism for the hatch door being closed.

Connected to the bottom of the glue station, to which you put the glue into is a thermostat, this thermostat has two additional wires connected into it.

The marks on the thermostat states that it is a; Mfr. Part No.2455RC Thermostat, Solder Tag Termination, 0°C +260°C

When disconnected and the machine is rebooted with power it will bypass to the second stage; “Main menu”

Once into the main menu the machine goes into alarm mode in turn disabling its features.

The features that seem to be disabled are the following:

1. milling station: -

2. Press carriage.

On a further inspection towards the resolution of the error codes; they are labelled as follows:

1. 007 Error movement of press: -

2. 009 Cleaner not present: -

3. 010 Temperature not ok: -

4. 011 Execute present: -

5. 019 Critical Temperature.

My main concern at present other than getting the machine to work:] is the error showing 007 error movement of press, as I hope that changing the thermostat will clear error 010, 019 and then once 009 has been addressed then 011 will no longer exist as a problem if 007 is fixed, thus repairing the machine.

After speaking to another gentlemen a Morgana it was explained to me that I can attach a external power supply to the mill and after to the carriage to check the motors to them mechanism are functioning correctly, on an attempt to do this the mill motor had no issue of concern and is a straight forward motor to supply the power to, the mill has neutral and live inclusive of ground. When rerouting the mill I disconnected N1- L1 from Km21.01 within the fuse board to add the external power supply, with the mill motor activating.

I then attempted to make the press carriage active and took the chain of the motor so the spindle can move freely, on revealing the wires behind the power plate cover to the motor, for the power cables to be connected I noticed four wires;

3. One grey in colour: -

4. One brown in colour: -

5. One black in colour: - And: -

6. A green ground wires.

I understood the brown cable to be L1 live and grey to be forward while black would be reverse to the motor, so I connected the external power supply with the ground connected, then: -

133,

7. I connected L1 also from an external power supply to L1 in the motor and the

8. N1 to the grey cable and after to the black cable, when this was achieved you could hear the carriage motor slightly hum with power but no movement of the motors Spindale.

9. When the machine is as standard as at present, if any user is to go through stage one and “Tick yes you are trained to use this machine,” once at stage two if u press the two green buttons at the front of the machine simultaneously, that person will hear a breaker click in the back of the machines fuse box, this shows code: E21.01 and has three lights, the top light is always active named supply and in consequence to the two green buttons being push together R2 will become active, with no response from the press carriage motor.

My questions are:

1. Does Morgana sell used parts at a discount from new priced parts?

2. How much would a press carriage motor cost in any of them instances?

3. If I continue to do a further diagnostics of the press carriage motor I will split the differential gearing from the motor and attempt to run the motor from an external power supply, once again in the hope of keeping cost down in aiding to fix the machine.

4. How much will Morgana supply the required thermostat for after vat?

5. How much will Morgana supply a press carriage motor without gearing attached?

6. How much will Morgana supply gearing for the press motor without the motor attached?

7. How much will Morgana sell the carriage motor and gearing together for?

While I was in the fuse box at the back of the machine I notice two more fuse controllers that are not active with present Semiconductor High Voltage Glass Passivated Junction Rectifiers the fuse board numbers are as follows; Km20.01 Km23.01 on further research of them empty fuse slots, after reading the wiring schematics it states that the usage for them slots are as follows:

1. KM20.01 = Main Enabling

2. 2Km23.01 = Heating Enable

Another question I have to ask for your response in is should those two slots be without fuses as they are at present?

I also would like to question whether u supply the glue and blue beans needed to operate the machine and pricing if so, if not please can you help provide a supplier for such products?

If I resolve the issues the machine is faced with at present I would like to order the flat end screws needed to service the glue station so for the glue to get extruded through it correct path at its optimal performance and therefore request the following price of them parts from your self s.

I would appreciate any help or advice that you or your team members may have in helping to get the Morgana Pur 150 re­commissioned.

Many thanks and kind regards Mr S. Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 0. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-20741 26-04-2017 09-46

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 134,135,136,137

 

 37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 0. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-20741 26-04-2017 09-46

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 134,135,136,137

--

134,

Subject: Undeliverable: In regard to a pur 150

Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:

spairs@rnQraa~iacQ.uk fspairs@mciraana.cci.uk)

The e-mail address you entered couldn't be found. Please check the recipient's e-mail address and try to resend the message. If the problem continues, please contact your helpdesk.

Diagnostic information for administrators:

Generating server: plockmatic.se

spairs@moraana.co.uk

135,

Same as Above!

136,137,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 0. 2.

Morgana -1-26356 26-04-2017 09-46

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 138,139

 

 38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 0. 2.

Morgana -1-26356 26-04-2017 09-46

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 138,139

--

138,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 26/04/2017 09:45:47 AM

To: spairs@morgana.co.uk

Subject: In regard to a Pur 150

Dear Mike and Mat

Hello how are you doing, I hope all is well I spoke to a gentleman on the 24/04/2017 on the phone called mike in regards to a Morgana Pur 150 that I am interested in purchasing from another person, mike then passed the phone to a man called Mat, who then asked me to send this reply. The machine I am able to buy seems to come with its own problems and I request your help in solving the issues.

Diagnostic; when the machine is first turned on it allows any user to go to the first stage which is; “Are you trained to operate this machine” once ticked in agreement the power to the machine will flip the main distribution power supply but does not blow the machines internal fuses.

On a diagnostic of the problem you have to take the two covers of the back of the machine and bypass the safety mechanism for the hatch door being closed.

Connected to the bottom of the glue station, to which you put the glue into is a thermostat, this thermostat has two additional wires connected into it.

The marks on the thermostat states that it is a; Mfr. Part No.2455RC Thermostat, Solder Tag Termination, 0°C +260°C

When disconnected and the machine is rebooted with power it will bypass to the second stage; “Main menu”

Once into the main menu the machine goes into alarm mode in turn disabling its features.

The features that seem to be disabled are the following:

1. milling station: -

2. Press carriage.

On a further inspection towards the resolution of the error codes; they are labelled as follows:

1. 007 Error movement of press: -

2. 009 Cleaner not present: -

3. 010 Temperature not ok: -

4. 011 Execute present: -

5. 019 Critical Temperature.

My main concern at present other than getting the machine to work:] is the error showing 007 error movement of press, as I hope that changing the thermostat will clear error 010, 019 and then once 009 has been addressed then 011 will no longer exist as a problem if 007 is fixed, thus repairing the machine.

After speaking to another gentlemen a Morgana it was explained to me that I can attach a external power supply to the mill and after to the carriage to check the motors to them mechanism are functioning correctly, on an attempt to do this the mill motor had no issue of concern and is a straight forward motor to supply the power to, the mill has neutral and live inclusive of ground. When rerouting the mill I disconnected N1- L1 from Km21.01 within the fuse board to add the external power supply, with the mill motor activating.

I then attempted to make the press carriage active and took the chain of the motor so the spindle can move freely, on revealing the wires behind the power plate cover to the motor, for the power cables to be connected I noticed four wires;

1. One grey in colour: -

2. One brown in colour: -

3. One black in colour: - And: -

4. A green ground wires.

I understood the brown cable to be L1 live and grey to be forward while black would be reverse to the motor, so I connected the external power supply with the ground connected, then: -

139,

Same as Above!

 

 

 

 

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

Morgana -1-26355 26-04-2017 09-43

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 140,141

 

 39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

Morgana -1-26355 26-04-2017 09-43

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 140,141

--

140,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 26/04/2017 09:42:42 AM

To: spairs@morgana.co.uk

Subject: In regard to a Pur 150

Dear Mike and Mat

Hello how are you doing, I hope all is well I spoke to a gentleman on the 24/04/2017 on the phone called mike in regards to a Morgana Pur 150 that I am interested in purchasing from another person, mike then passed the phone to a man called Mat, who then asked me to send this reply. The machine I am able to buy seems to come with its own problems and I request your help in solving the issues.

Diagnostic; when the machine is first turned on it allows any user to go to the first stage which is; “Are you trained to operate this machine” once ticked in agreement the power to the machine will flip the main distribution power supply but does not blow the machines internal fuses.

On a diagnostic of the problem you have to take the two covers of the back of the machine and bypass the safety mechanism for the hatch door being closed.

Connected to the bottom of the glue station, to which you put the glue into is a thermostat, this thermostat has two additional wires connected into it.

The marks on the thermostat states that it is a; Mfr. Part No.2455RC Thermostat, Solder Tag Termination, 0°C +260°C

When disconnected and the machine is rebooted with power it will bypass to the second stage; “Main menu”

Once into the main menu the machine goes into alarm mode in turn disabling its features.

The features that seem to be disabled are the following:

1. milling station: -

2. Press carriage.

On a further inspection towards the resolution of the error codes; they are labelled as follows:

1. 007 Error movement of press: -

2. 009 Cleaner not present: -

3. 010 Temperature not ok: -

4. 011 Execute present: -

5. 019 Critical Temperature.

My main concern at present other than getting the machine to work:] is the error showing 007 error movement of press, as I hope that changing the thermostat will clear error 010, 019 and then once 009 has been addressed then 011 will no longer exist as a problem if 007 is fixed, thus repairing the machine.

After speaking to another gentlemen a Morgana it was explained to me that I can attach a external power supply to the mill and after to the carriage to check the motors to them mechanism are functioning correctly, on an attempt to do this the mill motor had no issue of concern and is a straight forward motor to supply the power to, the mill has neutral and live inclusive of ground. When rerouting the mill I disconnected N1- L1 from Km21.01 within the fuse board to add the external power supply, with the mill motor activating.

I then attempted to make the press carriage active and took the chain of the motor so the spindle can move freely, on revealing the wires behind the power plate cover to the motor, for the power cables to be connected I noticed four wires;

1. One grey in colour: -

2. One brown in colour: -

3. One black in colour: - And: -

4. A green ground wires.

I understood the brown cable to be L1 live and grey to be forward while black would be reverse to the motor, so I connected the external power supply with the ground connected, then: -

I connected L1 also from an external power supply to L1 in the motor and the

N1 to the grey cable and after to the black cable, when this was achieved you could hear the carriage motor slightly hum with

141,

Same as Above!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana 26-04-2017 -10-43

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 142,143

 

 40.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana 26-04-2017 -10-43

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 142,143

--

142,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 26/04/2017 10:43:49 AM

To: spares@morgana.co.uk

Subject: In regard to a Pur 150

Dear Mike and Mat

Hello how are you doing, I hope all is well I spoke to a gentleman on the 24/04/2017 on the phone called mike in regards to a Morgana Pur 150 that I am interested in purchasing from another person, mike then passed the phone to a man called Mat, who then asked me to send this reply. The machine I am able to buy seems to come with its own problems and I request your help in solving the issues.

Diagnostic; when the machine is first turned on it allows any user to go to the first stage which is; “Are you trained to operate this machine” once ticked in agreement the power to the machine will flip the main distribution power supply but does not blow the machines internal fuses.

On a diagnostic of the problem you have to take the two covers of the back of the machine and bypass the safety mechanism for the hatch door being closed.

Connected to the bottom of the glue station, to which you put the glue into is a thermostat, this thermostat has two additional wires connected into it.

The marks on the thermostat states that it is a; Mfr. Part No.2455RC Thermostat, Solder Tag Termination, 0°C +260°C

When disconnected and the machine is rebooted with power it will bypass to the second stage; “Main menu”

Once into the main menu the machine goes into alarm mode in turn disabling its features.

The features that seem to be disabled are the following:

1. milling station: -

2. Press carriage.

On a further inspection towards the resolution of the error codes; they are labelled as follows:

1. 007 Error movement of press: -

2. 009 Cleaner not present: -

3. 010 Temperature not ok: -

4. 011 Execute present: -

5. 019 Critical Temperature.

My main concern at present other than getting the machine to work:] is the error showing 007 error movement of press, as I hope that changing the thermostat will clear error 010, 019 and then once 009 has been addressed then 011 will no longer exist as a problem if 007 is fixed, thus repairing the machine.

After speaking to another gentlemen a Morgana it was explained to me that I can attach a external power supply to the mill and after to the carriage to check the motors to them mechanism are functioning correctly, on an attempt to do this the mill motor had no issue of concern and is a straight forward motor to supply the power to, the mill has neutral and live inclusive of ground. When rerouting the mill I disconnected N1- L1 from Km21.01 within the fuse board to add the external power supply, with the mill motor activating.

I then attempted to make the press carriage active and took the chain of the motor so the spindle can move freely, on revealing the wires behind the power plate cover to the motor, for the power cables to be connected I noticed four wires;

1. One grey in colour: -

2. One brown in colour: -

3. One black in colour: - And: -

4. A green ground wires.

I understood the brown cable to be L1 live and grey to be forward while black would be reverse to the motor, so I connected the external power supply with the ground connected, then: -

I connected L1 also from an external power supply to L1 in the motor and the

N1 to the grey cable and after to the black cable, when this was achieved you could hear the carriage motor slightly hum with

143,

Same as Above!

 

 

 

 

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2.

Asbo Rewired -1-4819 26-04-2017 12-27

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159

 

 41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2.

Asbo Rewired -1-4819 26-04-2017 12-27

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159

--

144,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 26/04/2017 12:27:04 PM

Subject: eye

support team put into place, the acting solicitors were made aware of this, and so was the Court in the September 2016, when the Appellant was due to attend.

On 16 September 2016 the case was listed for a mention hearing for Non-Disclosure, and also a meeting with Mr Locke the Appellant Barrister as he had not seen any barrister since the 04/08/2015 hearing at the Magistrate’s Court when the Antisocial Behaviour Order was granted by the Judge with no legality found.

The Appellant was told by his acting solicitors to be at Court by 09:30 hours, but later this was changed to 09:00 hours, this was so he could have a meeting with his barrister, which he did agreed to do.

On the agreed court date the Appellant arrived at Court for 09:00, his barrister did not arrive until around 09:40, disappointingly. On arrival The Appellants barrister and him himself inclusive of his mother all went together into a side room for a pre talk. Before any desiccations in relation to the case could be discussed, Mr Locke said he was sorry he was not feeling very well and that he also had some emails from Ms Ward, that he had to read first, on trying to open the emails he realized he could not and subsequently went out of the room to call Ms Ward.

At around 10:00 hours the Appellant was called into Court, Mr Locke came back into the room from after making his phone

145,

call to Miss Ward, so for himself to be able to have collected his things and he then hurried and started to walk back out of the room we all was supposed to have a meeting but on stead he hurried in towards the Court room. The Appellant tried to stop him, so to have explained to him, what his concerns were. (“As we had not yet at this point in time had a moment to talk”) and the Appellant was also concerned about the disclosure that was going to be asked for.

The Appellant asked Mr Locke if he could ask the Judge to adjourn the case for five or ten minutes, so that we all could speak with each other, which he replied “no that the hearing was only for disclosure about the schedule”, The Appellant said that:- “He knew this was not correct and this was one of the reasons that he wanted to speak with him about.” The Appellant again asked: - “if the barrister would ask the Judge to postpone for ten minutes again” he yet again said “no”, at which point the Appellant asked “why Mr Locke did not want to speak to him, and should he act for himself ”?

The Barrister Mr Locke had no time to talk to The Appellant at the time and spent around four minutes talking to Ms Ward on the phone, before ending his call, he asked the Appellant if he the Appellant was dismissing his solicitors, to which the Appellant replied:- “No”, Mr Locke then started to walk towards the Courtroom, we followed the barrister into Court and on entering the Court in a raised voice, The Appellant said to Mr Locke:- (“who was ahead of him”) so am I acting for myself then.? Mr Locke never replied to the Appellant and just proceeded to talk to the Judge and then he walked toward the courtroom door and ushered out. At this point the Appellant

146,

had no idea what was going on but proceeded to follow him outside the Court room, it was at this point of time when Mr Locke turned around and said quite curtly “I do not want you to speak anymore”, as we got closer to him he also informed the Appellant it was not good to shout out, “in open Court,” to which the Appellant had to agree with, but the Appellant felt so let down as it seemed his barrister did not even want to talk to him, since the Appellant had last seen him in 2014 and this is another part of the reasons that the Appellant wanted to speak with him, as so much had already gone wrong with this case and the Appellant felt very nervous as he did not know what was going on, or what would be said as he had not spoken to his barrister.

The Appellants mother, who had witnessed all of this, did try to explain to the Appellants barrister, what the Appellant wanted to say, in reference to the receipt of the requested Non­disclosure and asked Mr Locke to explain what the schedule is about before we all went back into court.

The Appellant also asked about the two article 6’s that had been issued by the court, which had never been addressed:- “by the Court,” which pertains to The Appellants Human Rights and importantly his rights to a fair and speedy trial, to what had not happened. The Article 6 the right to a fair and speedy trial had been handed to the Court at earlier hearings, as The Appellants knew Mr Locke knew nothing about this and other information that had happened, so he felt it important to explain this to him at the time. Mr Locke explained that the schedule was what the Judge had asked for on the 04/04/2016, my mother replied this was not all the Judge had asked for,

147,

without replying Mr Locke walked towards the Courtroom and we all followed, it was at this point The Appellant said to the barrister I feel I should represent myself because he felt he was not being heard.

All that the Appellant wanted was to be able to speak to his barrister, so that he knew what had been said at the earlier hearing of the 04/04/2016 and show him the document that was handed to the Judge, on that date.

On entering the Court the Appellant barrister Mr Locke addressed the Judge and said the Appellant did not want him to act for him, but this was not fully the case the Appellant only wanted to be able to speak to his barrister.

The Judge informed the Appellants barrister to remain in the Courtroom, the Judge asked what the case was listed for and the prosecuting barrister addressed the Court, answering the questions, he then also handed the schedule to the Applicants barrister, they also said to the Judge that the Appellant had been sending letters to the Court and the prosecution himself,

148,

which stated: - “I Simon Cordell throughout the document.” This is not the case and the Appellant did not understand their comment or what document the prosecuting barrister was talking about. The Judge then addressed the Appellant and asked the Appellant did the Appellant still want the barrister to act for the Appellant, the Appellant replied “Yes” to the Judge that he did want the barrister to act for him; the Appellant stated that he only wanted time to speak to his barrister, as he had not spoken to a barrister since the Magistrate’s hearing.

The Judge then addressed the Appellant barrister he said that the Appellant still wanted the barrister to act for the Appellant, the Appellant barrister agreed to this. The Judge also stated he felt he was not the best person to be hearing this case and passed it back over to the Judge that was hearing the Appeal.

On leaving the Courtroom the Appellant and his mother proceeded to go into a side room to talk with the Appellant barrister, we explained that a letter had been handed to the Judge on the 04/04/2016, the barrister said he knew nothing of this letter, so we handed him a copy for him to read. Once he read this, he said he knew nothing about this and had only seen one document that kept saying I Simon Cordell, (“The Appellant has no idea of what this I Simon Cordell letter is.”)

The Appellants mother proceeded to explain this is why the Appellant wanted to talk to Mr Locke before going into Court, as this is part of the Non-disclosure being requested.

The barrister explained he only knew about the schedule, to which the Appellant mother replied, the schedule had been

149,

asked for by the Judge in addition to the letter that had been handed in and this was also when the Judge said it could be used as the Appellants skeleton argument and that this had happened when Miss Ward was in the Court on the date of the 04/04/2016 when she was also taking notes, so Miss Ward knew exactly what the Judge had asked for.

The Appellants mother had made a call to the Appellants solicitor and enquired as to what the Judge had asked for on the 04/04/2016 in regards to the disclosure, Ms Ward stated she could not remember, the Appellant mother being dumbfounded by this said in reply to her:- “you was sitting in the back of the Courtroom taking notes,” and continued to explain that only last week from the date in mention, will have everything that the Judge had asked for in his original disclosure, plus what was asked for in the Appellants letter, that was handed to the judge and Miss Ward also explained that the Judge had made other addictions in addition to the mentioned.

At no point did Ms Ward ever make the Appellants mother feel she did not know what was due to be disclosed, before and while still on the phone, if she had ever done this the Appellant and the Appellant mother would have asked her to relist the case to the Court and asked for this to be clarified, as the disclosure that we was asking for was very important to the ongoings of the Appeal.

The Appellant mother then handed the Appellant the phone the Appellant asked Ms Ward about the letter he was supposed to have sent to the Court and the prosecuting barrister, the Appellant was still thinking she was talking about the letter

150,

handed to the Judge on the 04/04/2016 when Miss Ward was not.

Also in Court on this date, it was said the Appellant had written this letter himself, which was not the case.

In truth The Appellant agreed for a letter that Miss Ward had written in reply to the Judge’s letter for the Appellant to be amended, he had amended it himself and it was to be handed into the court, the Appellant solicitor was at Court so she knew the Appellant had amended the letter, this is to be inclusive of it being sent to her by email, as she was in the court on this date to.

On this date when Miss Ward was a court she said to the judge that the Appellant had drafted the letter when the Appellant had only amended it, Miss Ward continued to say, that she did not draft the Letter and that the Appellant wrote it, this is not true, at this the Appellant did call Miss ward a lair as the Appellant knew Miss Ward had drafted the letter herself at first.

The Appellant later explained to Miss Ward on the phone that he could prove the truth and said, I have the emails you sent to me and my mother of the letter we talk about and me amending it, in return for you. It was also explained to all that we have kept copies of all other correspondence between our persons and this is to include (Since the start of the Court proceedings.

The Appellant mother has checked the dates for when this letter was drafted by The Appellant solicitor and then returned to her, the date was on the 03/04/2016 please see attached email

151,

and letter (marked 03/04/2016 Ms Ward).

The Appellant barrister was listening to the phone call and after the Appellant ended the barrister got up and said I will need to think about still representing you as you called your solicitors a lair, the Appellant stated that he can prove that Miss Ward wrote the letter and she’s denying as to doing so and further expressed himself in question the line of investigation by saying:- “how would anyone body else’s feel, if she had lied about them,” the Appellant barrister then replied that if he was still going to represent the Appellant then there would need to be a meeting at the Appellant barrister chambers, at this point the meeting concluded, with nothing else really spoke of about the Appellant Appeal yet again, this was days before the Appeal hearing was due to start once again.

Up to here for now

A while after the Solicitor wrote a letter and sent it to the Appellant and the Appellants mother, the date of this received email is dated 20/09/2016 and a copy had also been sent to the Court, this application was put in so for the acting solicitor to once again attempt to be removed from the record this was done to our surprise and was listed in Court to be heard on the 21/09/2016.

There were large sections of this letter that were incorrect and did not happen so therefore are not true; this can also be proven by the Court transcripts from the 16/09/2016.

152,

On the 21/01/2016 we were on our way to Court and got caught in traffic, we contacted the Court to get a message to the Judge to say that we were going to be five to ten minutes late, “I know the Judge got the message.”

When we got to the Court, there was a barrister that Michael Carroll and Co had sent to the Court to deal with the application; this was so for them to be removed from the record for the second attempt.

The Barrister informed us she did not want to leave the Court before explaining what had happened it seemed the Judge had called this into Court without us being present and removed the solicitors from the record.

We question how could this have happened? Considering, the Appellant was not present at Court? And there was not a senior Partner from Michael Carroll and Co; “this question is due to what had been previously said by His Honour Judge Morrison on 19/02/2016 in regard to this not being allowed to happen.”

The Barrister said the Judge wanted to see us and we would need to wait in Court until we were called, as the Judge was dealing with a trial and we would be called in after it.

Around 16:00 hours we were called into Court, the Respondent did make the Judge aware at this point that what had been said by His Honour Judge Morrison on the 19/02/2016 stating that a Senior Partner was not present at Court, the Judge replied that he could not force a solicitor to carry on with a case they clearly did not want to and that the Appellant could represent himself, he continued to state; that the case was in a much

153,

better order now, but as is known the Appellant has learning difficulties and health problems which the Court are also well aware of, there were only a few days until the Appeal hearing was due to start once again, how could a Judge believe that a person with learning difficulties and health problems could be ready and cope with dealing with a three-day Appeal hearing on his own?.

We did try to get the Judge to adjourn the Appeal hearing so we could try and get representation put in place due to knowing the Appellant could not cope or handle this case on his own, which was due to start on the 26/09/2016 for a three- day hearing, the Judge said he would not allow this and that the Appeal hearing would go ahead no matter what. It seems again that the Appellant was being blamed for what was ongoing in this case, when the Appellant and the Appellant mother had done all they could, so for them to have this case ready to be heard.

How can a Judge expect someone that is known to be ill and have learning difficulties to be able to handle this case on their own? considering there were only four days until the three- day Appeal hearing was due to start. Nothing was put in place by the Judge to help the Appellant in any way. The Appellant was just meant to get on with the case all on his own under the circumstances.

Once again, the solicitors had done nothing for this case and the Judge had allowed them to walk away when this was said to not be allowed and it seems as if everything was being blamed on the Appellant.

154,

It was also noted while we had been waiting outside the Court that the bundles we had been working from was the very first set of the application bundles and since that time everything had been updated, without us being informed, this included more statements from the police officer in charge of the case, there were lots of documents missing from within the first bundle due to the update, so until he was given the updated bundles, the Appellant had never seen them additional documents.

It was stated by the respondent they had sent new bundles to the acting solicitors Michael Carroll and co three times since the being of January 2016, we had never been given a set of new bundles since this case had started in 2014, we had never been told about new bundles been sent and never given a new copy of any bundle. This meant that bundle we had would have had all wrong page numbers and been paginated totally different from the bundles that were being used by the prosecution barrister and Courts.

When we were in Court, we did say this to the Judge about the bundles, the Judge ordered the clerk of the Court to contact Michael Carroll and Co solicitors and order the solicitors to bring the bundles to Court. the solicitors informed the clerk that the bundles were at Nexus Chambers, the Judge was shocked that the solicitors did not have a copy of the bundles at their office. The Appellant’s uncle who was also at Court said to the Judge he was willing to go to Nexus Chambers and pick the bundles up.

155,

The Judge listed this for the 22/09/2016 after 14:00 hours to make sure we were all working from them same set of bundles.

Upon the Appellant’s uncle getting home it was seen that the bundle he had collected was not the full set of bundles and only had part of the applications Skeleton Bundle.

On the 22 September 2016 we attended Court to inform the Judge we still did not have the updated bundles and the Judge once again got the clerk of the Court to call Michael Carroll and co solicitors to find out what was going on within the bundles, the Judge was very upset that we still did not have the bundles for the case, the Judge asked for the bundles to be brought to Court before 4 PM, The Appellant’s mother stated that it would be easier and faster for her to pick the bundles up from the solicitors on the way home from Court, the Judge asked if she was sure that he could get them brought to Court she stated that it be faster for her to pick the bundles up from the solicitors on my way home.

When we left Court due to the time and the circumstances we had been placed in The Appellant mother called Michael Carroll’s office to say what time we would be there by, The Appellant mother was told that the office would be closed by the time we got there so The Appellant mother agreed to pick the bundles up first thing in the morning on 23 September 2016.

On 23-09-2016 The Appellant mother left home early in the morning to go to Michael Carroll’s office and collect the bundles with her brother, Mr A Cordell they went into the office

156,

together to get the bundles, when the solicitor came down the stairs, he had a piece of paper that The Appellant mother needed to sign, stating that the bundles had been collected from the office.

Upon getting home and looking at the bundles, The Appellant mother noticed there is now at least 13 additional statements that The Appellant and The Appellant mother had never seen before from the Respondent bundle, this is a clear error as we knew that in the first bundle there were only 4 public witness statements and there now seems to be 16, when taking a closer look at the statements we noticed there are no members of the public's statements of truth and this also applied for the original 4 contained in the folder minus one, this also highlighted that each member of the public's statements are police officers only and have each put their signatures on two different statements each, in a pretence of portraying to own two houses each in Edmonton xxx Gardens and other surrounding roads in an around Progress way, the police officers are claiming to be victims of this case while on active duty.

So in understanding this, the Applicant contacted Edmonton police stations lost property room, so too for him to arrange collection of the original bundle, that was never served to him in accordance with the law. To his further upset and disappointment of justice he was to be told by another police officer deployed at the lost property room as the manager, that the bundle that the Appellant wanted to claim had been misplaced or stolen, this file clearly shows that there was only ever four potential members of the publics witness statements

157,

attached within side of the original Asbo application.

Some of the statements added are all dated prior to the Magistrates Court trial. Upon looking at The Appellant’s bundles it seemed this had not been updated or indexed since 2015, so all the new documents that had been submitted to be added to The Appellant’s bundle was not in their as they should have been.

Over the days leading up to this, The Appellant mother had learned how important it was that all the bundles were paginated and indexed correctly and that all the bundles were the same as each other so that each person was working on them files was all in Co Hurst to each other, as there was always problems at court due to this not being completed correctly.

Though the case history multiple documents had been handed to the Court, and them documents did not get patronised correctly or indexed into The Appellant’s bundles, this includes the court and the Respondent bundles that they were using also.

A whole weekend was spent trying to add missing documents to the Appellant’s bundle and making copies so that on the Court date of the 26-09-2016; any missing files could be added to the Respondent bundle and the three Judge’s bundles. The Appellant health had become very unstable due to him knowing that he was going to have to be dealing with this

158,

himself.

The Appellant mother also spent part of the weekend also writing a letter to the Judge in regards to what had gone on with the breaches in The Appellant’s human rights, his article 6 human rights the Applicants rights to a fair and speedy trial, there were also a list of other things that had gone on throughout the case since 2014 in regards to the nondisclosure, and other issues that was always being raised when at Court and the reason as to why legal aid had been granted:

Due to the complexity of the case.

Due to The Appellant’s learning difficulties.

Due to the concerns of The Appellant health.

This letter was emailed to the Court and asked to be passed to the Judge.

Please see letter that was emailed to the judge

The 26 September 2016 the three-day Appeal hearing was due to start, The Appellant was so unwell that there was no way he could attend Court, Mr A Cordell and Miss L Cordell attended Court to speak to the Judge, when the Judge entered the Courtroom he stated that he had received a letter that had to be addressed, he stated that he felt this would go to judicial review, he stated he had three options:

Carry on with the Appeal in the hope that The Appellant would turn up the following day.

159,

To Dismiss the Appeal.

Adjourn the Appeal to a new date.

The Judge went over the letter in great detail; he started around five times that he felt that this case was going to go to judicial review.

The Judge decided to adjourn the case until the 16/01/2017; this was later changed for the Appeal to start on the 17/01/2017. The Respondent had tried to object to the Appeal being adjourned. The Judge stated that we should try to find a new solicitor to take on the Appeal and that he would help and also make sure that legal aid was in place.

The Judge asked why The Appellant was not in Court. The Appellant mother stated The Appellant had become so unwell due to what was going on in this case and that he was not coping. Information was passed to the Judge that showed The Appellant was unwell.

Mentioned in court; was also the missing documents that was missing from The Appellant’s bundle, and that there were no statements within the bundle, my mother stated to the Judge that she had spent a lot of the weekend trying to update The Appellant’s bundle and make sure that it was indexed correctly,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2.

Asbo Rewired -1-4820 26-04-2017 18-58

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173

 

42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2.

Asbo Rewired -1-4820 26-04-2017 18-58

26/04/2017

/ Page Numbers: 160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173

--

160,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time:       26/04/2017 06:58:10 PM

In the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division

Royal Courts of Justice Strand,

London,

WC2A 2ll

Date: 17/04/2017

Between:

THE QUEEN

ON THE APPLICATION OF

SIMON CORDELL   CLAIMANT

- AND -

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

DEFENDANT

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

INTERESTED

PARTY

SKELETON ARGUMENT INTRODUCTION:

1. This application is to have the following decisions/orders reviewed and reversed in order to prevail in the right to and in justice.

2. A decision/order to make an application for an Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order against the Appellant as named above was agreed in a conference at the Enfield civic centre on the 00/00/2014 alongside their employed staff and members of the Metropolis police.

3. On the 5th November 2014, the Appellant defends in his defence that a guilty verdict was wrongfully decided at Highbury Magistrates Court, this was in order for the Commissioner of the Metropolis Police.

4. The Appellant asks for the case to be reopened and reviewed in its decision that is made by order of the Magistrates Court, so for the verdict to be overturned in his favour to be declared as void making the decision an error in law.

5. The Appellant's human rights have now been breached. And.

6. The Appellant's right to due process has also been breached. This led to the Appellant's right to a fair trial also being breached.

7. The ongoing of the Asbo case are a clear miscarriage of justice that has been allowed to happen, even once reported.

8. The Appellant's rights in the data protection act 1998 have also been breached in relation towards the ongoings of the Anti-Social Behaviour order.

9. The Appellant requests the decision/order that was placed upon his statue of liberties to make the interim order a full Antisocial Behaviour order on 4th August 2015 by Highbury Corner Magistrates Court, in order for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to be revoked.

10. The Appellant asks for the case to be reopened and reviewed in its decision that is made by order of the Magistrates Court, so for the verdict to be overturned in his favour to be declared as void making the decision an error in law.

11. The Appellant's human rights have now been breached. And.

12. The Appellant's right to due process has also been breached. This led to the Appellant's right to a fair trial also being breached.

13. The ongoing of the Asbo case are a clear miscarriage of justice that has been allowed to happen, even once reported.

14. The Appellant's rights in the data protection act 1998 have also been breached in relation towards the ongoings of the Anti-Social Behaviour order.

15. The Appellant requests for the decision/order made at Wood Green Crown Court on 19th January 2017 in relation to the Appeal against conviction, of the Antisocial Behaviour Order to be dismissed also.

16. The Appellant asks for the case to be reopened and reviewed in its decision that is made by order of the Magistrates Court, so for the verdict to be overturned in his favour to be declared as void making the decision an error in law.

17. The Appellant's human rights have now been breached. And.

18. The Appellant's right to due process has also been breached. This led to the Appellant's right to a fair trial also being breached.

19. The ongoing of the Asbo case are a clear miscarriage of justice that has been allowed to happen, even once reported.

20. The Appellant's rights in the data protection act 1998 have also been breached in relation towards the ongoings of the Anti-Social Behaviour order.

21. It is said that on the on the 12th September 2014 the police attended The Appellant home address of 109 Burncroft, Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ, they knocked on the door, the Appellant was not expecting anyone, the Appellant approached his front door and looked through his spy hole he could see people who appeared to be police officers, and asked them through the door what they wanted, the police stated they needed to speak to him, the Appellant opened his front door very slightly then the police officers started to try a force an object into the front door, he soon came to the understanding he was being tricked so for the officers to be able to serve some

161,

documents on him as they would never have been able to fit into any standard letterbox, due to the Appellant's learning difficulties he stated he would not accept anything and closed his door and then continued to state that he was not being rude in doing so.

22. It is a well-known fact on the police's system of government bodies that the Appellant does have learning difficulties and health problems.

23. The Appellant could hear the police talking outside his front door and the lady police officer then questioned her colleges and said what shall we do now, a male police officer stated put it on the floor in front of the door referring to the application.

24. They then put some other pages into the Appellant's letterbox this totalled to four pages. The lady police officer then placed an A4 size folder on the floor outside the Appellant's front door as the male officer had instructed her to do.

25. The Appellant then made a phone call to his mother, who could not attend at the time this was until the following day when she attended the Appellant's home address. On her attendance, she found the folder was left opened on the floor where the police had left it. The Appellant’s mother was very shocked when she looked inside the folder and saw the data that was within it.

26. The data that was within side the A4 size folder was personal information and a breach of the data protection act 1998 by leaving such data in a commune area of the block of flats.

27. A letter of complaint was put to the police in the way in which they had left personal information on a doorstep in view of everyone that lived or who came into the block of flats, this was achieved on the 13th September 2014 and was hand delivered to Edmonton Green police station and a receipt was issued from them, at the same time as of when the complaint letter was handed in there was also that of the A4 bundle being referred to as the Asbo application and court summons which was also handed into the front desk of the police station.

28. The complaint has never been addressed and neither has there been that of a professional response concluding any outcome to them issues raised of concern, a total failure of a response from the police, providing any professionalism when dealing with complaints.

29. Please see a letter of the compliant and photos and receipt that was handed to Edmonton police station on 13th September 2014.

30. On 06th October 2014, the Appellant was due to appear in Court on this day, The Appellant had arranged for Michael Carroll and Co Solicitors, to act on his behalf, this included to have legal aid in place.

31. On the day of court legal aid had been applied for, but the legal aid had been refused, the Judge sitting overturned this and granted legal aid in the Applicants favour.

32. The reason for the Judge overturning and granting legal aid was due to the Appellant having known learning difficulties, health problems and due to the complexity of the case.

33. The disclosure was asked for so that the Appellant could stand a fair and speedy trial, but the requested disclosure never ever did come. The case was relisted for the 22/10/2014, for an interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing, all police officers were due to attend for the interim hearing.

34. On the 22nd October 2014, the Appellant was due in Court for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order to be heard, due to the Appellant barrister having a burst water pipe and his home being flooded he could not attend, the applicant still wanted the case to be heard which the Judge would not allow.

35. The Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing was then set for the 05/11/2014.

36. On the 22nd October 2014, all police officers did attend Court for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing. The disclosure was asked for on this date.

37. 37.On 05th November 2014, the Appellant was due in Court for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing; all police were due to attend but did not. The Appellant's barrister could not attend on this date due to the flooding that taken place at his home address, another barrister turned up to represent the Appellant but had no paperwork for the case only a skeleton argument to strike-out the Antisocial Behaviour Order application.

38. The skeleton argument, submitted on behalf of the Appellant, to strike out the application for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order. Arguments advanced in this respect, and those which rely upon the civil procedure rules, are not applicable to these proceedings. The civil procedure rules only apply to proceedings in the county Court, the high Court, and the civil division of the Court of Appeal. As a result, the Magistrate's Court has no jurisdiction to consider an application to strike-out application.

39. The Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing went ahead, The Appellant's barrister did not have the correct paperwork for the hearing, and knew very little about the case, no police officers turned up to Court on this day.

40. In the days prior to this hearing, The Appellant was rushed to the hospital due to kidney problems while he was still in hospital he was informed by his solicitor on the 04/11/2014 that if he did not attend Court on the 05/11/2014 the case would go ahead without his presence. The Appellant then discharged himself from the hospital because he had no choice. (He was extremely unwell)

41. On this date, the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order was granted by the District Judge Newham.

42. Upon delivering her judgment, District Judge Newham ruled that it is just to impose an Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order, and that regard had been taken of The Appellant's Article 6 and 8 rights, as well as The Appellants business. District Judge Newham ruled that there are no provisions contained within the (amended) proposed Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order which would prevent The Appellant from conducting legitimate business.

43. On this date, all police officers were due to attend. (They did not attend their reason was they were not told to attend; this was untrue as the application from 22/10/14 should still stand as the case had only been adjourned until this date for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing)

44. The applicant's case also relied solely on hearsay, Magistrate's Courts (hearsay evidence in civil proceeding) rules 1999.

45. These are the conditions The Appellant was placed under and are for the whole of the UK:

46. The defendant is prohibited from:

47. Attending a rave as defined by s.63 (1) of the criminal justice and public order act 1994.

48. Being concerned in the organisation of a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal justice and public order act 1994.

49. Knowingly using or supplying property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal justice and public order act 1994.

50. Entering or remaining in any disused or abandoned building unless invited to do so in writing by a registered charitable organisation.

51. Entering or remaining on non-residential private property on an industrial estate between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am without written permission from the owner and/or leaseholder of the property; and: -

52. Engaging in any licensable activity in any unlicensed premises.

53. For the sake of clarity, nothing in this order prevents the defendant from assisting, preparing for, or engaging in licensed licensable activities.

54. This is untrue as we have since contacted council and police and told he would not be granted a licence to hold any events as long as the Antisocial Behaviour Order was in place other than when applying with Enfield Council. So the Appellant's entertainment business is seriously affected by the Antisocial Behaviour Order that was put in place.

55. Points to address regarding the conditions the Appellant is prohibited from doing.

162,

Clearly, the conditions the Appellant was put under are a breach of the Appellant's human rights, and disproportionate due to the fact it would breach:

56.  Article 3 freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment: -

57.  Article 5 right to liberty and security: -

58.  Article 8 respect for your private and family life, home, and correspondence: -

59.  Article 23.1 of the universal declaration of human rights states: (1) everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

60.  Condition E states entering or remaining on a non-residential private property on an industrial estate between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am without the written permission from the owner of that land and/or leaseholder of the property.

61.  With this condition in place, it makes it so that the Appellants life is left in term while as for it leaves him in a state of confusion as to what he can and cannot do as he has been left not equal to others.

62.  Any non-residential property the Appellant would like to attend such as where house night club or any friends or family’s private parties he is not able to attend:

63.  This also includes Hospitals, Police Stations, 24-hour Supermarkets, Petrol Stations, Cinemas, Restaurants, Bars, Nightclubs, and any other public place open to the public between these times that is non-residential. The Appellant cannot go to without written permission which would be degrading for the Appellant to have to ask each time he wanted to go somewhere and explain why he needed it to be confirmed in writing by the owner and/or leaseholder of the property, how this condition could be applied by any Judge and state it is not a beach of someone human rights should not be justified.

64.  Conditions C states knowingly using or supplying property personal or otherwise for the use of a rave as defined under section 63.1 of the criminal justice and public order act, the Appellants has spent the last 10 years building his business saving every penny with help from his family.

65.  The company he has built is regulated within the entertainment industry and is represented by the licensing Act 2003, he intends to hire equipment out, the Appellants business is seriously affected by the conditions, partly because if he hired his equipment to any person and it ended up in an indoor private party or an outdoor illegal rave then the Appellant would be in breach of the conditions he has been imposed to be incompliance with another issue of concern is all events sighted within the Applicants bundle are indoor events and are therefore not illegal. When hiring out equipment the appellant does ask what it is going to be used for and also makes sure that he and his clients have that of a professional contract in place, so for him to be sure he is hiring the equipment in good faith.

66.  Sometimes when a person tells you their reason for hiring the equipment out you may find out at a later date that what was explained when hiring the equipment out is not always correct and that it was not used for the purpose the person told you. The Appellant should not be liable for other people's actions when following the correct protocols of business and should never be in breach of the Asbo conditions in them circumstances.

67.  Also if the Appellant loaned someone any personal belongings and that person ended up at an illegal rave then the Appellant would again be in breach of his conditions, even if the item was something that did not even constitute as being for an illegal rave.

68.  These are just two more of the concerns within the conditions that the Appellant is under.

69.  Some of our other concerns within the conditions set by the Courts are that the Appellant's Human rights are even further breached, this includes: -

70.  Article 6 right to a fair trial: -

71.  The Appellant had to go ahead at the hearing without the barrister having any other paperwork other than the application to strike out, which was not allowed.

72.  Also on this date, the police officers did not attend when they knew they should.

73.  The Appellant was so unwell at this hearing, he was not coping he should never have had to discharge himself from hospital to try to defend himself.

74.  The police have it on the police systems who done what they say the Appellant has done and have not disclosed that information when requested.

75.  The following directions were made:

76.  The parties to exchange any additional evidence on which they seek to rely by 20th January 2015, this is to include any witness statements from any witness, including the defendant himself; and: -

77.  The parties are prohibited from relying on any evidence not already served or served in accordance with paragraph 1 of these directions, without the permission of the Court.

78.  Although not a formal direction, should any witnesses no longer be required, the Judge requested written confirmation of this to be given to all parties speedily.

79.  At present, the following witnesses are required to attend the full hearing:

(i) Inspector Douglas Skinner; -

(ii) Police constable Miles; -

(iii) Acting police sergeant Edgoose; -

(iv) Police constable Elsmore: -

(v) Sergeant King: -

(vi) Police constable Ames; and: -

(vii) Inspector Hamill.

 

80.  The interim order was set to continue until 10th March 2015 when the full hearing was heard this was listed for two full days.

81.  The disclosure was asked for this was meant to be given by 20/01/2015 this never happened, and no disclosure was given.

82.  No disclosure was served on us by the20/01/2015 that was asked for; this has happened throughout this case. The disclosure we ask for would prove the Appellant did not do what the police are saying within the application.

83.  Before the first hearing was due to take place the Appellant and his mother was constantly requesting by methods such as via phone and emails for the acting solicitors Michael Carrol and co.’s to obtain the relevant information so for them to have the Applicants best interests at heart regarding a fair trial, thought our requests we understood that things were not being addressed to the correct level of services needed, this included a lack of communication, submission of forms and applications and relevant procedures for a solicitor firm to have the correct correspondents ready for trial, in laymen terms a complete disregard for their clients, things just was simply not being completed.

84.  Since the start of the case meetings was constantly being put off by them self's, we had also asked a number of times could the solicitors please go over the CADs, and intelligence reports that were in the Asbo application as we understood there to be serious errors contained within its context, our request was never accomplished, this included the questioning of laws representing the case stating it was an illegal offence to which the Applicant had never been arrested for.

85.  Also noticed within the applicant's bundles were other serious breaches of data protection, regulations, and codes of conduct, this includes some of the following: - in police officers’ statements.

 

163,

Should start at number 76 document index

1.      In what is referred to as a “CFS call” in a short abbreviation a member of the public requesting assistance by way of a phone call for services that in turn has led an investigating officer(s) into using a mg11 form otherwise known as a witness statement, to take a version of events of a person.

2.      The issue of relevance being highlighted is in witness statements that were contained within the Asbo applications bundle. Serious errors once again seem to have occurred, that leave serious concerns towards any guilty verdict, as for sure when any official person is filling out such a form as a mg 11 there should be statements of truth that have been complied with as well as many other measurements that should be met that seem to be under serious scrutiny as for they were written by police officers and not the witnesses themselves, to even further the rights to justice the Appellant was not allowed to call any witnesses or any other police officers whose information was within the application's bundle he was only allowed to have the police officers that the application wanted us to have, he simply was denied his rights to have any other witnesses being called.

3.      The members of the public's statements that could be proved to be no other than information reports that should be classified as non-disclosed intelligence were allowed to remain within the application’s bundle as witness statements without being questioned by the acting solicitors, although it was constantly being brought up.

4.      On the 10th March 2015, this date was due to be the full Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing, but the Court had made a mistake and only listed it for a one-day hearing.

5.      District Judge Williams sitting, apologised for the error, and said that a part hearing could take place, or the full hearing is adjourned to a later date so that the full hearing could be dealt with over two days.

6.      The Appellant was upset as he wanted this to be dealt with and only agreed that the case is adjourned until the 03/08/2014 and the 04/08/2014 if district Judge Williams heard the case, she cleared her diary and promised that she would be the Judge that would preside over the case.

7.      District Judge Williams also stated that this was the 1st time she had ever seen a case in which the commissioner of the metropolitan police had brought an Antisocial Behaviour Order in front of her in this way in a civil capacity.

8.      The disclosure was asked for and this was once again never given.

9.      On the 2nd August 2015 The Appellant's mother received a phone call from Miss Ward acting solicitors, regarding a statement she had just found in the emails relating to Antisocial Behaviour Order, The Appellant's mother asked if this could be sent over via email to her, in knowing it was too late to do anything about it because the full hearing started the next day. Similar things were continuously happening throughout the case; the solicitors seemed to only do anything on the case the day before the hearings, or a few days before it was due to take place. Many emails were sent including many phone calls that were made to get the right things done, most of the emails went not replied to for months, phone calls was not picked up, or if they were we were told that things would be addressed when they never were.

10.  The Appellant attended Court on the 03rd August 2015 and the 04th August 2015 for the full hearing of the Antisocial Behaviour Order, only to find the stipulation and reasons he had allowed the case to be adjourned to these dates had not been adhered to, the presiding Judge was not District Judge Williams, it fact it was District Judge D Pigot who would be residing over the full hearing.

11.  Non-disclosure was again spoken about, but nothing came of this and the case went forward.

12.  We understand this is only our opinion, but we believe this Judge had already found that she was going to prove the case before it even started for the full Antisocial Behaviour Order in favour of the applicants.

13.  Before the hearing started The Appellant’s, mother informed the Judge the Appellant was very ill and she did not think he would cope due to health problems. She continued with the case none the less and did not ask the Appellant's mother to elaborate further. Later within the hearing the judge would notice that there should have been medical records adduced for the Applicants response within his bundle and this was missing along with a lot of other documents that had been requested for his defence, the Appellants bundle was only around 82 pages when it should have been around 300 pages.

14.  Continually through cross-examination by the Appellants barrister toward the police officers, District Judge D Pigot kept interrupting and telling the barrister he could not ask the questions he was asking even though what he was asking corresponded with what the police had put in their own statements. The Appellant's barrister even commented to the Judge Pigot “I am only asking questions pertaining to what the police have put in their statements” also he said to the Judge “I hope you are not going to have as much due- diligence with my client on cross-examination as you have with me” to which the Judge replied she would.

15.  This was certainly not the case and in fact, the Judge allowed the Appellant to be cross-examined extremely harshly even knowing the Appellant had health problems.

16.  On the date of trial the Appellants solicitor had not even prepared a copy of the bundle so for the Appellant to have his own bundle, he was never told by the acting solicitors that he should of had his own copy and there was also the issue of there being a lot of documents missing from the Appellant's bundle.

17.  On the day of trial when the Appellant took the stand, the Judge did ask where the Appellants bundle was, he stated he had never been given one, and did not know he needed one, the Judge did ask if there was a spare bundle that the Appellant could use which there was not. the Judge carried on by allowing the Appellant to be cross-examined clearly anyone could see the Appellant was unwell, from time to time the Judge passed the Appellant her own bundle.

18.  Thought the trial the Appellant because the appellant did not understand what he was being asked, the problem with this is how is someone with learning difficulties is meant to be able to read what is contained within the bundle.

19.  The Appellant feels that if he had had been solicited correctly then for sure he would have been better prepared, as for this would have left him with access to his own bundle so for him and his barrister to have been able to defend the Applicant correctly, therefore efficiently. Prior to the hearing this would have been the right point of time of opportunity for any of the support network the Applicant has or may need in place to have complied with what would have been in the Applicants best interest, so for that group of people working together as a collective of people, to have been able to off overseen this case, we all now feel this was totally inappropriate for Mr Simon Cordell to have been opposed to such behaviour and therefore challenge the rightfulness of what was allowed by the Judge to have happened.

20.  To the best of the Appellants barrister abilities he questioned the legitimacy of many issues of our concern that we have raised in many of the correspondents to the relevant persons of interest, relating towards this case, one of them concerns that we continually have raised is in relation towards the CAD's that are being used in the Asbo application, such problems referring to the cads are in reference towards the case that is linked to Progress Way on 6th 7th 8th June 2014, this line of interrogation, such as what has been taken on by members of the police lead to a line of questioning such as:- if there was an illegal rave taking place at the sometime on Crown Road.

21.  The Appellants barrister was asked to make this line of questioning, the reason being, after reading the local newspapers and making other inquires, we knew for sure this was a true fact, that there was another party at Crown road on the same dates.

22.  It was latter revelled that the acting solicitors had not gone over the CADs before the trial, although they were asked too many times, and this should have been a standard fair practice for them.

23.  If asked by any official person involved in the on goings of the Anti-Social Behaviour Order, the defendant can and is happy to provide a list of correspondents that have been requested by way of mobile texts and electronic emails by him and his per network. In them

164,

24.  messages he had asked his acting solicitor firm at the time to make sure of any reductions of wrongful accusations that has now been proven not to be correct, part of the reason why is because there is still CADs within the bundle that had nothing to do with the Appellant, what has already been clearly proven and should not stand as any part of a case against his person.

25.  As can be seen in a copy of the Magistrates transcripts of the trial a police officer gave wrongful information while under oath, he stated that every CAD contained in the Asbo application on the dates of the 6th 7th 8th June 2014 is in fact related to Progress Way and there was not an illegal rave taking place on Crown Road on them same dates, he done this to help himself in aid of gaining a guilty verdict against the Appellant, what he stated to the district judge under cross-examination is not the truth as can be proven by a copy of a freedom of information request that was sent in receipt's to Enfield Council and ourselves, to further this the Judge then asked the same question was every CAD linked to the case of the application, and was given the exact same answer yes.

26.  Attached is a copy of the freedom of information act which was obtained from Enfield Council.

27.  In point of the facts there are multiple inconsistencies pertained within the CADs within the application, timestamps also do not match up within the CADs, there is also all the missing CADs. Some of the intelligence reports also have been updated with no reason as to why. There are also the breaches of data protection within the Appellants PNC record which are incorrect which also can be proven and should have never been contained without the right application granted by a judge, also contained within the police officer statements there are errors which can be proven as untrue and are therefore a breach of the data protection act.

28.  We know the police knew about the illegal rave at Crown Road because police were deployed there. This can clearly be seen within the CADs which are within the application's bundle, but there is so much reduction within the CADs we believe there is a lot more that pertain to Crown Road, and we cannot see due to the reductions.

29.  Part of the Appellant's barrister submission had been that the allegations were that the Appellant was involved in the organising of illegal raves, but the applicant hadn't adduced evidence of trespass which is a requirement for proving that an indoor rave was illegal.

30.  The district Judge ruled that the applicant did not need to prove illegality - all that needed to prove was the Appellant had acted in an Antisocial Manner.

31.  In the Appellants barrister view this is a very questionable decision: firstly, the applicant based their case on the illegality of the raves rather than the fact of the rave's themselves and secondly, without proof of illegality the presumption of innocence leads to the conclusion that the raves were legal, and thus the applicant being prohibited from engaging in an ostensibly lawful activity requires more careful consideration on issues of proportionality.

32.  The barrister continued to state that the Applicant could go to judicial review in regards to the case, but gave his legal advice that he did not think this decision was in the Appellants best interest as he believed there is little merit in doing so, the reason he gave was because the Appellant would then lose his right to Appeal to the Crown Court and even if he succeeded in the high/div Court, they would merely remit it back to the Lower Court, who would then probably go through the motions of considering proportionality before coming to the same conclusion.

33.  To summarise the Judge stated she did not need to prove illegality, but she proved the Appellant had acted in an Antisocial Manner, how the district Judge came to this conclusion we do not understand, not one police officer had stated the Appellant had acted in an Antisocial Manner towards them, is also a fact that any application for an Antisocial Behaviour Order has to be bought within six months of the dates, there were cases going back prior to the six months which should have only been used for reference, but the District Judge also included these cases to be proven.

34.  Since this case started, we knew the police and the public order investigation unit held information on the police systems that proved the Appellant was not the organiser of these illegal raves. In fact, the police knowingly went around to the known organiser's homes and also spoke with them on the telephone. This proves they have the information we were asking for in disclosure. (This was found out via social media and Google by the Appellant's mother) the Appellant's mother even called the public order investigation unit and spoke to DS Chapman, and Val Turner.

35.  The Appellant had not been coping throughout this case and walked out of the Court, the Appellant's mother said to the District Judge you can clearly see he is not well and is not coping, which the district Judge confirmed she could clearly see that the Appellant was not well. But continued to ask the clerk to get the Appellant back in Court and she also informed that if appellant re-entered the Courtroom and was disruptive, she would hold him in contempt of Court. The Appellants mother would not let the Appellant re-entered the Courtroom, as she knew the Appellant was so unwell and not coming and did not want him to be held in contempt of Court due to his health.

36.  Because of this, the Appellant was not there to have the Antisocial Behaviour Order served on him, and the Antisocial Behaviour Order was served to the Appellant's mother on his behalf.

37.  Upon proving the case District Judge Pigot granted all the applicants’ conditions. The applicants wanted to make this a lifetime Antisocial Behaviour Order, which district Judge Pigot did not allow and granted it for five years within the whole of the UK. With the stipulation that it could be reapplied for when the five years were concluded. She started the five years from the 04/08/2015; she did not count the time the Appellant had been on the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order.

38.  The Appellant's mother and the Appellant's barrister then asked the Judge if the conditions of the Antisocial Behaviour Order could be defined as there were many points of concern. the Judge was asked if the Appellant went to a Tesco or Tesco petrol station between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am would he be in breach of the conditions and subsequently arrested, the response from District Judge Pigot was dumbfounding she said” yes he would be arrested, taken to Court and would then have to prove he was going to get whatever petrol he required”. I am guessing the same could be said for food and any other non-residential buildings, this would include hospitals, police stations, restaurants, cinemas etc. on hearing the Appellant's mother and barrister questioned this and said “so you think this is in accordance with the law,?” she replied to this “the conditions are precise and plain.

39.  District Judge Pigot then left the Courtroom with her clerk to get the memorandum of an entry, so for them to be made up as soon as possible, this was due to the lateness of the day and the department who dealt with this kind of request would be closed, on her return the District Judge asked why the Appellants barrister was not in Court, the Appellants mother said that he had left because he was not told that he needed to stay, she handed the memorandum of an entry to the Appellants mother and a copy was then sent to the applicants barrister, on reviewing this the applicants barrister said there were multiple spelling mistakes and that the dates from 2013 should not be entered and needed to be removed. She said this would be amended and a new copy would be sent in the post, and until this day this has never happened even though the Appellants mother contacted the Court via emails in regards to them issues, the spelling mistakes were corrected but not the dates.

40.  We have since found out that we also should have been handed a map showing all areas which the Antisocial Behaviour Order conditions encompassed, which we have also never been given, but this map would have just shown the whole of the UK, even low the extent of the problems only excised in Enfield and under Asbo guidance should never have been granted on such a geological wide scale without proof of contempt.

41.  The Appellant's mother asked the Court for the transcripts, but was told at the Magistrate's Court does not record hearings, that the only notes that were kept were the clerks Court notes, the clerks Court notes were requested and the fee paid to obtain these. Upon looking at the clerk's notes there is a substantial amount is not included within them for the full two-day hearing for the Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing.

165,

42.  Please see Clerk Notes: -

43.  I know that a judicial review in regards to the Magistrates hearing is being submitted to the Court out of time, but when the Appellants mother contacted the high Court to make enquiries in regards to a judicial review and explained the situation that had occurred throughout this case she was told to submit the application for judicial review for the Magistrates hearing's and that under exceptional circumstances the time limit could be overturned, the reason that this has been submitted to the Court out of time is due to the Appellant taking his barristers opinion that he would be better to go for the Appeal at the Crown Court and this is what the Appellant did. The Appeal hearing was not concluded until 19 January 2017.

44.  On the 13 August 2015, the Metropolitan Police Service posted on their website, this led to all the local newspapers printing the story about the Appellant.

45.  Please see attached: -

46.  But how could the police have printed this as illegality had not been proven?

47.  This lead to the Appellant having stones thrown at his windows, and a gun being pulled out on him, which it then took the police six days to come out to take a report, we know the reason why it took the police so long to come and take the report it's how much the police dislike the Appellant, and his family this has been ongoing for over 23 years.

48.  The Appellant's mother contacted many solicitors to try and get a new solicitor to take over the case, each time she was told that solicitors will not take a case on at Appeal stage due to how much legal aid paid for Appeal hearing, legal aid believed the solicitors that acted for the hearing would be dealing with the Appeal hearing so there was a set amount that would be paid for Appeal hearings which would not cover a new solicitor going over the complete case. The Appellant's mother believed it was best to keep the old solicitors on record as it was better to have a solicitor then having non due to the Appellant's health which had deteriorated throughout this case.

49.  The Appeal was listed for the 26 October 2015 but only listed for 1-hour hearing the case was put off, due to the case needed to be set for three days as to the Appeal hearing.

50.  The acting solicitors had seemed to have lost the Appellant's bundle it had been removed from the office due to the office being audited in the October 2015, no one seemed to be able to find the Appellant's bundle, and all the missing documents that was meant to have been within the bundle which was for the case and full hearing.

51.  On the 9th November 2015 the case was listed for a mention hearing, all bundles were due to be at the Crown Court by the 23December 2015. The case was listed for a three-day Appeal to start on 22 February 2016. Discloser had been requested again.

52.  In the December 2015 arrangements was made for the acting solicitors to attend the Appellants mother's home to go over the case bundles, at this point the Appellants mother made sure that all the CADs and intelligence reports was gone over by the solicitor, upon seeing all the errors the solicitor was shocked, maps were made up to be included in the Appellant's bundle and the Appellant's bundle was remade as it was due to be handed into Wood Green Crown Court on the 23 December 2015. Emails were also sent by the solicitor to the police.

53.  The Appellants mother agreed to print of multiple documents including all maps needed to be done in colour, just prior to the Christmas holiday all printing was done and contact was made with the solicitors in order to get the Appellant's bundle Paginated and indexed, on 22 December 2015 multiple texts and calls was made to the solicitor due to the fact the bundle needed to be to the Court by the 23 December 2015.

54.  The acting solicitor firm's replies were not being made in efficient time. On one occasion out of many the acting solicitor did not reply until much later, when she finally did reply she stated, that she could hand in the bundle when she got back from the Christmas and her New Year holidays, this was clearly not adequate as there should have been a case handler in her position to handle the Applicants case load.

55.  Effectually a text was sent to the solicitor stating that this was going to have an effect on families Christmas and New Year due to the Appellant knowing that the Court had ordered the bundle to be submitted to the Court by a certain date and this time limit given by a judge not being merited, a text was received back from the solicitors, this stated the following:- “to be at the office by 18:00 PM” The Appellants mother attended and two bundles was Paginated and indexed which took until around01:30 AM. Miss Ward was not happy due to the time that had to be spent dealing with this as she was due to fly out in the early hours to Ireland. The bundles were left with the Appellants mother, this was achieved so that one mastered copy could behand-delivered to the Court in the morning on the 23 December 2015 and the other bundle was recorded delivered via the Post Office to the police.

56.  Miss Ward stated after the Christmas and New Year holidays she would get the Appellant's bundle ready so it could be given to him. The Appellant had not seen the new bundle as the solicitor did not want to meet him, and due to the lateness in which the bundle was made to get into the court and the police, there was not the time for the Appellant to see the new bundle.

57.  One of the texts that were sent to the Appellants mother please see below. Stated: that on the 22/12/2015, “This is a legal aid case Lorraine and Simon need to recognise that he is not paying privately so needs to work within the constraints of the legal aid system.” Upon receiving the text the Appellants mother was upset, it was the Court who had set the day for the bundle to be within the Court, not the Appellant.

58.  The solicitors should have dealt with the case in a timely manner and made sure that things were not left to the last minute.

59.  All that the Appellant ever wanted was for the solicitors to do what was right and needed for the Applicant their client, to which never happened.

60.  When overseeing the past activities of: “the case handlers”, it is a sure fact that things was always left or not achieved at all, this would always lead the Appellants to his disappointment, in turn, causing wrongful suffering and loss, this seems to continue to leave the Appellant being in receipt of getting the blame, when he should not.

61.  It was also upsetting because it seemed as if: - the Appellant paid for the solicitor's services then things would have been addressed a lot differently. I feel it should make no difference between paying privately or having legal aid put in place, a solicitor's job is to represent their client to the best of their ability seek justice for their client the best they possibly can, this was not the case throughout this case. After the Christmas and the New Year's holidays, we had to keep asking for the Appellant's bundle, we managed to get this in the beginning of February 2016, not long before the trial was due to start, it would also seem the solicitors was having problems getting a barrister for the Appellant still had not seen a barrister, this was at the time of the full hearing at the Magistrate's Court, the original barrister that represented the Appellant at the Magistrate's hearings, was on sabbatical leave. It is also noted that the acting solicitors, did not want a meeting with the Appellant and was mostly dealing with the Appellants mother.

62.  On the 19th February 2016 the acting Solicitors put into the Court for a mention hearing, the Appellant believed this was due to non­disclosure, but the solicitors had also put an application into Break Fixture this was dismissed by His Honour Judge Morrison, this was three days before the three-day Appeal hearing was due to start.

63.  “The Court will not and does not accede to any application for The Appellants.”

64.  Solicitor's to come off the record or to cease acting for the Appellant, such an application was dismissed by His Honour Judge Morrison on the 19th February 2016. It was also said that if any attempt is made to repeat this application the Court will require it to be made in person, by the Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co.”

65.  This information is very important due to what occurred on the 21/09/2016 when HHJ-PAWLAK removed the solicitors from the record, as this was done without the Appellant or a Senior Partner of Michael Carroll & Co being present in Court. (“See date 21/09/2016 as more

166,

notes”)

66.  His Honour Judge Morrison listed for the case to be heard on the 22/02/2016 in front of HHJ-PAWLAK, this was due to issues that were raised once again regarding nondisclosure and he felt he was not the best Judge to answer these issues.

67.  The reason the solicitors gave to come off the record so close to the Appeal hearing was a breakdown in communication and they also could not get a barrister to deal with this case, this is in part misleading, the actual reason for them wanting to come off the record was due to the lack of work done by solicitors acting for the Appellant, in point of fact the case was not ready for the Appeal hearing, They could also not get a Barrister, and did not want to meet with their client.

68.  His Honour Judge Morrison had never heard off solicitors that could not get a barrister and ordered that a Public Defender took over the case to act for the Appellant.

69.  A three-day Appeal hearing was listed for 22/02/2016, 23/02/2016 and 24/02/2016.

70.  Mr Morris acting Public Defender attended Court on this day to act for the Appellant; the Appellant had not met Mr Morris before this date. Mr Morris had only had the case since the 19/02/2016 and was not ready for the three-day Appeal hearing. He wanted time to be able to go over all the large case bundles and be able to sit down and talk to the Appellant, so asked for an adjournment.

71.  HHJ-PAWLAK was very unsympathetic and said he had the weekend to get ready for this case and that the Appeal would go ahead. Considering this was the Public Defender that His Honour Judge Morrison had allocated to the case only three days beforehand it seemed that the Appellant was the one being penalised for the incompetence of his acting solicitors Michael Carroll & Co.

72.  The Appellant's health had deteriorated considerably due to all of what was happening within this case and other issues, the mental health team had obtained a section 135 warrant under the mental health act and it was only because of the disdain towards the Appellant from the ASBO proceedings, the Appellants Mother felt that she had to hand this information to his acting barrister, so for them to give a copy of the letter handed to them to the Judge, knowing this would cause a huge rift between the Appellant and his mother. But she had no option as the Judge was going to force the Appeal hearing to go ahead when the Appellant mother knew the Appellant would not cope.

73.  This information was also posted to the judge, in knowing that the barrister had only just got the case handed to him and he himself was not ready to take the case on, as he had not even met with the Appellant at this point in time.

74.  Upon Mr Morris handing the documents to the Judge the Judge then unwilling adjourned the Appeal hearing until the 26/09/2016 for a three-day hearing.

75.  The Judge listed the case for a mention hearing also on the 04/04/2016.

76.  After this Court hearing, HHJ-PAWLAK wrote a letter to the acting solicitors Michael Carroll and co that had to be replied to by the 04/04/2016.

77.  See Attached letter from Judge: -

78.  See attached response from Solicitors dated 03/04/2016: -

79.  ln the letter that the Judge wrote to The Appellant's solicitors on the 22/02/2016, he asked Miss Ward who was dealing with this case for the Appellant at Michael Carroll & Co, if she knew that the response had to be completed by the 04/04/2016 for when the case was next listed in Court.

80.  Miss Ward did not start working on the response to the Judge's letter until the 03/04/2016 and an email was sent to the Appellant with what Miss Ward wanted to reply in response to the Judge's letter also stating any amendments that needed to be complied with, as soon as practically possible.

81.  Because the Appellant knew that Miss Ward had sat on the letter from the Judge, in turn, she and the company that she represented, had done nothing about what the judge had requested, this was since the date of February 2016 and then Miss Ward had rushed a response to be ready on the 03/04/2016, when she had been asked repeatedly to address the letter in a timely manner from the Judge and ourselves. In doing this she had not given the Appellant any time to go over the response she had written.

82.  The Appellant amended Miss Wards Letter to include multiple points that had been missed out and sent it back to Miss Ward via email within a few hours of getting it. The Appellant was upset that he had to rushed into things, this was due to the learning problems he has and the delay in getting the letter from the solicitors meant the Appellant had hardly any time.

83.  Please see attached: -

84.  Upon attending Court on the 04/04/2016 it was seen that Mr Morris had also drafted a response to the Judge letter this response was almost identical to Miss Ward's Letter except that it included one crucial section regarding the hearsay rule that had not been included in Miss Ward's letter.

85.  The Appellant agreed on the point about the hearsay rule as he had been explaining this to Miss ward since the start of the ongoings of the case, which he felt did need to be included. But the Applicant was adamant it was going to be his letter that was going to be handed to the Judge with the oral addition of the hearsay. (This was the oral addition)

86.  “The Magistrates Court hearsay rules 1999 do not apply to the Crown Court.

87.  The defence does not accept that the Respondent has relied on the correct legislation to apply under the hearsay rules. In any event, the Appellant requests that the Respondent calls the witnesses who made CAD entries for cross-examination.

88.  It is neither professionally appropriate nor suitable for the Appellant to call police officers and question their Credibility, as proposed by the Respondent through their application under the Magistrates Court Hearsay Rules.

89.  The Appellant submits that questioning the credibility of one's own witnesses would not be permitted by the Court.

90.  The Respondent has put forward no good reason for why these witnesses cannot be called. As to say it is not in the interests of justice to do so.”

91.  HHJ-PAWLAK granted the hearsay application could be submitted, although opposed orally by Mr Morris. HHJ-PAWLAK informed that Mr Morris opposition to hearsay was contained in Mr Morris legal document, for which the Appellant did not allow Mr Morris to hand up. HHJ-PAWLAK was informed that client wished to hand up his own document to HHJ-PAWLAK against Mr Morris advice. Document read by all sides.

92.  Please see The Appellant document: -

93.  Considering point five of the Judge's letter to the Appellants Acting solicitors, it raises the question of how was this allowed, the Judge allowed Mr Morris to make an oral submission in regards to hearsay in the Court, yet then said they were not allowed and then granted the hearsay application as allowed.

94.  Michael Carroll and Co had also not done or prepared a skeleton argument for the Appellant's bundle, the Judge stated that the letter that had then been handed in could be used as the Appellant's skeleton argument.

95.  Miss Ward was sitting in the back of the Court taking notes of what was being asked by the Judge and what was being said.

96.  A meeting was meant to be arranged with the Appellant and the Public defender Mr Morris; this was not done.

97.  On the 12/07/2016: Informed by solicitor via email: -

98.  “Please note that Mr Andrew Locke has returned from a career sabbatical and he has agreed to deal with the Appeal against the imposition of an ASBO. I am in the process of confirming a conference date with Mr Locke, hopefully within the next two weeks. I have notified Mr Morris from the Public Defender Service that Mr Locke is your preferred choice and I have requested the written submissions that he had prepared for the mention hearing in April 2016 that you did not consent to or permit us to serve upon the prosecution,

167,

instead your own document was served at your insistence and contrary to the advice given by both Mr Andrew Morris and myself.

99.  Please confirm any dates that you are not available so that this conference can be arranged.

100.          The meeting was never arranged with Mr Locke, the Appellant's agreed barrister, until just before the Appeal date hearing, even though we kept asking for this to be arranged.

101.          I would like to say that no option was given to us about a preferred barrister and if any person was to notice the date of the email then they would also notice that in a period of time it was once upon a time three whole months that had escalated since the said:- “mention hearing” referring to the date of the 04/04/2016, this is even through multiple emails were continually being sent to Miss Ward, asking for things to be addressed and dealt with in this case.

102.          Emails were going unanswered for months by the acting solicitor firm, in fact since the start of time in this case, which started in 2014. As for the list of police officer the Appellant wanted to call Miss Ward had been told over and over the officer's names required to be listed in the Asbo application case, this list of names contained officers from the Public Order Investigation unit at Scotland Yard and maybe another officer such as Superintendent Specialist Operations Adrian Coombs.

103.          On the 14th August 2016 the Appellant was sectioned under section 2 of the mental health act, he was then released later in August 2016, after a tribunal hearing and this was also due to agreeing that he would work with the mental health doctors and teams, that was put in place, he stated he would be willing to stay in hospital voluntarily, but due to bed shortages, he was discharged home a day later, with a support team put into place, the acting solicitors were made aware of this, and so was the Court in the September 2016, when the Appellant was due to attend.

104.          On 16 September 2016 the case was listed for a mention hearing for Non-Disclosure, and also a meeting with Mr Locke the Appellant Barrister as he had not seen any barrister since the 04/08/2015 hearing at the Magistrate's Court when the Antisocial Behaviour Order was granted by the Judge with no legality found.

105.          The Appellant was told by his acting solicitors to be at Court by 09:30 hours, but later this was changed to 09:00 hours, this was so he could have a meeting with his barrister, which he did agreed to do.

106.          On the agreed court date the Appellant arrived at Court for 09:00, his barrister did not arrive until around 09:40, disappointingly.

107.          On arrival The Appellants barrister and him himself inclusive of his mother all went together into a side room for a pre talk. Before any desiccations in relation to the case could be discussed, Mr Locke said he was sorry he was not feeling very well and that he also had some emails from Ms Ward, that he had to read first, on trying to open the emails he realized he could not and subsequently went out of the room to call Ms Ward.

108.          At around 10:00 hours the Appellant was called into Court, Mr Locke came back into the room from after making his phone call to Miss Ward, so for himself to be able to have collected his things and he then hurried and started to walk back out of the room we all was supposed to have a meeting but on stead he hurried in towards the Court room. The Appellant tried to stop him, so to have explained to him, what his concerns were. (“As we had not yet at this point in time had a moment to talk”) and the Appellant was also concerned about the disclosure that was going to be asked for.

109.          The Appellant asked Mr Locke if he could ask the Judge to adjourn the case for five or ten minutes, so that we all could speak with each other, which he replied “no that the hearing was only for disclosure about the schedule”, The Appellant said that:- “He knew this was not correct and this was one of the reasons that he wanted to speak with him about.” The Appellant again asked: - “if the barrister would ask the Judge to postpone for ten minutes again” he yet again said “no”, at which point the Appellant asked “why Mr Locke did not want to speak to him, and should he act for himself ”?

110.          The Barrister Mr Locke had no time to talk to The Appellant at the time and spent around four minutes talking to Ms Ward on the phone, before ending his call, he asked the Appellant if he the Appellant was dismissing his solicitors, to which the Appellant replied:- “No”, Mr Locke then started to walk towards the Courtroom, we followed the barrister into Court and on entering the Court in a raised voice, The Appellant said to Mr Locke:- (“who was ahead of him”) so am I acting for myself then.? Mr Locke never replied to the Appellant and just proceeded to talk to the Judge and then he walked toward the courtroom door and ushered out. At this point the Appellant had no idea what was going on but proceeded to follow him outside the Court room, it was at this point of time when Mr Locke turned around and said quite curtly “I do not want you to speak anymore”, as we got closer to him he also informed the Appellant it was not good to shout out, “in open Court,” to which the Appellant had to agree with, but the Appellant felt so let down as it seemed his barrister did not even want to talk to him, since the Appellant had last seen him in 2014 and this is another part of the reasons that the Appellant wanted to speak with him, as so much had already gone wrong with this case and the Appellant felt very nervous as he did not know what was going on, or what would be said as he had not spoken to his barrister.

111.          The Appellants mother, who had witnessed all of this, did try to explain to the Appellants barrister, what the Appellant wanted to say, in reference to the receipt of the requested Non-disclosure and asked Mr Locke to explain what the schedule is about before we all went back into court.

112.          The Appellant also asked about the two article 6's that had been issued by the court, which had never been addressed:- “by the Court,” which pertains to The Appellants Human Rights and importantly his rights to a fair and speedy trial, to what had not happened. The Article 6 the right to a fair and speedy trial had been handed to the Court at earlier hearings, as The Appellants knew Mr Locke knew nothing about this and other information that had happened, so he felt it important to explain this to him at the time. Mr Locke explained that the schedule was what the Judge had asked for on the 04/04/2016, my mother replied this was not all the Judge had asked for, without replying Mr Locke walked towards the Courtroom and we all followed, it was at this point The Appellant said to the barrister I feel I should represent myself because he felt he was not being heard.

113.          All that the Appellant wanted was to be able to speak to his barrister, so that he knew what had been said at the earlier hearing of the04/04/2016, and show him the document that was handed to the Judge, on that date.

114.          On entering the Court the Appellant barrister Mr Locke addressed the Judge and said the Appellant did not want him to act for him, but this was not fully the case the Appellant only wanted to be able to speak to his barrister.

115.          The Judge informed the Appellants barrister to remain in the Courtroom, the Judge asked what the case was listed for and the prosecuting barrister addressed the Court, answering the questions, he then also handed the schedule to the Applicants barrister, they also said to the Judge that the Appellant had been sending letters to the Court and the prosecution himself, which stated: - “I Simon Cordell throughout the document.” This is not the case and the Appellant did not understand their comment or what document the prosecuting barrister was talking about. The Judge then addressed the Appellant and asked the Appellant did the Appellant still want the barrister to act for the Appellant, the Appellant replied “Yes” to the Judge that he did want the barrister to act for him; the Appellant stated that he only wanted time to speak to his barrister, as he had not spoken to a barrister since the Magistrate's hearing.

116.          The Judge then addressed the Appellant barrister he said that the Appellant still wanted the barrister to act for the Appellant, the Appellant barrister agreed to this. The Judge also stated he felt he was not the best person to be hearing this case and passed it back over to the Judge that was hearing the Appeal.

117.          On leaving the Courtroom the Appellant and his mother proceeded to go into a side room to talk with the Appellant barrister, we explained that a letter had been handed to the Judge on the 04/04/2016, the barrister said he knew nothing of this letter, so we handed him a copy for him to read. Once he read this, he said he knew nothing about this and had only seen one document that kept saying I Simon Cordell, (“The Appellant has no idea of what this I Simon Cordell letter is.”)

168,

118.          The Appellants mother proceeded to explain this is why the Appellant wanted to talk to Mr Locke before going into Court, as this is part of the Non-disclosure being requested.

119.          The barrister explained he only knew about the schedule, to which the Appellant mother replied, the schedule had been asked for by the Judge in addition to the letter that had been handed in and this was also when the Judge said it could be used as the Appellants skeleton argument and that this had happened when Miss Ward was in the Court on the date of the 04/04/2016 when she was also taking notes, so Miss Ward knew exactly what the Judge had asked for.

120.          The Appellants mother had made a call to the Appellants solicitor and enquired as to what the Judge had asked for on the 04/04/2016 in regards to the disclosure, Ms Ward stated she could not remember, the Appellant mother being dumbfounded by this said in reply to her:- “you was sitting in the back of the Courtroom taking notes,” and continued to explain that only last week from the date in mention, will have everything that the Judge had asked for in his original disclosure, plus what was asked for in the Appellants letter, that was handed to the judge and Miss Ward also explained that the Judge had made other addictions in addition to the mentioned.

121.          At no point did Ms Ward ever make the Appellants mother feel she did not know what was due to be disclosed, before and while still on the phone, if she had ever done this the Appellant and the Appellant mother would have asked her to relist the case to the Court and asked for this to be clarified, as the disclosure that we was asking for was very important to the ongoings of the Appeal.

122.          The Appellant mother then handed the Appellant the phone the Appellant asked Ms Ward about the letter he was supposed to have sent to the Court and the prosecuting barrister, the Appellant was still thinking she was talking about the letter handed to the Judge on the 04/04/2016 when Miss Ward was not.

123.          Also in Court on this date, it was said the Appellant had written this letter himself, which was not the case.

124.          In truth The Appellant agreed for a letter that Miss Ward had written in reply to the Judge's letter for the Appellant to be amended, he had amended it himself and it was to be handed into the court, the Appellant solicitor was at Court so she knew the Appellant had amended the letter, this is to be inclusive of it being sent to her by email, as she was in the court on this date to.

125.          On this date when Miss Ward was a court she said to the judge that the Appellant had drafted the letter when the Appellant had only amended it, Miss Ward continued to say, that she did not draft the Letter and that the Appellant wrote it, this is not true, at this the Appellant did call Miss ward a lair as the Appellant knew Miss Ward had drafted the letter herself at first.

126.          The Appellant later explained to Miss Ward on the phone that he could prove the truth and said I have the emails you sent to me and my mother of the letter we talk about and me amending it, in return for you. It was also explained to all that we have kept copies of all other correspondence between our persons and this is to include (Since the start of the Court proceedings.

127.          The Appellant mother has checked the dates for when this letter was drafted by The Appellant solicitor and then returned to her, the date was on the 03/04/2016 please see attached email and letter (marked 03/04/2016 Ms Ward).

128.          The Appellant barrister was listening to the phone call and after the Appellant ended the barrister got up and said I will need to think about still representing you as you called your solicitors a lair, the Appellant stated that he can prove that Miss Ward wrote the letter and she's denying as to doing so and further expressed himself in question the line of investigation by saying:- “how would anyone body else's feel, if she had lied about them,” the Appellant barrister then replied that if he was still going to represent the Appellant then there would need to be a meeting at the Appellant barrister chambers, at this point the meeting concluded, with nothing else really spoke of about the Appellant Appeal yet again, this was days before the Appeal hearing was due to start once again.

129.          Up to here for now: -

130.          A while after the Solicitor wrote a letter and sent it to the Appellant and the Appellants mother, the date of this received email is dated 20/09/2016 and a copy had also been sent to the Court, this application was put in so for the acting solicitor to once again attempt to be removed from the record this was done to our surprise and was listed in Court to be heard on the 21/09/2016.

131.          There were large sections of this letter that were incorrect and did not happen so therefore are not true; this can also be proven by the Court transcripts from the 16/09/2016.

132.          On the 21/01/2016 we were on our way to Court and got caught in traffic, we contacted the Court to get a message to the Judge to say that we were going to be five to ten minutes late, “I know the Judge got the message.”

133.          When we got to the Court, there was a barrister that Michael Carroll and Co had sent to the Court to deal with the application; this was so for them to be removed from the record for the second attempt.

134.          The Barrister informed us she did not want to leave the Court before explaining what had happened it seemed the Judge had called this into Court without us being present and removed the solicitors from the record.

135.          We question how could this have happened? Considering, the Appellant was not present at Court? And there was not a senior Partner from Michael Carroll and Co? “this question is due to what had been previously said by His Honour Judge Morrison on 19/02/2016 in regard to this not being allowed to happen.”

136.          The Barrister said the Judge wanted to see us and we would need to wait in Court until we were called, as the Judge was dealing with a trial and we would be called in after it.

137.          Around 16:00 hours we were called into Court, the Respondent did make the Judge aware at this point that what had been said by His Honour Judge Morrison on the 19/02/2016 stating that a Senior Partner was not present at Court, the Judge replied that he could not force a solicitor to carry on with a case they clearly did not want to and that the Appellant could represent himself, he continued to state; that the case was in a much better order now, but as is known the Appellant has learning difficulties and health problems which the Court are also well aware of, there were only a few days until the Appeal hearing was due to start once again, how could a Judge believe that a person with learning difficulties and health problems could be ready and cope with dealing with a three-day Appeal hearing on his own?.

138.          We did try to get the Judge to adjourn the Appeal hearing so we could try and get representation put in place due to knowing the Appellant could not cope or handle this case on his own, which was due to start on the 26/09/2016 for a three-day hearing, the Judge said he would not allow this and that the Appeal hearing would go ahead no matter what. It seems again that the Appellant was being blamed for what was ongoing in this case, when the Appellant and the Appellant mother had done all they could, so for them to have this case ready to be heard.

139.          How can a Judge expect someone that is known to be ill and have learning difficulties to be able to handle this case on their own? considering there were only four days until the three-day Appeal hearing was due to start. Nothing was put in place by the Judge to help the Appellant in any way. The Appellant was just meant to get on with the case all on his own under the circumstances.

140.          Once again, the solicitors had done nothing for this case and the Judge had allowed them to walk away when this was said to not be allowed and it seems as if everything was being blamed on the Appellant.

141.          It was also noted while we had been waiting outside the Court that the bundles we had been working from was the very first set of the application bundles and since that time everything had been updated, without us being informed, this included more statements from the police officer in charge of the case, there were lots of documents missing from within the first bundle due to the update, so until he was given the updated bundles, the Appellant had never seen them additional documents.

142.          It was stated by the respondent they had sent new bundles to the acting solicitors Michael Carroll and co three times since the being of January 2016, we had never been given a set of new bundles since this case had started in 2014, we had never been told about new bundles been sent and never given a new copy of any bundle. This meant that bundle we had would have had all wrong page numbers

169,

and been paginated totally different from the bundles that were being used by the prosecution barrister and Courts.

143.          When we were in Court, we did say this to the Judge about the bundles, the Judge ordered the clerk of the Court to contact Michael Carroll and Co solicitors and order the solicitors to bring the bundles to Court. The solicitors informed the clerk that the bundles were at Nexus Chambers, the Judge was shocked that the solicitors did not have a copy of the bundles at their office. The Appellant's uncle who was also at Court said to the Judge he was willing to go to Nexus Chambers and pick the bundles up.

144.          The Judge listed this for the 22/09/2016 after 14:00 hours to make sure we were all working from them same set of bundles.

145.          Upon the Appellant's uncle getting home it was seen that the bundle he had collected was not the full set of bundles and only had part of the applications Skeleton Bundle.

146.          On the 22 September 2016 we attended Court to inform the Judge we still did not have the updated bundles and the Judge once again got the clerk of the Court to call Michael Carroll and co solicitors to find out what was going on within the bundles, the Judge was very upset that we still did not have the bundles for the case, the Judge asked for the bundles to be brought to Court before 4 PM, The Appellant's mother stated that it would be easier and faster for her to pick the bundles up from the solicitors on the way home from Court, the Judge asked if she was sure that he could get them brought to Court she stated that it be faster for her to pick the bundles up from the solicitors on my way home.

147.          When we left Court due to the time and the circumstances we had been placed in The Appellant mother called Michael Carroll's office to say what time we would be there by, The Appellant mother was told that the office would be closed by the time we got there so The Appellant mother agreed to pick the bundles up first thing in the morning on 23 September 2016.

148.          On 23-09-2016 The Appellant mother left home early in the morning to go to Michael Carroll's office and collect the bundles with her brother, Mr A Cordell they went into the office together to get the bundles, when the solicitor came down the stairs he had a piece of paper that The Appellant mother needed to sign, stating that the bundles had been collected from the office.

149.          Upon getting home and looking at the bundles, The Appellant mother noticed there is now at least 13 additional statements that The Appellant and The Appellant mother had never seen before from the Respondent bundle, this is a clear error as we knew that in the first bundle there were only 4 public witness statements and there now seems to be 16, when taking a closer look at the statements we noticed there are no members of the public's statements of truth and this also applied for the original 4 contained in the folder minus one, this also highlighted that each member of the public's statements are police officers only and have each put their signatures on two different statements each, in a pretence of portraying to own two houses each in Edmonton xxx Gardens and other surrounding roads in an around Progress way, the police officers are claiming to be victims of this case while on active duty.

150.          So in understanding this, the Applicant contacted Edmonton police stations lost property room, so too for him to arrange collection of the original bundle, that was never served to him in accordance with the law. To his further upset and disappointment of justice he was to be told by another police officer deployed at the lost property room as the manager, that the bundle that the Appellant wanted to claim had been misplaced or stolen, this file clearly shows that there was only ever four potential members of the publics witness statements attached within side of the original Asbo application.

151.          Some of the statements added are all dated prior to the Magistrates Court trial. Upon looking at The Appellant's bundles it seemed this had not been updated or indexed since 2015, so all the new documents that had been submitted to be added to The Appellant's bundle was not in their as they should have been.

152.          Over the days leading up to this, The Appellant mother had learned how important it was that all the bundles were paginated and indexed correctly and that all the bundles were the same as each other so that each person was working on them files was all in Co Hurst to each other, as there was always problems at court due to this not being completed correctly.

153.          Though the case history multiple documents had been handed to the Court and those documents did not get patronised correctly or indexed into The Appellant's bundles, this includes the court and the Respondent bundles that they were using also.

154.          A whole weekend was spent trying to add missing documents to the Appellant's bundle and making copies so that on the Court date of the 26-09-2016; any missing files could be added to the Respondent bundle and the three Judge's bundles. The Appellant health had become very unstable due to him knowing that he was going to have to be dealing with this himself.

155.          The Appellant mother also spent part of the weekend also writing a letter to the Judge in regards to what had gone on with the breaches in The Appellant's human rights, his article 6 human rights the Applicants rights to a fair and speedy trial, there were also a list of other things that had gone on throughout the case since 2014 in regards to the nondisclosure, and other issues that was always being raised when at Court and the reason as to why legal aid had been granted:-

 

· Due to the complexity of the case: -

· Due to The Appellant's learning difficulties: -

· Due to the concerns of The Appellant health.

This letter was emailed to the Court and asked to be passed to the Judge.

Please see letter that was emailed to the judge: -

The 26 September 2016 the three-day Appeal hearing was due to start, The Appellant was so unwell that there was no way he could attend Court, Mr A Cordell and Miss L Cordell attended Court to speak to the Judge, when the Judge entered the Courtroom he stated that he had received a letter that had to be addressed, he stated that he felt this would go to judicial review, he stated he had three options:

Carry on with the Appeal in the hope that The Appellant would turn up the following day.

· To Dismiss the Appeal: -

· Adjourn the Appeal to a new date.

 

156.          The Judge went over the letter in great detail; he started around five times that he felt that this case was going to go to judicial review. The Judge decided to adjourn the case until the 16/01/2017; this was later changed for the Appeal to start on the 17/01/2017. The Respondent had tried to object to the Appeal being adjourned. The Judge stated that we should try to find a new solicitor to take on the Appeal and that he would help and also make sure that legal aid was in place.

157.          The Judge asked why The Appellant was not in Court. The Appellant mother stated The Appellant had become so unwell due to what was going on in this case and that he was not coping. Information was passed to the Judge that showed The Appellant was unwell. Mentioned in court; was also the missing documents that was missing from The Appellant's bundle, and that there were no statements within the bundle, my mother stated to the Judge that she had spent a lot of the weekend trying to update The Appellant's bundle and make sure that it was indexed correctly. The Appellant handed the documents in to the court that The Appellant mother was able to get ready with the new indexing, the Appellant mother also stated that she knew there was still documents missing from The Appellant's bundle, which she was not sure about neither had she been given time in which to add them. The Appellant mother also stated that there were around thirteen statements that had never been seen and that were now contained within the Respondent bundle that was dated prior to the Magistrate's trial.

158.          The Judge was very unhappy and passed the Applicants mother his own bundle for her to check by seeing if the Courts bundles had been updated, upon looking into the Judge's bundle, she noticed that his bundle had also not been updated since 2015, the Appellant mother passed the Judge's bundle back up the judge while explaining to him that his folder had not been updated. At this the Respondent stated they would make new copies of the bundles and have copies sent to us and the Judge.

170,

159.          The Judge was very unhappy and said he was not going to allow this to be dropped and again made the clerk of the Court make a phone call to Michael Carroll and co, to order them to attend Court on the 14/10/2016, in regards to the missing documents.

160.          I stated I would try and add as many missing documents as I could but was unsure of what documents were missing, the reason being as so much had been handed to the court and solicitors.

161.          The Appellant mother asked the Judge if the Appellant would need to attend Court on the 14/10/2016, as the hearing was due to only be regards to the missing documents, The Appellant mother felt The Appellant did not need to be there the Judge agreed to this.

162.          On the 14 October 2016 Mr A Cordell and the Appellant's mother attended Court on this date, the solicitors did not turn up, The Appellant mother had a list of documents that she had made up and indexed that needed to be added to The Appellant's bundle's, which she passed to the Judge. She stated to the Judge that she could not be sure if there were still documents missing. She also stated that she had tried to call Miss Ward and had no reply. The Judge was very upset that the solicitors had not turned up; the Judge again got the clerk of the Court to email Michael Carroll and co to tell them that they had to be in Court on the 19/10/2016.

163.          The Appellant mother also stated to the Judge that she had made many phone calls to other solicitors and due to the case being at the Appeal stage no one was willing to take the Appeal on due to the cost they would get under legal aid, in more detail it was explained that legal aid is a set amount and continued to explain that the solicitors dealing with the Appeal should be the same solicitors that dealt with the original trial, Appeals are set at a standard rate, so any solicitor taking on a case would not get paid to go over the complete bundles and to take updated instructions from the client.

164.          Again the Appellant mother asked the Judge if The Appellant needed to attend Court on the next date, to which the Judge replied no.

165.          On the 19/10/2016 again Mr A Cordell and the Appellants mother attended Court, to find out that once again the solicitors was not in attendance, the Judge had received a letter from Michael Carroll constating that Miss Ward no longer worked for the company, the Judge was very upset and said he was not going to allow the issue of: the “Missing documents, legal aid certificate “to be dropped, the Judge asked the clerk of the Court to email Michael Carroll and co, so for them to attend Court on the 25/10/2016.

166.          The Appellants mother again stated to the Judge that she had made many phone calls to other solicitors to try and get them to take over the Appeal, and due to the case being Appeal stage no one was willing to take the Appeal on due to the cost they would not get under legal aid and that it was a set amount agreed for all cases, as legal aid believed that the solicitors dealing with the Appeal would be the same solicitors that dealt with the original trial, so should not incur this additional cost as Appeals are set at a standard rate, so any solicitor taking on a case would not get paid to go over the complete bundles because this had already been paid to the past solicitor firm beforehand and this would include to take updated instructions from any client.

167.          When the Appellant mother got home, she again tried to call Miss Ward, this was with no reply she done this by texting her with no receipt of reply.

168.          On the 25/10/2016 again Mr A Cordell and I attended Court, once again the solicitors was not in attendance, the Judge was very upset and done an Internet search under Miss Ward's name to find out if she was working under a new solicitor, he found the new solicitors and sent an email demanding that Miss Ward attended Court on the 11/11/2016.

169.          Again The Appellant mother stated to the Judge that she had made many phone calls to other solicitors and due to the case being Appeal stage no one was willing to take the Appeal on and this was due to the cost they would get under legal aid.

170.          When The Appellants mother got home from Court at 15:48 she received a phone call from Miss Ward, she stated that she knew nothing about, what had happened meaning that she did not know the Judge had asked her to attend Court further to the explained that Michael Carroll and Co had not informed her in regards to any emails sent from the Court.

171.          The Appellant mother said to Miss Ward while on the telephone that she herself had previously tried to call her, this was to include the sent text messages that she had spent inclusively but Miss Ward had not replied or picked the phone up.

172.          Miss Ward stated while still on the phone that Michael Carroll had previously told her while she was leaving his company as employed staff that she must not contact any of the client she had gained this was to include the Appellants and his family members.

173.          The Appellant mother and Miss Ward arranged to a meeting on the 27/10/2016, to go over The Appellant's bundle “case load” to check for any missing documents.

174.          On the 27/10/2016 The Appellant mother meet with Miss Ward to go over The Appellant's bundle, upon looking at the bundle and the documents that The Appellant mother had added and indexed Miss Ward stated she believed there were no missing files, as time has gone on I have found other documents that should have been in The Appellant's bundle that were missing. These have never been added as The Appellant mother did not want to have to go back to the Judge and say there were more documents that were missing.

175.          Miss Ward stated she had to attend Court but gave a different date that the Judge had ordered her to be there, The Appellant mother stated to her that the Judge had given the date of the 11/11/2016 when we was in Court, Miss Ward stated that this was not what was put into the email that was sent to the company Miss Ward now worked for. The Appellant mother stated she would send an email over to the Court to tell the Court that they had met up and checked the Appellant's bundle and they believed there were no more documents missing at that point.

176.          On the 01/11/2016 The Appellant mother wrote an email to the Judge to state that there had been a meeting with Miss Ward, and they had gone over The Appellant's bundle and believed there were no documents missing now. The Appellant mother asked in the email to the Judge if the Applicant still needed to attend Court on the 11/11/2016 and if so, could this be confirmed via email.

177.          On the 02/11/2016 The Appellant mother received a reply from Wood Green Crown Court from the Judge stating that we did not need to attend on the 11/11/2016 and the date would be vacated.

178.          On the 19/12/2016 The Appellant mother sent an email to the Judge this was in regards to still not finding a solicitor, that was willing to take the Appeal on, The Appellant mother asked the Judge to help in regards to getting a solicitor to act for The Appellant regarding the Appeal as time was becoming short for the Appeal hearing.

179.          On the 21/12/2016 The Appellant mother received a reply in her email from the Judge; this explained that the Judge could not help with a solicitor. The Appellant mother and Appellant still did not give up, they both carried on trying to find one that was willing to take the Appeal on for The Appellant, the Appellant and his mother was upset the reason being; as the Judge did state he would help with the issue of the solicitor on the 26/09/2016 and another part of the reason being that time was short for when the Appeal hearing was to take place, as this was due to start soon after. The Appellant and his mother did not wait till the last minute to ask the Judge for help and was then told by the Judge that he could not help.

180.          On the 12/01/2016 late in the day The Appellant mother was given a number form a solicitor's of a solicitor's called MK-Law, that maybe could help and take the Appeal on, The Appellants mother called them as they were the first solicitor's in the list she was given.

181.          The entire of the solicitor's firms that had been contacted prior to September 2016 had simply refused to act in the case; the reason given was because the case was at an Appeal stage. Throughout our attempts to find a solicitor, No solicitor firm that was called wanted to hear what we had to explain so to be able to understand what the case was about, on one occasion the Applicants mother broke down in tears to the company she was talking to and they agreed to take on the case, this was as long as the Judge agreed to an adjournment, the Applicants mother, stated to them she did nothing the Judge will agree to this as in September 2016 the Judge had stated he would not adjourn it again.

182.          The solicitor stated that they would not have enough time to be able to get all of the bundles and then be able to get a barrister to go over them and that this would not leave time for them as the new acting solicitors to have time to have a meeting with The Appellant and

171,

183.          take instructions due to the weekend.

184.          The new solicitor firm said that they would send a barrister to Court on the 17/01/2017, to asked for an adjournment, so that they could act in the best interest of the client, as that is what they are there to do and so that the legal aid could be addressed and then passed over to them or a new application would need to be applied for.

185.          The Appellant's health had deteriorated, when The Appellant's mother told The Appellant she believed she had found a solicitor to take the Appeal on this did bring his mood up a little bit, but he felt so much had gone wrong within the Asbo case that there would be a high chance of more going wrong at that point of time, he agreed that he would attend Court and meet the barrister that the new solicitors was sending, the problem was that this person could change at any time.

186.          The Appellant does not leave his home which he treats as his prison cell due to the Asbo case and prudery the police have committed and not disciplinarily action, punishment, being brought into motion for their wrongful actions.

187.          On the 17 January 2016, the Appellant and his mother attended the Court, the new barrister was there also for The Appellant, so was the Appellants uncle, we all went into a side room and the barrister spoke to The Appellant, this was in regards to what the plans were for the case in turn what the new barrister was going to ask the Judge for, which was an adjournment, the reason being they needed an adjournment so that they could act in the best interest of their client, so that they could go over the complete case bundles, take instructions, make sure legal aid was in place correctly, and instruct a barrister who would be dealing with the Appeal for The Appellant, The Appellant agreed that an adjournment could be asked for, again it was stated to the barrister that we did not feel the Judge would grant an adjournment, the barrister stated that the Judge should understand that an adjournment would be needed for the new solicitors to act in a professional manner for their client and be able to get everything ready and have time to understand fully what the case was about, that an Appeal should be fair for all sides.

188.          We were called into Court and the barrister spoke to the Judge, explained the situation and that he was asking for an adjournment, he spoke to the Judge in regards to the legal aid, and having the appeal ready for their new client and having time to be able to deal with it in a professional manner for their client. The Judge stated that he believed legal aid was still in place and it could just be transferred, the barrister stated if legal aid had been revoked then it would take at least two weeks for it to be put back in place, the Judge adjourned the hearing so that the barrister could contact the legal aid department to check the status of the legal aid, the barrister made calls to the legal aid department, but the legal aid department could not confirm whether legal aid had been revoked. Calls was also made to Michael Carroll and Co who stated that when they were removed from the record that the legal aid that was in place at the time had been revoked.

189.          The case was called back into Court and the barrister explained that the legal aid department could not say whether or not the legal aid had been revoked, but when a call was placed to the old solicitors Michael Carroll and co they had said that the legal aid that was in place had been revoked. The Judge handed the barrister a certificate of legal aid, the barrister stated that the certificate was not proof that the legal aid had not been revoked.

190.          The Judge stated I'm sure that you can be ready for the Appeal to go ahead by tomorrow, the barrister stated that they have a professional obligation to act in the best interest of the client and that they would not have enough time in order to go over all the bundles take instructions from the client, and instruct a barrister within half a day, and also to check fully whether a new legal aid application would have been need to be applied for.

191.          At this the Judge stated, well if you cannot be ready by tomorrow, then The Appellant will have to act for himself, we will not adjourn the Appeal again.

192.          It seems again The Appellant was being put at blame for the delay in the Appeal, but it was not due to The Appellant, The Appellant only wanted a fair hearing and Appeal from when this started in 2014 and from what was going on this clearly had not been.

193.          The barrister tried his hardest to get an adjournment of the Appeal but the Judge would not allow an adjournment, the Judge started talking about the conditions that was imposed by the Magistrates Court, he stated that he felt that parts was disproportionate, but he could see nothing wrong with the timescale of the Antisocial Behaviour Order of 5 years. This was not the first time the Judge had mentioned the conditions that The Appellant was under, but this time the Judge went further to include what sections he thought were disproportional, to the people in the Court The Appellant, Mr A Cordell, Miss L Cordell, and The Appellants barrister, the only way of looking at what the Judge was stating he had already made his mind up that he thought the conditions was the only problem. But this was before the Appeal had even been heard, why a Judge would state this without even hearing the Appeal.

194.          The Judge would not allow an adjournment and stated The Appellant could represent himself if the barrister could not be ready by 10 0'clock the next morning, the Judge raised and left the Courtroom.

195.          The Appellant was in such a state when we left the Courtroom he stated he knew the Judge would not allow the adjournment and felt the Judge did not want him to have representation and this is why the Judge removed his old solicitors, he felt very let down and just wanted to go home.

196.          The barrister called us into a side room and had to ask The Appellant due to what the Judge has said, if they were to change the conditions to something appropriate would The Appellant accept it. This put further stress on The Appellant, The Appellant knew he had done nothing wrong and had not done what the police was saying he had done and The Appellant knew that if the disclosure had been given it would have proven this. The police have been unwilling to give any disclosure since this case started.

197.          The Appellant was not willing to accept having the conditions changed and accepting the Antisocial Behaviour Order as this would have said he was guilty; The Appellant was not willing to accept something he knew he was not guilty of.

198.          The Appellant was so distressed all the way home, he felt he would never get justice.

199.          Later that day The Appellant's mother contacted the solicitors to see if anything could be done, but due to the Judge not allowing the adjournment the solicitors stated they could not take the case on and could not attend Court the next day, the reason given was because they would be putting their company reputation at risk by not having enough time in order to prepare for the Appeal to be able to act in a professional and correct way for their client. The Appellant's and his mother could totally understand this.

200.          A vulnerable person should not be forced into a position where they have to act on their own behalf, in the opinion of many practitioners, detrimental to the administration of justice. But this is exactly what had happened, The Appellant and The Appellant mothers and others cannot understand or see any reason why the Judge did not allow for a short adjournment so that The Appellant had proper representation in place, especially when there was a solicitors company willing to take on the Appeal hearing, in turn to allow a fair Appeal hearing.

201.          The Appellant's and his mother had not stopped since the removal of the old solicitors in September 2016, they continued to try and find a solicitors firm company, to take the Appeal hearing on, many calls were made to solicitors companies, advice lines, citizens advice, even in the search of a pro bono solicitors, the reason why the pro bono unit would not take the case on, is because The Appellant was entitled to legal aid, if The Appellant or his family could have afforded to pay privately for a solicitors company to act for The Appellant this would have been done a long time ago. Justice is meant to be fair but in the case of The Appellant Asbo this is not the case.

202.          On 18th January 2017 The Appellant was so unwell he did not attend Court on this day, nor did Mr A Cordell, or Miss L Cordell, Miss L Cordell did however write a letter to the Judge and in that letter it asked for a stay on proceedings for the Appeal until it was taken to judicial review in regards to what had gone on.

172,

203.          The Judge decided to go ahead in the absence of The Appellant with the Appeal; he heard the witness statements from police on this date.

204.          On 19 January 2017 again The Appellant and his family did not attend Court this case has made The Appellant so unwell, at the end of this day the Judge dismissed the Appeal against conviction, but he changed a few of the conditions that The Appellant was under, the conditions are still a breach of The Appellant's human rights. Schedule of prohibitions are listed below.

205.          Schedule of prohibitions: - You must not: -

 

· Be concerned in the organisation of a rave as defined by s.63 (1) or s63 (1A) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

· Knowingly use or supply property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave as defined by s.63 (1) of the Criminal justice and Public Order Act 1994.

· Enter or remain in any disused or abandoned building unless invited to do so in writing by a registered charitable organisation or local authority or owner of the premises.

· Enter any non-residential private property (by which words buildings and an open enclosed and are intended to be individual) or an industrial estate between the hours of 22:00 and 07:00 without written permissions from the owner and a leaseholder of such property.

If you can demonstrate that the purpose of your entry of such property is to purchase goods or services from any shop or garage or fuel supplier which is open to the public at such times. Then in such event, you may enter but you must not remain on such property for longer than 30 minutes and you may do so on only one occasion during each separate nine-hour period between 22:00 and 07:00 daily.

· Provide any service in respect of any licensable activity in any unlicensed premises.

For the sake of clarity, nothing in this order prevents the defendant from assisting, preparing for, engaging in licensed licensable activities,

 

206.          This order expires on the 3 August 2020: -

207.          This order and its requirements amends' a previous order imposed by Highbury Corner Magistrates Court.

208.          Condition 4 states: -

209.          Enter any non-residential private property (by which words buildings and an open enclosed and are intended to be individual) or an industrial estate between the hours of 22:00 and 07:00 without written permissions from the owner and a leaseholder of such property.

210.          If you can demonstrate that the purpose of your entry of such property is to purchase goods or services from any shop or garage or fuel supplier which is open to the public at such times. Then in such event, you may enter but you must not remain on such property for longer than 30 minutes and you may do so on only one occasion during each separate nine-hour period between 22:00 and 07:00 daily. With this condition in place, it would mean that any non-residential property The Appellant would not be able to attend unless it was for no less than 30 minutes on any one occasion, during a separate nine-hour period:

211.          This would include hospitals, police stations, 24-hour supermarkets, petrol stations, cinemas, restaurants, bars, night clubs and any other public place open to the public between these times, that is non-residential, The Appellant would only have a 30 minute window to be able to enter any non-residential building, however is not feasible within that 30minutes to:-

 

·         The Appellant could not be seen in a hospital within 30 minutes,

·         How would it be feasible if The Appellant went to dinner at a restaurant, they would be completed within 30 minutes?

·         How would it be feasible if The Appellant wanted to go to a nightclub or late-night bar as it would only have 30 minutes?

·         Places that are open to the public should not be restricted to The Appellant how is The Appellant meant to have a normal family life?

·         The Appellant cannot go to without written permission which would be degrading for The Appellant to have to ask each time he wanted to go somewhere and explain why he needed it to be confirmed in writing by the owner and/or leaseholder of the property, how his condition could be applied by any Judge and state it is not a beach of someone human rights must be wrong.

·         jiojiojioj

·         Conditions 2 states knowingly using or supplying property personal or otherwise for the use of a rave as defined under section 63.1 of the criminal justice and public order act,

 

 

212.          The Appellants has spent the last 10 years building his business saving every penny and help from family it is within the entertainment industry, he will hires equipment out and his services, The Appellants business would seriously be affected, because if he hired his equipment and it ended up in an illegal rave The Appellant would be in breach of the conditions. When hiring out equipment you do asked what is going to be used for, and you do have a contract that is in place, but what the person tells you their reason for hiring the equipment out is not always the correct reason and is not used for the purpose the person told you The Appellant would be in breach of these conditions. Also if The Appellant loaned someone any personal belongings and that person ended up at an illegal rave then The Appellant would again be in breach of his conditions, even if the item was something that did not even constitute as being for an illegal rave.

213.          Conditions 5 states provide any service in respect of any licensable activity in an unlicensed premise.

214.          How is The Appellant meant to run his business, The Appellant would not be able to obtain a licence that has already been clarified by the police and councils due to the Antisocial Behaviour Order that is in place, The Appellant would not be able to offer his services also due to the restriction that he has only 30 minutes within a non-residential building, most events go to the late hours in the morning so even if there was a licensed premises and someone wanted to hire the services of The Appellant The Appellant would not be able to do this. The Appellant was also offered contracts within two nightclubs to be the manager if The Appellant was again offered contracts within nightclubs or late-night bars The Appellant would not be able to accept these contracts. I cannot even say why condition 5 has been imposed because condition 4 conflicts with condition 5 in certain parts. And who would want to hire or take on The Appellant if he had to ask for written permission which would be degrading for The Appellant to have to ask each time he wanted to go somewhere or had a contact and had to explain why he needed it to be confirmed in writing by the owner and/or leaseholder of the property,

215.          These are just a few concerns with the conditions that The Appellant is under, there is other concerns with other conditions set at by the Courts that are of concern.

216.          When the Appeal hearing was over the conditions was not served on The Appellant, they were posted to him in the post.

217.          The Appellant mother has put an application into the Crown Court on forms EX-105 and EX-107 requesting the Tape/Disc Transcription for all hearings, and is waiting to hear back from the court, to see if it will be granted.

218.          The Appellant mother has also put an application into the police under a subject access request to get all The Appellant history with the police which will show the data protection errors and more data that has been inputted incorrectly by the police, it will also show a history of how much the police does not leave The Appellant alone.

219.          Also how many complaints has had to be put into the police regarding how the police have treated

220.          The Appellant over many years which when asked in this ASBO application case by the judge was any of this the truth they replied no to. The Judge also asked if anyone else had had an ASBO application against them for an ASBO on the dates held within the ASBO application, the Judge did not get a reply and it was not asked again.

221.          The police have not only done this to The Appellant but The Appellant whole family so each family member have requested their records. So far, the police have refused The Appellant application and his brothers, they have allowed The Appellant mother and The Appellant sister but only part of the information has been supplied. This has been passed to the ICO to address, but due to the backlog

173,

222.          the ICO has we have not been told a timeframe this will take.

223.          At this time there is also complaint still ongoing with The Appellant and the police and The Appellant brother with the police. It is also noticed that some of the police in this application who have done statements in this ASBO have complaint still standing against them, with The Appellant brother complaint.

224.          But until we get all the data, we have requested there could be more police officers in this ASBO application who have had complaints put in about them.

225.          There will also be a complaint regarding the DPS who investigated The Appellant complaint due to the fact they did not follow their own codes, when this complaint was passed the IPCC they upheld The Appellant Appeal to the IPCC and the complaint has had to be reinvestigated, due to what the DPS allowed to happen, and allowed the police officer to resign. Before allowing The Appellant rights to take his complaint to the IPCC for Appeal before seeing the report and allowing a misconduct hearing to happen, before The Appellant had his right to appeal and the IPCC and they left a large section out in the investigation which pointed to discourtesy by the police.

226.          Still not completed I still got sections to add about ASBO application and no discloser and some other sections. And some laws.

227.          This is how a JR has to be written up. They will have all the ASBO application bundles sent to the high court also so will be able to see the whole case as I need to also point out that we cannot add everything in this due to allowing the police to have the full extent as to what is wrong within the application for the ASBO that should have been able to use at the appeal hearing. As we don't want the police to be able to try and correct the things that are wrong.

228.          If you want to edit any of this then please do so really carefully and in a next colour and you have to keep this format don't change it as it has to be sent to the high court in this formation, I know you are not going to like some of what I have written but if you want to win this case at JR you have to put things you don't like to hear or feel you don't have a problem. The judges have to see your human rights have been fully funked over from start to end of these court cases. And showing things you don't like will help that. you can at your own write up as well

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-4128 10-05-2017 14-00

10/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 174,175

 

 43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-4128 10-05-2017 14-00

10/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 174,175

--

174,

175,

 

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-26360 11-05-2017 11-31

11/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 176,177

 

 

44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-26360 11-05-2017 11-31

11/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 176,177

--

176,

177,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2.

JOEL -1-20743 13-05-2017 22-34

13/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 178,179

 

 45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2.

JOEL -1-20743 13-05-2017 22-34

13/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 178,179

--

178,

From: JOEL TIBS <change2008@live.co.uk>

Sent time: 13/05/2017 10:33:38 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: The dpi might be low as well

Attachments: Copy of kids day3.jpg

From: JOEL TIBS <change2008@live.co.uk>

Sent: 13 May 2017 22:23:17

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: The dpi might be low as well

179,

 

 

 

 

 

 

46.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Printers -14-05-2017 14-46

14/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 180

 

 46.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Printers -14-05-2017 14-46

14/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 180

--

180,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 14/05/2017 02:46:14 PM

To: JOEL TIBS <change2008@live.co.uk>

Subject: Re: The dpi might be low as well

flyer

On Saturday, 13 May 2017, 22:38, JOEL TIBS <change2008@live.co.uk> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-4124 15-05-2017 11-25

15/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 181

 

 47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Morgana -1-4124 15-05-2017 11-25

15/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 181

--

181,

From: Spares <Spares@morgana.co.uk>

Sent time: 15/05/2017 11:25:16 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Parts

Hi Simon

Price for part number.

C40400010 Thermostat @Ł10.93 each plus vat & carriage (carriage Ł9.95 )

We have 1 available from stock.

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 03 May 2017 16:32

To: Spares <Spares@morgana.co.uk>

Subject: Parts

Contact Name, Mr Simon Cordell

23 Byron Terrace

Edmonton

London

N9 7DG

Hello, hope all is well I have been asked to forward this email to your self’s in regard to parts for a Morgana 150 Pur machine that I have recently been trying to fix.

The parts and prices that I request are as follows: -

1. Thermostat Solder Tag the markers on the original part are Termination, 0°C +460°C - 2455rc - 9082 - N47 - 12 L200c.

2. The different prices of the blue beans needed to clean the machine.

3. The different prices of the glue need to fill the machine.

I also ask if there should be a Semiconductor contained in the machine within the distribution board at the back: code numbers

1. KM20.01

2. KM23.01

If so, what is the part number and how much does Morgana supply them for?

Many thanks and kind regards Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 0. 2.

Mother 24-05-2017 -10-49

24/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200

 

 48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 0. 2.

Mother 24-05-2017 -10-49

24/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200

--

182,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/05/2017 10:49:53 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Mr Simon Paul Cordell -v- The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

Attachments: c100781_240520171324_001.pdf.pdf

Simon please see attached

Original Message       

From: Sally.Gilchrist@met.pnn.police.uk [mailto: Sally.Gilchrist@met.pnn.police.uk]

Sent: 24 May 2017 10:26

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Mr Simon Paul Cordell -v- The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

Dear Ms Cordell,

I attach my client's acknowledgement of service, together with summary grounds.

I confirm a hard copy has been sent to you in the post.

Yours sincerely Sally Gilchrist Chartered Legal Executive Directorate of Legal Services Metropolitan Police Service

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law.

Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

183,

184,

185,

186,

 

 

 

 

 

 

187,

188,

189,

 

 

190,

191,

192,

193,

194,

195,

196,

197,

198,

199,

200,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canon Busentre -1-4107 24-05-2017 11-03

24/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 201,202

 

 49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canon Busentre -1-4107 24-05-2017 11-03

24/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 201,202

--

201,

From: Stacey Elliott <stacey.elliott@cuk.canon.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/05/2017 11:02:50 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: Finishing Samples for your quote

Stacey Elliott

Account Manager

BIG Direct Channel - Canon Business Centre Tel: 01737 229100 1468321349875_canon.png Canon (UK) Ltd.

5th Floor, 130 Wood Street, London, EC2V 6DL, United Kingdom www.canon.co.uk

Canon (UK) Ltd is registered in England & Wales under no. 1264300 1468321396945_come

From: Stacey Elliott

Sent: 24 May 2017 10:59

To: re_wired@ymamail.com

Subject: Finishing Samples for your quote

Good Morning Simon,

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me today, I want to make sure I get this right for you so if you can just fill out the missing three fields in the below form marked with a *and attach any examples of what you would like to print, We will then get some samples of the finishing options available so that we can quote on the right thing for you.

· Print Sample Request

Requested by Stacey Elliott

Delivery Name (FAO) Simon Cordell

Company Name: Jesus House

Delivery Address

112, BRENT TERRACE LONDON, NW2 1LT

SFDC Opportunity Number    OPP- 1018475

· Printing Requirements

Hardware Required     C5550

Print Driver Required Fiery

Media Size A4 + A3

Media Weight *

Finishing Requirements

Generic or Personalised samples?

Please send showing different print finishers for

Further instructions?

catalogue like prints - Thank you Please allow a five-day turnaround for all print samples.

If applicable, please ensure that you have attached the files that you wish to be printed.

If you have any questions, then please let me know.

Regards,

Stacey Elliott

Account Manager

BIG Direct Channel - Canon Business Centre Tel: 01737 229100 1468321349875_canon.png Canon (UK) Ltd.

5th Floor, 130 Wood Street, London, EC2V 6DL, United Kingdom www.canon.co.uk

202,

Canon (UK) Ltd is registered in England & Wales under no. 1264300 1468321396945 come

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canon Busentre -1-4114 25-05-2017 12-27

25/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 203,204

 

 50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canon Busentre -1-4114 25-05-2017 12-27

25/05/2017

/ Page Numbers: 203,204

--

203,

From: Stacey Elliott <stacey.elliott@cuk.canon.co.uk>

Sent time: 25/05/2017 12:26:41 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: Finishing Samples for your quote

Stacey Elliott

Account Manager

BIG Direct Channel - Canon Business Centre Tel: 01737 229100 1468321349875_canon.png Canon (UK) Ltd.

5th Floor, 130 Wood Street, London, EC2V 6DL, United Kingdom www.canon.co.uk

Canon (UK) Ltd is registered in England & Wales under no. 1264300 1468321396945_come

From: Stacey Elliott

Sent: 24 May 2017 10:59

To: re_wired@ymamail.com

Subject: Finishing Samples for your quote

Good Morning Simon,

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me today, I want to make sure I get this right for you so if you can just fill out the missing three fields in the below form marked with a *and attach any examples of what you would like to print, We will then get some samples of the finishing options available so that we can quote on the right thing for you.

· Print Sample Request

Requested by Stacey Elliott

Delivery Name (FAO) Simon Cordell

Company Name: Jesus House

Delivery Address

112, BRENT TERRACE LONDON, NW2 1LT

SFDC Opportunity Number    OPP- 1018475

· Printing Requirements

Hardware Required     C5550

Print Driver Required Fiery

Media Size A4 + A3

Media Weight *

Finishing Requirements

Generic or Personalised samples?

Please send showing different print finishers for

Further instructions?

catalogue like prints - Thank you Please allow a five-day turnaround for all print samples.

If applicable, please ensure that you have attached the files that you wish to be printed.

If you have any questions, then please let me know.

Regards,

Stacey Elliott

Account Manager

BIG Direct Channel - Canon Business Centre Tel: 01737 229100 1468321349875_canon.png Canon (UK) Ltd.

5th Floor, 130 Wood Street, London, EC2V 6DL, United Kingdom www.canon.co.uk

204,

Canon (UK) Ltd is registered in England & Wales under no. 1264300 1468321396945 come

 

 

 

 

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Mother 03-07-2017 -04-34

03/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225

 

 51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Mother 03-07-2017 -04-34

03/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225

--

205,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 03/07/2017 04:34:44 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: read this

Attachments: Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

here

206,

In the High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division

Royal Courts of Justice Strand, Lord

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

on,

WC2A 2ll

Date: 28/06/2017

Ref: C0/2171/2017

To Whom It May Concern:

I Miss Lorraine Cordell am writing this letter to say that I do object to pay the sum of Ł785.70 for preparing the Acknowledgment of Service to be paid by the claimant to the defendant. I confirm that I was also the person who filed the application for the claimant in order to get justice within this case. The judge who stated that there was no merit within the case I believe is wrong. I do understand that when the judge made his decision there was little evidence supplied by us. I am not a lawyer and upon receiving the Metropolitan police response to the application I realised my mistake when filing the application. I did make calls to the High Court to explain the error in the hope that they would be able to help me as they had done before, I stated that I would need more time to submit the evidence to the court that I would have to try and get legal help. The lady I spoke to stated that I could take my time in submitting the evidence, so I did not know I was on a time limit until we’d received the letter from the court.

1

Between:

THE QUEEN

ON THE APPLICATION OF

SIMON CORDELL

CLAIMANT

- AND-

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

DEFENDANT

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE POLICE OF THE METROPOLIS

INTERESTED

PARTY

207,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

At this time the skeleton argument I was writing comprises of over 90 pages with regard to the errors that have occurred within this whole case since it started in 2014. This would be many more pages once completed.

The claimant and his family only ever wanted justice and the truth, the UK justice system is supposed to be one of the best within the world but in this case it has failed to see the truth, the police hold information on their systems which proves my son's innocence and when asked to provide this evidence they withheld it though we asked many times since 2014, not one judge has ordered the police to hand over this information, then the appeal judge removing my sons legal representation and stating he can do the case himself, How was a person with mental health problems, learning difficulties, health problems meant to have coped with dealing with the appeal himself, nothing was put in place by the judge to address this, a few days prior to the appeal hearing I managed to find a solicitor willing to take the case on for the appeal, on 17 January 2017 the judge refused to allow the new solicitors a short adjournment which would have enabled the new solicitors to go over all the bundles, speak to the client which they had not done, the judge just dismissed it told them they had to be ready by the next morning if they could not be ready then my son would have to deal with the case himself, how is this justice, there is many other factors in this case that was incorrect and breached human rights.

The claimant as the courts was aware has mental health issues, he also has learning difficulties, and other health issues. The claimant receives benefits every two weeks of the sum of Ł201.30, which is Ł100.65 per week; this money has to cover all of his bills, water rates, 19.5% council tax shortfall, electric, gas, Ł5 a week for him to have a phone for emergencies, his food, hygiene items, and any other items to support living. I do not understand how he is meant to pay Ł785.70, just because a mistake was made in my endeavour to get justice for my son.

Below I will list dates that is within the application, and outline information I have recovered, which will show the police have information which proves my son is innocence. How could this miscarriage of justice been allowed to have happened.

12/01/2013 Canary Wharf:

On this date the claimant is accused of the organisation / or supply of equipment for an illegal rave.

The claimant has always disputed the account that the police stated in their application, he did not organise or was involved in any part of setting this party up or supply, hire or loan any equipment for this party.

The claimant did attend the party on this evening with his ex-girlfriend, they were there for a few hours before a person attacked the claimant at the party, the claimant was rushed to hospital, and the claimant does not know anything from this point in regards to this date as he was at the hospital.

2

208,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

When the hospital released him he returned with his girlfriend and the person that had driven him to the hospital to pick his car up, which had been left at the location, at this time the party had already ended it was around 07:00 hours.

Again this case is outside the six months’ time limit when the application was submitted to the court, so how has this case been proven by the Judge; any date outside the six months’ time limit should only be used as reference to show prior history.

On the 12th January 2013 the claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour to any person.

07/04/2013 No Insurance and Section 5 of the Public Order Act:

Within Steve Elsmore statement dated 11/08/2014 public order matter. Although this date is outside of the six months’ time limit from when the application was submitted to the court, Steve Elsmore still included this within his statement.

The claimant was arrested on this date due to an issue with his insurance not showing up on the MID database, the police stated in the intelligence report the claimant became abusive, hence why he was arrested for a public order matter and no insurance.

The claimant was charged and given a court date to attend court and, on this date, he attended court to prove his innocence.

The claimant had witnesses that would prove he did not become abusive; there was no need for him to become abusive he had done nothing wrong; the case for the public order offence was withdrawn by the CPS at court and the claimant was found not guilty.

The insurance matter was addressed and proven the claimant did in fact have insurance so his vehicle in fact should never have been seized at a cost to take it out of the police compound of about Ł190.00 by the claimant that has never been recovered so was a loss to the claimant for no good reason.

There was information on the police’s systems due to the claimant being stopped a number of times due to the error on the MID database showing he did not have insurance, which the claimant had tried to get addressed and so did I as to the reason why it was not showing on the MID database when in fact he did have insurance no one could understand why he was showing as not insured.

Why then in fact did Steve Elsmore include this within the ASBO application and make it look as if the claimant had been found guilty of it by the court? I though false information on an application was illegal. Why has this case and the intelligence report been allowed to be used within this case?

So how has this been allowed to stay within this case for the judges to read and the statements are read out in court when the fact it should never have been entered into this case.

3

209,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

All Steve Elsmore statements only act to show bad character towards the claimant within them and multiple errors and facts that are untrue and can be proven to be untrue. But it would be too long within this letter to list them all.

Please see below information regarding these two issues that is on the police’s system.

The claimant did not cause any Anti-Social Behaviour on the 07th April 2013.

Disposal (Court)

Adjudication Date: 23/07/13

Court Name:  EAST LONDON MAGISTRATES

Name: CORDELL, SIMON PAUL

Offence Count: 2

Taken into Consideration: 0

Owner:  02 (METROPOLITAN POLICE)

Last Updated: 25/07/13

Offence

Arrest/Summons Ref: 13/01HT/01/1537C

Crime Reference: 01HT/1537/13

Offence Number: 1

Court/Caution/Force            13/2574/60295A

Reference:

Court Offence Number: 1

Adjudication: NOT GUILTY

Plea Description: NOT KNOWN

Originator: 01 (METROPOLITAN POLICE)

Offence Description: USE DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR OR

THREATENING / ABUSIVE/INSULTING WORDS LIKELY TO CAUSE HARASSMENT ALARM OR DISTRESS

Offence Date(s): 07/04/13

Location: ELLESMERE STREET, LONDON E14 (01HT)

Disposal: 23/07/13 AT EAST LONDON MAGISTRATES

COURT REF: 13/2574/60295A

1 WITHDRAWN FINAL Offence

Arrest/Summons Ref: 13/01HT/01/1537C

Crime Reference: 01HT/1537/13

Offence Number: 2

Court/Caution/Force            13/2574/60295A

Reference:

Court Offence Number: 2

Adjudication: NOT GUILTY

Plea Description: NOT KNOWN

4

210,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

Originator: 01 (METROPOLITAN POLICE)

Offence Description: USING VEHICLE WHILE UNINSURED

Offence Date(s): 07/04/13

Location: ELLESMERE STREET, LONDON E14 (01HT)

Disposal: 23/07/13 AT EAST LONDON MAGISTRATES

COURT REF: 13/2574/60295A

1 WITHDRAWN FINAL

24/05/2013 Old Police Station Ponders End:

On this date it is alleged by the police the claimant was looking for venues in which illegal raves could be held.

This is far from the truth on this date, I was contacted via phone by a person called Joshua, Joshua was homeless and at that time was staying at 204 High Street, Ponders End EN3 4EZ, this building is also known as the old police station, Joshua had contacted me due to being hungry and in need of food, he told him he would come and meet him in order to take him out and get some food as he had no money.

As the claimant approached 204 high Road the police stopped him, the claimant consented to being searched and having his car searched due to the police stating there was a strong smell of cannabis, the police did their search and found nothing. The police asked where he was going which he told them, he was going to meet a friend to get some food.

The claimant disputes stating to police that he could attract people to illegal raves and three day events, the claimant does not know what Joshua said to the police so cannot comment on this as he was not with Joshua when the police were questioning Joshua.

This date is also outside of the six months’ time limit from when the application was submitted to the court, again the judge has proved this case when this case is only meant to be used as reference, and the claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour on the 24th May 2013. Why are these cases being proven/

20/04/2014 Cannabis 420 day:

Within Steve Elsmore statement dated 11/08/2014, it is made to seem that the claimant attended on this date without the knowledge of the organisers of this event and was not hired to be there by the event organiser’s norm-co.uk. In fact he was hired by norm-co.uk to attend the event that they had organised the claimant believes this event is legal and happens every year. The claimant was hired on a dry hire basis; the claimant was doing the job on a no profit basis. When norm-co.uk contacted the claimant he was told that the person that they had hired had let them down at the last minute.

The claimant arrived at the location in Hyde Park he was approached by the police, the claimant explained why he was there that he had been hired by the organisers, the police stated to him he had not been hired by the organisers of the event, and that he was not supposed to be there, when the claimant was hired by the organisers norm- co.uk they told him that this was a licensed event. The claimant did not use his

5

211,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

equipment he did try to contact the organisers of the event but was unable to, the claimant left the location as the police had asked him to do and returned home.

Within the claimant’s bundle there are emails to prove the above account of what the claimant has stated these emails are from norm-co.uk. The claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour on the 20th April 2014.

·         25/05/2014 Unit 5 St Georges Ind Est White hart Lane, N17:

In respect to this date the claimant did attend premises where homeless people was treating it as their home, the claimant had attended bringing food for the homeless people living in the premises, when the claimant got to the premises the homeless people was already in the premises living there, there was no music being played while he was present.

The claimant does admit he attended the premises in his van, when the police attended the premises he allowed the police to search his vehicle, in his vehicle there were two speaker boxes with no drivers within them so they were unable to play music, he explained to the police that he used his van as storage, he did ask the police to note this, he did not have any other sound equipment in the vehicle.

Once the police had searched his vehicle which he allowed them to do, he was allowed to leave, and he made his way home.

The police did not seize anything within the claimant’s van, which if the police believed there was going to be an illegal rave in the premises they would have had the right to do this, but the police saw the speaker that were in the van could not play music. And he never had any other sound equipment in the van, this is why the police allowed him to leave.

At no time while the claimant was at the premises did anyone attend there dressed up stating there was going to be a party at the premises.

If the police had CCTV of people breaking into the premises why was this not submitted as evidence within this case?

Why was there a need to update the information report on the 19/06/2014?

The claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour on the 25th May 2014.

06/06/2014 to 08/06/2014 Progress way Enfield:

The claimant disputes the facts that are within the application, on the 06th June 2014 he was at his home address with a friend, and also attended my home address Lorraine Cordell. His sister Deon was there, and a friend of the family Jamie Duffy who lived at the family’s addresses.

On the 07/06/2014 he attended a leaving party for his cousin Dwayne Edwards who was leaving to go around the world for 12 months, the claimant was there at the leaving party till the early hours on the 08/06/2017, it has already been stated in the

6

212,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

magistrates court there was a mistake in the paperwork and the claimant did not attend until the 08/06/2014 at around 02:00 hours. I also cannot understand why the claimant’s brother name has been added to this case as an organiser. As stated in the magistrates court the claimant’s brother had a serious life changing accident in April 2014, his brother had a number substantial injuries, after this was stated before the magistrates trial the claimant’s brother was never mentioned again, the reason for this the police knew of the RTA accident as they was called and the claimant’s brother had to be airlifted to the Royal London Hospital. The police know my sons very well by face they do not even have to do a name check on them. So how this serious mistake could have been made is beyond me.

While the claimant was at the leaving party he had got a call from someone he knew they had stayed at his home address a few weeks earlier and left their locker keys there, due to them being in the area they called the claimant and asked if he could drop the keys off to them, the claimant told them he was at a family party and that once he left he would drop the keys off to them. He asked where they was and they gave the location as progress way, he told them that once he left the family party he would pick the keys up from his home address and drop them off to them, this is how the police saw the claimant coming towards them while they were standing at the gate at progress way on the 08/06/2017 at around 02:00 hours, the claimant had never been in side progress way, but due to the police knowing the claimant they went straight up to him and started to talk to him, the police was with people that worked for Enfield Council, they wanted to serve paperwork on the claimant, the claimant would not accept any paperwork and walked back towards the A10.

The claimant was not involved in organising or supplying any equipment at progress way. The claimant did not act in any anti-social behaviour manner on the 06/06/2014, 07/06/2014 and the 08/06/2014.

Within ASBO application most of the data relates to Progress Way which relates to the dates of the 06/06/2014, 07/06/2014 and the 08/06/2014.

The police stated that the information contained within their bundle does not relate to another location and deny that an event was ongoing just down the road from progress way on the same dates as progress way, this was even stated under oath at court. The police denied that there was another event ongoing in Crown Road at the same time that Progress Way was ongoing.

They even confirmed to the judge when the Judge asked if anything related to another location, it was stated to the Judge everything that related to 06/06/2014, 07/06/2014 and the 08/06/2014 within their bundle related to progress way that nothing within the bundle for Progress Way related to another event.

A huge amount of data has been redacted by the police, I could understand if the redacted data only redacted the person’s details name and address phone numbers etc that had made the calls to the police. But the redaction goes a lot further than this where there is whole pages redacted within one CAD which really makes the CAD useless being in the bundle, also the grid references why would so many be redacted I can understand the call location being redacted but why would there be a need to redact the Att Location and Inc Loc. We asked every time we were in court for the CADs

7

213,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

to be un-redacted because we knew a fair amount related to Crown Road, which the police were denying, we also asked for all of the missing CADs, nothing ever came of our requests, none of the judges ordered this to be done.

Crown Road has a lot of history for events they were ongoing in this location from April 2014 till around June 2014, in fact maybe later than June 2014.

I do not really need to bring the intelligence reports and CADs up as the information I will supply later in this letter regarding Progress Way will become very relevant as to what the police are hiding. The reason I’m going to go to some detail here is because I do not feel it is correct that the police are allowed to get away with what they have done within this case towards my son due to how much they dislike him and my family. And I believe it will show how much the police are willing to do in order to put everything onto my son.

Let me give you some CADs Numbers I will not go over everyone as there is a great deal of them and some have got so much redaction we can only wonder why.

CAD 2410:08/06/2014 all grid references are redacted, most of the second and third pages are redacted, but what gives this away as being Crown Road is what has been written by the call handler on page 4.

“illegal rave going on opposite A&J Cars approx. 200 people1 drugs being openly sold and taken caller noticed them whilst on his way home, they're all over the Street.”

“Linked to cads 1646 & 1768 08June”

Any police officer would know that A&J Cars is right by Crown Road, right opposite the Old Mann Building where the events was ongoing for months, and nowhere near Progress Way.

The CAD numbers 1646 and 1768 08 June are missing we were never allowed to have these.

CAD 3319:08/06/2014, Grid Reference below,

Att Location: SOUTHBURY RD/CROWN ROAD

Map: Page 082, Grid Reference 534960,196240

GPA: YP [Division: YE: JC]

Inc Location: SOUTHBURY Rd/CROWN ROAD

Map: Page 082, Grid Reference 534960,196240

GPA: YP [Division: YE: JC]

Call Location: 93, BROADLANDS AVENUE, ENFIELD

Map: Page 082, Grid Reference 534981,196790

GPA: YF [Division: YE: SX]

As we can see all the Grid Reference have been left in this one by mistake, I believe, once again any police officer would know 93, BROADLANDS AVENUE, ENFIELD is behind Crown Road, so in fact this CAD cannot belong to Progress Way.

8

214,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

But this CAD tells us even more as there is a safety risk with it regarding a fragile roof, and subsequently gives details in regard to door numbers along Southbury Road and Crown Road. This also links to CAD number 3319. There is no mistaking this CAD links to the event that was ongoing at Crown Road. The police deny this they state no event was ongoing, yet it is a known fact the building was along Crown road/Southbury Road have fragile roofs, the old man building has partly a glass roof.

These are just a few CADs that prove there was an ongoing event at Crown Road, it is also proven in the FOI request I put into Enfield Council, there is also a substantial amount of information within the intelligence reports that do not correspond in the way in which they should do, there is also errors within the timeline of some of the CADs, I do not see why the police have mislead the courts, the only reason is most of the information the police had related to Progress Way.

Also the witness statements that was taken by police are meant to be written in the words of the witness signed and dated by the witness, all but one witness statement has been written and signed by police officers, not one witness statement identifies the claimant or a description, under the law I witness statement should be completed and signed and dated by the witness.

Now as said before I have done a lot of research, and I now put it to the police they knew full well my son had not done what they said he had done in this case. And that the police were hiding information.

Progress Way Event was relocated to Progress Way; the Metropolitan police know this already, but yet blame my son.

The location that this was meant to have happened In Essex a very senior police officer was being updated in regard to this event, due to the Essex police monitoring the event page on social media for some time, due to the brief location on the event page on social media, the very senior police officer was concerned due to it being very close with the border to the Metropolitan police area.

The very senior police officer due to being concerned contacted the Metropolitan police, information was given to the Metropolitan police in regards to the concerns with this event and area, there was information given so that the Metropolitan police could monitor the event page on social media, the senior officer asked for information of a senior officer within the Metropolitan police that would be on duty the full weekend the event was due to take place so that contact could be made regarding this.

On the 06th June 2014 the Very senior police officer sent police to look for the location within the border of Essex, the police found the location this event was going to be taking place. Once the very senior police officer got the location, he went in a police helicopter and went to the location and landed in the field.

He had his file with all the information in it which included pictures of the known organiser, he went up to the known organiser who was white north European, after speaking to him the very senior police officer asked him to leave the land and served him a notice under S63 CJOPOA and a notice not to set up within 24 hours. The very senior police officer gave the known organiser 3 hours to pack up everything and leave the land and gave him an explanation of the offence he was liable to commit if he failed to comply with the direction.

9

215,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

The organiser then relocated to progress way. Police are well aware organisers relocate if the police close an event down.

The claimant was nowhere near Essex on this day; he was not involved in the organisation or supply of equipment which the police are well aware of.

Yet the police want to blame him and they was not going to stop until they got the ASBO on him and did not care what they covered up in the process of the information they had, I believe this is also why there is nothing really for the 06th June within the bundle for the ASBO application.

And why when asked over and over why we were never allowed to see the police officers packet notebooks, for any of the dates in their application.

20/06/2014 1 Falcon Park Neasden Lane NW10:

The claimant’s is alleged to have been involved in the organisation and or supplied equipment for an illegal rave, the claimant disputes what the police have said, on this date the claimant had been contacted and asked if he would hire a sound system for a gentleman’s birthday party. The claimant agreed to do so; the sound system and van were collected from the claimant’s home. The claimant’s terms and conditions were agreed, and invoice signed, and a deposit was given to him.

At around 01:00 hours the claimant received a phone call from the person he had hired the sound system to; the person stated that the sound system and van was being seized by the police.

The claimant was very upset and could not at this stage understand why the police was seizing his equipment and van.

The claimant asked the location and took down the address, he had to get up and get dressed and leave his home it took him around an hour to reach the location, upon approaching the address he had been given he saw there was a lot of police around, he parked his car up got out and went up to the police to speak to them to find out what was going on, he showed the police the terms and conditions of hirer, and the invoice.

The police at this point allowed the claimant into the building where he continued to speak to the police, the sound system had not been put away and the police allowed the claimant to start packing it away into his van, but the police stated they were confiscating it until they had looked into the matter.

The claimant gave the police all his contact information, and also took down the police officer information. About a week later the police contacted the claimant and told him he was allowed to come and pick his van and equipment up from the police station.

The claimant did not knowingly supply equipment for an illegal rave; he believed the hire was for a birthday party and it was all above board.

The claimant did not cause any antisocial behaviour on the 20th June 2014.

19/07/2014 Carpet right A10 Enfield:

As stated previously by the claimant he was not involved in the organisation or supplied equipment on this date. And the claimant totally disagrees in regard to what the police have said in their application. The claimant on this day was driving down A10 he was heading towards McDonald’s, as he was passing carpet right he saw the police outside and he believed he saw a friend who he knew had been homeless, he was on the wrong side of the road so went down towards Southbury Road where he knew he could turn his car around. He parked his vehicle and walked

10

216,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

to the location, upon arriving there he saw there was a lot of police, as soon as he got there he was standing on the pavement and the police arrested him to stop a believed breach of the peace, the claimant never entered the building, he was arrested outside.

Within the CADs it clearly states there was around 20 people males and females all white approximate age 20. The claimant is mixed raced, The CADs start from 20:51 hours, the claimant was not arrested until 22:50 hours, some two hours after the police arrived at the premises.

There is a statement from Mr Moses Howe who states he was hired by Mr Anthony Harvey, he states Mr Anthony Harvey was arrested by the police inside the premises but later de-arrested, the police have never disputed this.

As stated, before I have done a lot of research, I will deal with this research into this date below.

Officer in Charge Steve Elsmore states in his statement dated 11/08/2014 about a rave that happened in Croydon where a poor boy lost his life, and in fact has made it seem as if the claimant was part of this rave.

Officer in Charge Steve Elsmore did an updated statement dated 26/06/15 in this statement he stated about operation blue iris which relates to the Croydon rave, the Croydon rave I believe was called rum and base.

Officer in Charge Steve Elsmore states in this updated statement that he spoke with A/DS Tanner who works for the public order investigation unit at Scotland Yard, A/DS Tanner confirmed she had spoken to Miss Lorraine Cordell to Steven Elsmore. Blue iris was the operational name that related to the investigation into the Croydon rave.

My investigation has led to the information regarding Anthony Harvey being listed by Scotland Yard and all TV media as wanted regarding the Croydon rave his picture was published in the media along with a lot of others that was also wanted regarding the Croydon rave, on the 30th June 2014 Anthony Harvey handed himself into Ilford police station, Scotland Yard attended Ilford police station and took Anthony Harvey back to Scotland Yard for questioning, Anthony Harvey was questioned by 4 police officers at Scotland Yard, he was charged with violent disorder and some other things, he was released on bail with bail conditions. He spent around six hours in a cell.

The claimant had nothing to do with the Croydon rave, he was not present, and I believe this is confirmed in the updated statement of Officer in charge Steve Elsmore. The claimant did not organise or supply equipment in Croydon rave. Once again why has this been put in the application and worded as if my son had organised this, when clearly the police have information that he had nothing to do with this. The only reason I can see is that this was a high-profile case where someone unfortunately lost their life. And tainting my son with this event will make any Judge believe my son is such a bad person, I believe this amount to slander and or defamation of character.

The claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour at Croydon rave as he was not there and had nothing to do with it.

11

217,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

It seems Anthony Harvey was very unhappy in regard to how Scotland Yard was treating him they would not leave him alone, but he was still advertising the events he was putting on. One was for the 19th July 2014 called The Raving Family That Rave In The Woods, Anthony Harvey even had special T-shirts made up with the wording The Raving Family on them, Anthony Harvey even put a request for anyone that had strong bolties he could use.

It would seem that Anthony Harvey first location for the 19th July 2014 was in Barking, Anthony Harvey then relocated to Enfield carpet right, he states that he begged the police to allow this to carry on but they would not, and states fuck to Scotland Yard, a person that knows Anthony Harvey states they was all waiting at Southbury Road.

As stated, before Anthony Harvey was on bail, I believe one of those bail conditions was not to attend an illegal rave, as he states he is allowed to attend legal events only.

I believe that when Steve Elsmore spoke to A/DS Tanner, A/DS Tanner explained a lot more about Anthony Harvey then Steve Elsmore states in his updated statement. Even about the event at Barking which was due to me relocated.

“A/DS Tanner states that she had inputted a Crimit regarding a rave that was due to take place on 19th July 2014 in Barking. This rave was due to be at one location but was due to be moved to another location which had not disclosed.”

Why did Steve Elsmore state in the lower court he had deleted emails to and from A/DS Tanner, why did Steve Elsmore not ask A/DS Tanner to do a statement, why did he feel it necessary to write what he says A/DS Tanner said to him. I know the public order investigation unit was told by Sir Bernard Hogan Howe to monitor all raves keep intelligence on them and try to put stop to them A/DS Tanner told me this on the phone when I spoke to her. And when I spoke to DS Chapman from the public order investigation unit he confirmed they was looking into all raves, he also did a check on the claimant’s name and stated within all the information they had they only had the claimant’s name on their systems once, and that was to prevent a breach of the peace on the 19th July 2014.

The claimant did not organise or supply equipment; the claimant did not cause any anti-social behaviour on this date.

24/07/2014 Admitted to police he setups raves:

On this date the claimant was driving down the Road after just leaving my home, he was on his way home via Alma Road, as he passed King Edwards Road he saw the police in an unmarked police car the claimant knew it was the police as the police had stopped him before while on active duty, they were at this time indicating to do a right-hand turn out of King Edward Road onto Alma Road. But when they saw the claimant passed King Edward Road they changed direction and turned left onto Alma Road to follow him after a short time the police put their blue lights on, and pulled him over to the side of the road opposite the BMW repair centre along Alma Road, the male officer who was in the passenger side of the police car got out and started to approach the claimant’s car, the claimant opened his window a little and asked why

12

218,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

he had been pulled over. The police officer said he was not sure why, but his colleague had instructed him to do this, his colleague was the police officer that the claimant knew. The police officer walked back to the unmarked police car then re-approached the claimant’s car with his colleague the driver of the unmarked police car. I asked again what had been pulled over for, and the driver of the unmarked police car pulled out his truncheon and said the claimant had to get out of his car, and that if I declined his windows would be smashed. The claimant got out of his car as he had done nothing wrong and had nothing to hide, the claimant had not committed any offence whatsoever, the police stated to the claimant he had been pulled over because he was driving too close to the car in front of him, the driver who was in the car in front of the claimant never stopped, and was not stopped by police. The claimant was then accused of having drugs, the claimant allowed police to search him and his vehicle nothing was found. The police then asked the claimant what he was up to, the claimant said that he was setting up his catalogue that he had been building with a friend, and that the website that was being built was nearly completed. The claimant said that he was trying to achieve positive effects within today’s society with his business that he had been building. Once the police had completed all their checks they needed, they shook hands and went on our way.

At no time did the claimant act in an anti-social manner towards the police.

It seems the police stated other things in their report that are very untrue, please see below

“On Thursday 24th July 2014 at around 1625 hours, plain clothes officers from YE Gangs Unit had cause to stop the following male on ALMA ROAD EN3. Simon CORDELL. He was driving a silver Ford Focus vrm MA57LDY on which he is insured but is not the registered keeper. He was stopped as he was driving about 1" from the bumper of the car in front of him and his driving was erratic. He claimed to know the other driver; this male however approached officers saying he had been driving like that behind him since YR.

CORDELL was obstructive as usual, refusing to get out of his vehicle etc. He stated that his solicitor has a big case going where all his criminal records will be wiped as Police have unlawfully picked on him for years etc. Of interest he stated that he has 4 brand new speaker systems at home which he is happy to loan people for raves etc and that he is inundated with requests to run raves. He stated that he has 20,000 followers on one social media network and 70,000 in another. He says that he could organize a rave and get 20,000 people at it without any problems whatsoever, and that he gets lots of requests from anarchist type groups etc to run raves for them. Of note he claims Occupy London, Black Block and other anarchist groups have been asking him to organize one for Notting Hill Carnival so that they can "Cause carnage and mayhem".

The claimant is continuously being pulled up by the police for no reason this has been ongoing for the past at least 23 years, I believe the above comments within the police report shows this when it states CORDELL was obstructive as usual refusing to get out of his vehicle etc.

The claimant did not get out of his vehicle right away he did not know why he was being pulled again, so waited in his car to ask the police why he had been stopped. it is not a crime to sit in your car until the police approach.

13

219,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

The police state in their report he was driving about 1” from the bumper of the car in front of him and the claimant driving was erratic.

If the claimant had been driving 1” from the bumper of the car in front of him, which I believe is impossible, and his driving was erratic, then surely the police would have arrested him for dangerous driving, the police always try and find a way to arrest the claimant for any reason they can, and I am hundred percent sure if the claimant was driving like this he would have been in the police station under arrest for it. The driver in the car that was in front of the claimant did not stop and speak to the police if he had done this why have the police not given the drivers details.

The claimant did not speak to the police in regard to loaning out his equipment for raves. The numbers that the police have stated that the claimant said he had in 2 accounts on social media is impossible and is unbelievable that the police have stated such information. The police have also stated that the claimant spoke of links to Occupy London, Black Block and other anarchist groups, the claimant has never been involved in any activist groups, and is highly insulted that the police could say the name Black Block came out of his mouth, Black Block is a known NF group, so please why would the claimant have said such things when he is mixed race.

There is also concern with the date of this report, it was filed on the police’s system, it would seem police were together when the reports was made for 2 dates in the application, when they must have already knew the police wanted to bring this application against the claimant. If you look at the below and look at the two URN numbers, you will see this.

Information Report

 

 

Officer Safety

URN

YERT00376229

GPMS

RESTRICTED

Event Date

24/07/2014

Created

27/07/2014

Last Updated

31/07/2014

 

Information Report

 

 

Officer Safety

URN

YERT00376227

GPMS

RESTRICTED

Event Date

27/07/2014

Created

27/07/2014

Last Updated

27/07/2014

 

27/07/2014 Millmarsh Lane Enfield:

On this date the claimant is alleged to have organised a rave and/or supplied equipment, the claimant disputes this, there was some homeless people living in premises at Millmarsh Lane, I had been invited to attend a 20th birthday party the claimant did not know about any rave only that a homeless person was having their 20th birthday party, there was only a few people there and they was the homeless people living there. The claimant did not have any equipment there, did not load any equipment or hiring the equipment.

The claimant did not act in any anti-social manner on this date.

14

220,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

Within the police report it states the police had been given intelligence that a rave was due to take place, why is this intelligence not within the application.

The police report also states there was a large stack of speakers being powered by the claimant’s van, I do not understand how this is possible the voltage for a sound system would be 240 V the voltage on a van is only 12 V this would make it impossible for a van to power a sound system.

It would also be of concern that when police were writing these reports, they were together (please see URN above). At this point the police would have known the antisocial behaviour order application was going to be submitted and anything that was being added would go well with their case (True or untrue).

09/08/2014 to 10/08/2014 Millmarsh Lane Enfield:

On this date the claimant is being accused of organising and or supplying equipment at Millmarsh Lane Enfield, the claimant disputes this, the claimant was not involved in the organisation of any rave and did not supply equipment, police state this event was run by Every Decibel Matters, the claimant can confirm that he is not an employee of this organisation or a shareholder or a director and he has no controlling interest in the company. Information was supplied within the application by the director of Every Decibel Matters that confirms this.

On this date I had gone to see the people that was homeless that was living in Millmarsh Lane Enfield, the police were well aware that homeless people were living in this location in premises from weeks earlier.

As stated before I have done a lot of research, it seems every decibel matters had police turn up at their addresses stating they would be arrested if they carried on with this event, the event location was meant to have been in Harrow, every decibel matters state on the date of the event they were in Harrow and police sent helicopters all day looking for them, they had no option but to relocate I believe this is when they relocated to Millmarsh Lane, the claimant had no knowledge of this and was never in Harrow, and knew nothing regarding this being relocated to Millmarsh Lane.

The officer in charge of the application Steve Elsmore has stated in one of his updated statements that the claimant knew Mr Moses Howe, and that he has been stopped by police with Mr Moses Howe once in the claimant’s vehicle 2011.

The claimant does not dispute he does have knowledge of Mr Moses Howe, Mr Moses Howe is a sound engineer, in 2011 the claimant had been offered the management position at Club Juice in Green Street Enfield, the claimant would as part of his job role be organising events for Club Juice this would have included the claimant’s sound system being within the venue. Due to the claimant in 2011 not having much knowledge of all the complicated knowledge needed setting up the sound system he asked people he knew if they knew a sound engineer, Mr Moses Howe name was given, the claimant and Mr Moses Howe agreed to meet and go to the venue check what would be needed in regards to equipment, and it was agreed that if it took off Mr Moses Howe would be the sound engineer for club juice. When the police pulled the claimant and Mr Moses Howe was in the vehicle, they were on their way to Club Juice, they were due to set the sound system up in order to allow testing

15

221,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

and make sure everything was in order. Within the weeks that followed they had set up one event that was due to take place at club juice, but due to how the police was with the claimant they kept pulling him up outside of Club Juice strip searching him and would not leave him alone, the claimant got so distressed and embarrassed that he told the owner of Club Juice he could no longer carry on, and left the position. Since this time the claimant has had no knowledge of what Mr Moses Howe has been doing, Mr Moses Howe is the director with Sean O'Connor of every decibel matters, as shown within the documents within the claimant’s bundle.

If the claimant had a great deal of contact with Mr Moses Howe I am sure the police would have a lot more than one date on the police’s system that the claimant had been with Mr Moses Howe, the claimant as said above is pulled a great deal by the police and I believe that this would have been shown on the police’s system. And not just one date in 2011.

CAD 9717 seems to have intelligence that was received by police on 09th August 2014, this CAD was never included in the applications bundle, I believe this intelligence would have been very helpful to the claimant and this is why it was never added to the application bundle. As we believe it would prove the police had no information on my son.

It seems throughout this case there has been a lot of CADs and intelligence reports that have not been included in the applications bundle; I believe the reason for this is that it would show that what has been stated within the application is very misleading. I believe also that is why we was never allowed to see them. I believe also that the police officers’ notebook’s which we were also never allowed to see would also show how misleading the application was towards the claimant.

There is a lot more information I have gained due to research I have done, there is also a lot more points within the application that are misleading and incorrect, there is a list of breaches under the data protection of information that is totally incorrect which can be proven. At this time there is a case ongoing with the ICO in regards to breaches that the police have stated in their application and also incorrect information on the claimant’s PNC record, all of this information and a lot more was being bought up each time we attended court at the Magistrate’s Court and the Crown Court. There have been so many breaches of human rights throughout this case I cannot understand how it has been allowed to have happened, there is a total miscarriage of justice and many other issues regarding his legal representation within this case.

At this time the claimant does not leave his home he has not done since 2014 due to knowing the police are going to say he has done something that breaches the conditions and arrest him and put him in prison,

Steve Elsmore has already done in updated statements, which in fact implies my son had breached his conditions in Nov 2014 by being on an industrial estate, which was totally incorrect.

The conditions the claimant is under breaches his human rights, it seems as though the barrister that was representing the police in this matter feels that it is acceptable to breach someone human rights knowingly.

You can see this on page 28 of the appeal transcript which the administrative court sent, they also only seen to be concerned in regard to the claimant going to a shop or

16

222,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

petrol station. But the implications of the conditions go a lot wider and no one has taken this into consideration. Please see below a list of information which is only a small list which the claimant cannot do.

Schedule of prohibitions You must not:

1.      Be concerned in the organisation of a rave as defined by s.63(1) or s63(1A) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

2.      Knowingly use or supply property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave as defined by s.63 (1) of the Criminal justice and Public Order Act 1994.

3.      Enter or remain in any disused or abandoned building unless invited to do so in writing by a registered charitable organisation or local authority or owner of the premises.

4.      Enter any non-residential private property (by which words buildings and an open enclosed and are intended to be individual) or an industrial estate between the hours of 22:00 and 07:00 without written permissions from the owner and a leaseholder of such property. If you can demonstrate that the purpose of your entry of such property is to purchase goods or services from any shop or garage or fuel supplier which is open to the public at such times. Then in such event, you may enter but you must not remain on such property for longer than 30 minutes and you may do so on only one occasion during each separate nine-hour period between 22:00 and 07:00 daily.

5.      5 Provide any service in respect of any licensable activity in an unlicensed premise.

For the sake of clarity, nothing in this order prevents the defendant from assisting, preparing for, engaging in licensed licensable activities,

This order expires on the 3 August 2020

17

223,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

This order and its requirements amend a previous order imposed by Highbury Corner Magistrates Court.

Condition 4 states

Enter any non-residential private property (by which words buildings and an open enclosed and are intended to be individual) or an industrial estate between the hours of 22:00 and 07:00 without written permissions from the owner and a leaseholder of such property. If you can demonstrate that the purpose of your entry of such property is to purchase goods or services from any shop or garage or fuel supplier which is open to the public at such times. Then in such event, you may enter but you must not remain on such property for longer than 30 minutes and you may do so on only one occasion during each separate nine-hour period between 22:00 and 07:00 daily.

With this condition in place any non-residential property The Appellant would not be able to attend only for 30 minutes on one occasion during a separate nine-hour period:

This would include hospitals, police stations, 24-hour supermarkets, petrol stations, cinemas, restaurants, bars, night clubs and any other public place open to the public between these times that is non-residential The Appellant would only have a 30 minute window to be able to enter any non-residential building, however is not feasible that within 30 minutes The Appellant could be seen in a hospital within 30 minutes, how would it be feasible if The Appellant went to dinner at a restaurant they would be completed within 30 minutes, how would it be feasible if The Appellant wanted to go to a nightclub or late-night bar as it would only have 30 minutes, places that are open to the public should not be restricted to The Appellant how is The Appellant meant to have a normal family life. The Appellant cannot go to without written permission which would be degrading for The Appellant to have to ask each time he wanted to go somewhere and explain why he needed it to be confirmed in writing by the owner and/or leaseholder of the property, how

18

224,

Letter to high court C0 2171 2017.pdf

this condition could be applied by any Judge and state it is not a beach of someone human rights is beyond me.

Conditions 2 states knowingly using or supplying property personal or otherwise for the use of a rave as defined under section 63.1 of the criminal justice and public order act,

The Appellants has spent the last 10 years building his business saving every penny and help from family it is within the entertainment industry, he will hires equipment out and his services, The Appellants business would seriously be affected, because if he hired his equipment and it ended up in an illegal rave The Appellant would be in breach of the conditions. When hiring out equipment you do ask what it is going to be used for, and you do have a contract that is in place, but what the person tells you their reason for hiring the equipment out is not always the correct reason and is not used for the purpose the person told you The Appellant would be in breach of these conditions. Also if The Appellant loaned someone any personal belongings and that person ended up at an illegal rave then The Appellant would again be in breach of his conditions, even if the item was something that did not even constitute as being for an illegal rave.

Conditions 5 states provide any service in respect of any licensable activity in an unlicensed premise.

How is The Appellant meant to run his business, The Appellant would not be able to obtain a licence that has already been clarified by the police and councils due to the Antisocial Behaviour Order that is in place, The Appellant would not be able to offer his services also due to the restriction that he has only 30 minutes within a non-residential building, most events go to the late hours in the morning so even if there was a licensed premises and someone wanted to hire the services of The Appellant The Appellant would not be able to do this. The Appellant was also offered contracts within two nightclubs to be the manager if The Appellant was again offered contracts within nightclubs or late-night bars The Appellant would not be able to accept these contracts. I

19

225,

cannot even say why condition 5 has been imposed because condition 4 conflicts with condition 5 in certain parts. And who would want to hire or take on The Appellant if he had to ask for written permission which would be degrading for The Appellant to have to ask each time he wanted to go somewhere or had a contact and had to explain why he needed it to be confirmed in writing by the owner and/or leaseholder of the property,

These are just a few concerns with the conditions that The Appellant is under, there is other concerns with other conditions set at by the Courts that are of concern.

How this case could have been proven is beyond me, I have only done a brief account of information within this letter. there is a lot of information I have not included due to trying to keep this letter as short as I could.

I only wanted Justice for my son, but due to a mistake I done it seems there will be no Justice and the true facts will never be been known. And my son will suffer for something he did not do. I did call the High Court then I realised I had made a mistake and told them I was going to be late submitting documents due to trying to get help from a legal person. And as for the beaches of my son's human rights do, they do not matter.

There is so much wrong with this case, and the way the courts addressed it was not correct since 2014.

Best Regards

Written by Miss Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Mr Simon Cordell

20

 

 

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

Double1

19/06/2017

/ Page Numbers: 226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238

 

 52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

Double1

19/06/2017

/ Page Numbers: 226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238

--

226,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 19 July 2017 16:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: NOSP - Simon Cordell.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached copy of a Notice of Seeking Possession that was posted through Mr Cordell's letterbox this afternoon at 4.05pm. The notice is served as a result of reports of anti-social behaviour made against Mr Cordell by some of his neighbours and Enfield Council members of staff.

We will advise Mr Cordell to seek independent legal advice from a solicitor or the Citizens Advice Bureau in respect of this notice.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

227,

228,

229,

230,

231,

232,

233,

234,

235,

236,

237,

238,

 

 

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

Double2

19/06/2017

/ Page Numbers: 239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251

 

 53.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

Double2

19/06/2017

/ Page Numbers: 239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251

--

239,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 19 July 2017 16:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject:          Re: Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: NOSP - Simon Cordell.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached copy of a Notice of Seeking Possession that was posted through Mr Cordell's letterbox this afternoon at 4.05pm. The notice is served as a result of reports of anti-social behaviour made against Mr Cordell by some of his neighbours and Enfield Council members of staff.

We will advise Mr Cordell to seek independent legal advice from a solicitor or the Citizens Advice Bureau in respect of this notice.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

240,

Same as Above!

241,

Same as Above!

242,243,244,245,246,247,248,249,250,251

 

 

 

 

 

 

54.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas Plus -1-4166 25-07-2017 05-05

25/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 252

 

 54.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas Plus -1-4166 25-07-2017 05-05

25/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 252

--

252,

From: Get Canvas & Sublimation Supplies <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 25/07/2017 05:04:42 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: 2Day Discount - 5% OFF ALL SUPPLIES at checkout! Pre-orders not included

Valid 25-26th July 2017 only. Quantities may be limited. Not to be combined with other offers or applied to previous purchases

5% OFF all products online at GetCanvasPlus.co.uk

Get 5% off all your printing supplies for a limited time only. Offer is available on any items on our site www.getcanvasplus.co.uk.

Do you need Inks, Stretcher Bars, Canvas Material or Varnish? Grab a bargain to save your business money.

You can even get your items before midday the very next day by selecting pre noon delivery at checkout.

For more information on any of our items please contact us via our web chat feature on our site, or email us at info@getcanvasplus.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

55.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canvas -1-4167 25-07-2017 13-03

25/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 253

 

 55.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Canvas -1-4167 25-07-2017 13-03

25/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 253

--

253,

From: Get Canvas Plus <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 25/07/2017 01:02:50 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: New I Poly Canvas

INKJET CANVAS

QUICK DRYING

Our I Poly canvas has had great feedback over the past couple of years, being one of the most versatile and reliable canvas medias on the market. It is made from 100% Polyester and has its own specially formulated coating which gives it a bright white finish, and when printed makes your colour 'pop'. A high-quality vivid canvas with impeccable quality for price.

Bulk orders available, check out our bulk order table below for our prices and

discounts.

Order here today for next day delivery!

Price

Code

Title

Size

Roll

Price

(1-4)

Price

(5-9)

Price

(1-1)

PPoly13

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

13"

18m

Ł19.20

Ł17.70

Ł16.20

 

PPoly17

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

17"

18m

Ł20.10

Ł18.60

Ł17.10

PPoly24

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

24"

18m

Ł27.10

Ł25.90

Ł24.40

 

PPoly24xl

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

24"

30m

Ł43.10

Ł41.10

Ł39.10

 

PPoly36xl

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

36"

30m

Ł63.40

Ł61.40

Ł59.40

 

PPoly36

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

36"

18m

Ł38.90

Ł36.90

Ł34.90

 

PPoly44

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

44"

18m

Ł46.90

Ł44.90

Ł42.90

PPoly44xl

Premium Inkjet Polyester Canvas Roll

44"

30m

Ł73.00

Ł70.00

Ł67.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas Plus -1-4164 26-07-2017 09-55

26/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 254

 

 56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas Plus -1-4164 26-07-2017 09-55

26/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 254

--

254

From: Get Canvas Plus <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 26/07/2017 09:55:23 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Printable Inkjet Wallpaper Media

NEW Printable Inkjet Wallpaper Media - 24" and 36" Rolls

A smooth, Bright white Wallpaper media that offers outstanding colour and scratch resistance properties, allowing a water-resistant surface. It is a 260gsm media that is tough enough to handle without tearing but also pliable enough to be able to apply and trim like a "normal" wallpaper. Can be hung with standard wallpaper paste.

PVC free and Water resistant for UV pigment and latex inks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

804. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

26/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 255,256,257,258,259,260,261,262

 

 57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

804. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

26/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 255,256,257,258,259,260,261,262

--

255,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 26 July 2017 00:49

To: 'Lemmy Nwabuisi'

Subject: RE: Mr Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Lemmy Nwabuisi 25-07-2017.pdf

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi,

Could you please see attached letter

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto:Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 24 July 2017 11:18

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

The meeting is at 2pm and not 12:00. It was Mr Cordell himself that requested for the meeting and he offered to come to the Civic Centre. The meeting will be held in council offices, however if there are any health reasons why Mr Cordell is unable to attend council offices then you will need to provide us with a doctor's letter stating what the health issues are.

Alternatively, Mr Cordell can respond to the allegations made against him in writing if he does not wish to meet with us in council offices to discuss them.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 24 July 2017 10:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi

I am writing this email as I have just spoken to my son Simon Cordell and I believe a meeting has been set for the 26/07/2017 at 12:00 at your office. We would still like to have the meeting, but could the location be changed to my home 23 Byron Terrace N9 7DG. I think it would be too much for my son to come to the office.

If you could get back to me, I would be grateful.

256,

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi [mailto: Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 19 July 2017 16:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached copy of a Notice of Seeking Possession that was posted through Mr Cordell's letterbox this afternoon at 4.05pm. The notice is served as a result of reports of anti-social behaviour made against Mr Cordell by some of his neighbours and Enfield Council members of staff.

We will advise Mr Cordell to seek independent legal advice from a solicitor or the Citizens Advice Bureau in respect of this notice.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

257,

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

258,

RE: Mr Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession [SEC=OFFICIAL]->Lemmy Nwabuisi 25-07-2017.pdf

25/07/2017

Dear Lemmy Nwabuisi,

I am sorry for the short notice but we will not be able to attend the council meeting tomorrow 26/07/2017 at 14:00 hours the reason is we are indexing all the dates in your possession order, this is taking time due to there being mostly no times and some there is no dates just a month listed and there is so much to go over there is hours and hours of information we need to go over. There is also a great deal of emails that have to be printed off and other information.

I wonder if it will be possible for you to get some information as to the days that are missing and times. I believe a person putting in complaints would at least know what sort of time of day this happened and what day.

I would like to have everything in order and indexed and easy to go over so, as much detail as possible would be great. This will save a great deal of time for us and you.

I would like to have everything in order and easy to go over so, as much detail as possible would be great.

Please see the list of dates below and the information needed.

Dates of Breaches:

6th July 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

July 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a date and time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

I believe if this really did happen and the person was left with no electric to their flat, they would have had to call an electrical contractor to fix this so should have the information regarding this. I do not think they would leave themselves with no electricity to their flat so would have tried to sort this right away. So should have the date and time frame for this and electrical contractor details.

I do not believe it is right to blame someone when there is no proof that person has done anything wrong which he has not. The code for the main door has been the same for over 15 years and due to the time the code being used by the tenants at the block to go in the numbers have faded so anyone can see the numbers to get the code for the main door, this has been done many times there have been people smoking in the block and taking drugs who does not live there in the main section of the communal area of the block. There have even been items taken from the block even 111 had their charismas tree taken.

259,

At this point of time I wish to say Mr Cordell had nothing to do with this and has never damaged any lock to a cupboard or removed a fuse box.

6th August 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

September 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a date and time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

27th September 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this there seems to be 2 times on this date so if possible time frames for both please, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

28th September 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

4th October 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this it seems there is more than one-time frame, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

22nd November 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

I believe that Enfield council records telephone calls, I have asked repeatedly for all data the council hold including phone calls which I have still not been given, could I therefore have the recorded telephone call.

8th December 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

11th December 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time

it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

260,

14th December 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

23rd December 201:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

I believe if this really did happen and the person was left with no electric to their flat, they would have had to call an electrical contractor to fix this so should have the information regarding this. I do not think they would leave themselves with no electricity to their flat so would have tried to sort this right away. So should have the date and time frame for this and electrical contractor details.

Please also see the comments above July 2016

26th December 2016:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

3rd January 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

21st January 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

31st January 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

7th February 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

24th February 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time

it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

261,

17th March 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

I believe this was also on the 16th March 2017 and not the 17th March 2017.

5th May 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

14th May 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, this seems to be more than one time frame so could you please try and get both, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

14th May 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

9th June 2017:

Would it please be possible to get a time frame for this, also on what date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs:

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs:

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs:

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs:

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield

council and log of it being entered into the database?

30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs:

262,

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs:

Would it please be possible to get date and time it was reported to the Enfield council and log of it being entered into the database?

If you can get back to me as soon as possible I would be most grateful as we do not have much time to get all the information indexed and ready.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

58.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2.

request the video of the police 10-08-2017 -07-55

Copy of the original diary when it started!

Double1

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433,434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467,468

469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488,489,490,491,492

493,494,495,496,497,498

499,500,501,502,503,504

505,506,507,508,509,510

511,512,513,514,515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

523,524,525,526,527,528

529,530,531,532,533,534

535,536,537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544,545,546

547,548,549,550,551,552

553,554,555,556,557,558

559,560,561,562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578,579,580,581,582

583,584,585,586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650,651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661,662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671,672

673,674,675,676,677,678

679,680,681,682,683,684

685,686,687,688,689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701,702

703,704,705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712,713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

721,722,723,724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737,738

739,740,741,742,743,744

745,746,747,748,749,750

751,752,753,754,755,756

757,758,759,760,761,762

763,764,765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850,851,852

853,854,855,856,857,858

859,860,861,862,863,864

865,866,867,868,869,870

 

 58.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2.

request the video of the police 10-08-2017 -07-55

Copy of the original diary when it started!

Double1

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers:

263,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/08/2017 07:55:28 PM

Attachments: wwwwwwwwwwwwww.doc

video-2016-09-05-20-14-56.mp4

please can you request the video footage of the police officers webcams all three different ones of them present but manly 343ye lowe 10/08/2017

at about 09:45 to 10:35 outside of mine he told the council officer that I was a dead man and also, they came into mine and we talked about the Asbo.

I have also added the updated diary and a video of the banging at me.

I want the audio to do with George before the injunction hearing and want to request the so-called victims to court as well by law they have to go if I do this and I cannot load the good videos up because of their size

264,

wwwwwwwwwwwwww.doc

Who tried to kill Simon?

A Novel from a Diary off a Book off Truths, Created and Authored by

Simon: -

Staring:

Chapter 1

This is my, Introduction.

My Name is Mr. Simon Cordell, and this is part of my life story.

This book got written by me for the purposes of supplying true and accurate information to the public.

It is my intentions (To start this book) with a pretence of a story of a fiction, so I will begin, One day I found a colourful box and it had a wind up handle that was coming out of the side of it, so me, being me, I went up to the box and took hold on the handle, in doing so, I started to spin the handle.

At first, I could hear this cranking noise; it was ever so quiet but hearing this noise encouraged me, more and more, to keep on spinning the handle.

One second went by and then another second, till I started to feel and enjoy the fun in the rhythm, then, as I went to take my hand of the handle and stop, what I was doing. Pop then outcome this jack in a box.

Now as some people would, or might say, let’s get back to reality, this now is an Introduction; which in fact starts, with a short summary, of my own personal middle adder lessons of age and in brief, this is a short walking, to some of my earlier child hood memories:-

Regardless of any deceitful accusation; The truth is that throughout my whole life I have got raised with high living standards; off a good statue and that I have a very close mother to son relationship, my mother and I have always been very close to each other and this is alongside with the rest of our family member’s.

Together, we have always been there for each other, this got done by us all, as a family should do for each other and in a sequence of events, I can remember; historically, when very much so, in the younger days of my life, when my dad as he still does now, worked hard, so that he could provide for his loved ones and this was in an addition to getting managed, for us to get provided, with having nice things; “living essentials,” such as: A Good Education, Food, Drink, Water, Housing, Holidays and Good; Clothing.

1

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433,434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467,468

469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488,489,490,491,492

493,494,495,496,497,498

499,500,501,502,503,504

505,506,507,508,509,510

511,512,513,514,515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

523,524,525,526,527,528

529,530,531,532,533,534

535,536,537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544,545,546

547,548,549,550,551,552

553,554,555,556,557,558

559,560,561,562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578,579,580,581,582

583,584,585,586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650,651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661,662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671,672

673,674,675,676,677,678

679,680,681,682,683,684

685,686,687,688,689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701,702

703,704,705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712,713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

721,722,723,724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737,738

739,740,741,742,743,744

745,746,747,748,749,750

751,752,753,754,755,756

757,758,759,760,761,762

763,764,765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850,851,852

853,854,855,856,857,858

859,860,861,862,863,864

865,866,867,868,869,870

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2.

video footage of the officers 10-08-2017 -08-01

Copy of the original diary when it started!

Double2

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 871,872,873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883,884,885,886,887,888

889,890,891,892,893,894

895,896,897,898,899,900

901,902,903,904,905,906

907,908,909,910,911,912

913,914,915,916,917,918

919,920,921,922,923,924

925,926,927,928,929,930

931,932,933,934,935,936

937,938,939,940,941,942

943,944,945,946,947,948

949,950,951,952,953,954

955,956,957,958,959,960

961,962,963,964,965,966

967,968,969,970,971,972

973,974,975,976,977,978

979,980,981,982,983,984

985,986,987,988,989,990

991,992,993,994,995,996

997,998,999,1000,1001,1002

1003,1004,1005,1006,1007,1008

1009,1010,1011,1012,1013,1014

1015,1016,1017,1018,1019,1020

1021,1022,1023,1024,1025,1026

1027,1028,1029,1030,1031,1032

1033,1034,1035,1036,1037,1038

1039,1040,1041,1042,1043,1044

1045,1046,1047,1048,1049,1050

1051,1052,1053,1054,1055,1056

1057,1058,1059,1060,1061,1062

1063,1064,1065,1066,1067,1068

1069,1070,1071,1072,1073,1074

1075,1076,1077,1078,1079,1080

1081,1082,1083,1084,1085,1086

1087,1088,1089,1090,1091,1092

1093,1094,1095,1096,1097,1098

1099,1100,1101,1102,1103,1104

1105,1106,1107,1108,1109,1110

1111,1112,1113,1114,1115,1116

1117,1118,1119,1120,1121,1122

1123,1124,1125,1126,1127,1128

1129,1130,1131,1132,1133,1134

1135,1136,1137,1138,1139,1140

1141,1142,1143,1144,1145,1146

1147,1148,1149,1150,1151,1152

1153,1154,1155,1156,1157,1158

1159,1160,1161,1162,1163,1164

1165,1166,1167,1168,1169,1170

1171,1172,1173,1174,1175,1176

1177,1178,1179,1180,1181,1182

1183,1184,1185,1186,1187,1188

1189,1190,1191,1192,1193,1194

1195,1196,1197,1198,1199,1200

1201,1202,1203,1204,1205,1206

1207,1208,1209,1210,1211,1212

1213,1214,1215,1216,1217,1218

1219,1220,1221,1222,1223,1224

1225,1226,1227,1228,1229,1230

1231,1232,1233,1234,1235,1236

1237,1238,1239,1240,1241,1242

1243,1244,1245,1246,1247,1248

1249,1250,1251,1252,1253,1254

1255,1256,1257,1258,1259,1260

1261,1262,1263,1264,1265,1266

1267,1268,1269,1270,1271,1272

1273,1274,1275,1276,1277,1278

1279,1280,1281,1282,1283,1284

1285,1286,1287,1288,1289,1290

1291,1292,1293,1294,1295,1296

1297,1298,1299,1300,1301,1302

1303,1304,1305,1306,1307,1308

1309,1310,1311,1312,1313,1314

1315,1316,1317,1318,1319,1320

1321,1322,1323,1324,1325,1326

1327,1328,1329,1330,1331,1332

1333,1334,1335,1336,1337,1338

1339,1340,1341,1342,1343,1344

1345,1346,1347,1348,1349,1350

1351,1352,1353,1354,1355,1356

1357,1358,1359,1360,1361,1362

1363,1364,1365,1366,1367,1368

1369,1370,1371,1372,1373,1374

1375,1376,1377,1378,1379,1380

1381,1382,1383,1384,1385,1386

1387,1388,1389,1390,1391,1392

1393,1394,1395,1396,1397,1398

1399,1400,1401,1402,1403,1404

1405,1406,1407,1408,1409,1410

1411,1412,1413,1414,1415,1416

1417,1418,1419,1420,1421,1422

1423,1424,1425,1426,1427,1428

1429,1430,1431,1432,1433,1434

1435,1436,1437,1438,1439,1440

1441,1442,1443,1444,1445,1446

1447,1448,1449,1450,1451,1452

1453,1454,1455,1456,1457,1458

1459,1460,1461,1462,1463,1464

1465,1466,1467,1468,1469,1470

1471,1472,1473,1474,1475,1476

1477,1478,1479,1480

 

 59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2.

video footage of the officers 10-08-2017 -08-01

Copy of the original diary when it started!

Double2

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers:

871,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/08/2017 08:01:16 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Attachments: wwwwwwwwwwwwww.doc

please can you help me by requesting the video footage of the police officers webcams all three different ones of them present but

manly 343ye lowe

10/08/2017

at about 09:45 to 10:35 outside of mine he told the council officer that I was a dead man and also, they came into mine and we talked about the Asbo.

I have also added the updated diary and a video of the banging at me.

I want the audio that is to do with George before the injunction hearing and want to request the so called victims to court as well by law they have to go if I do this and I cannot load the good videos up because of their size##and the audio of when I got arrested and done an interview for carron when u was there

872,

wwwwwwwwwwwwww.doc

Who tried to kill Simon?

A Novel from a Diary off a Book off Truths, Created and Authored by

Simon: -

Staring:

Chapter 1

This is my, Introduction.

My Name is Mr. Simon Cordell, and this is part of my life story.

This book got written by me for the purposes of supplying true and accurate information to the public.

It is my intentions (To start this book) with a pretence of a story of a fiction, so I will begin, One day I found a colourful box and it had a wind up handle that was coming out of the side of it, so me, being me, I went up to the box and took hold on the handle, in doing so, I started to spin the handle.

At first, I could hear this cranking noise; it was ever so quiet but hearing this noise encouraged me, more and more, to keep on spinning the handle.

One second went by and then another second, till I started to feel and enjoy the fun in the rhythm, then, as I went to take my hand of the handle and stop, what I was doing. Pop then outcome this jack in a box.

Now as some people would, or might say, let’s get back to reality, this now is an Introduction; which in fact starts, with a short summary, of my own personal middle adder lessons of age and in brief, this is a short walking, to some of my earlier child hood memories:-

Regardless of any deceitful accusation; The truth is that throughout my whole life I have got raised with high living standards; off a good statue and that I have a very close mother to son relationship, my mother and I have always been very close to each other and this is alongside with the rest of our family member’s.

Together, we have always been there for each other, this got done by us all, as a family should do for each other and in a sequence of events, I can remember; historically, when very much so, in the younger days of my life, when my dad as he still does now, worked hard, so that he could provide for his loved ones and this was in an addition to getting managed, for us to get provided, with having nice things; “living essentials,” such as: A Good Education, Food, Drink, Water, Housing, Holidays and Good; Clothing.

1

873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883,884,885,886,887,888

889,890,891,892,893,894

895,896,897,898,899,900

901,902,903,904,905,906

907,908,909,910,911,912

913,914,915,916,917,918

919,920,921,922,923,924

925,926,927,928,929,930

931,932,933,934,935,936

937,938,939,940,941,942

943,944,945,946,947,948

949,950,951,952,953,954

955,956,957,958,959,960

961,962,963,964,965,966

967,968,969,970,971,972

973,974,975,976,977,978

979,980,981,982,983,984

985,986,987,988,989,990

991,992,993,994,995,996

997,998,999,1000,1001,1002

1003,1004,1005,1006,1007,1008

1009,1010,1011,1012,1013,1014

1015,1016,1017,1018,1019,1020

1021,1022,1023,1024,1025,1026

1027,1028,1029,1030,1031,1032

1033,1034,1035,1036,1037,1038

1039,1040,1041,1042,1043,1044

1045,1046,1047,1048,1049,1050

1051,1052,1053,1054,1055,1056

1057,1058,1059,1060,1061,1062

1063,1064,1065,1066,1067,1068

1069,1070,1071,1072,1073,1074

1075,1076,1077,1078,1079,1080

1081,1082,1083,1084,1085,1086

1087,1088,1089,1090,1091,1092

1093,1094,1095,1096,1097,1098

1099,1100,1101,1102,1103,1104

1105,1106,1107,1108,1109,1110

1111,1112,1113,1114,1115,1116

1117,1118,1119,1120,1121,1122

1123,1124,1125,1126,1127,1128

1129,1130,1131,1132,1133,1134

1135,1136,1137,1138,1139,1140

1141,1142,1143,1144,1145,1146

1147,1148,1149,1150,1151,1152

1153,1154,1155,1156,1157,1158

1159,1160,1161,1162,1163,1164

1165,1166,1167,1168,1169,1170

1171,1172,1173,1174,1175,1176

1177,1178,1179,1180,1181,1182

1183,1184,1185,1186,1187,1188

1189,1190,1191,1192,1193,1194

1195,1196,1197,1198,1199,1200

1201,1202,1203,1204,1205,1206

1207,1208,1209,1210,1211,1212

1213,1214,1215,1216,1217,1218

1219,1220,1221,1222,1223,1224

1225,1226,1227,1228,1229,1230

1231,1232,1233,1234,1235,1236

1237,1238,1239,1240,1241,1242

1243,1244,1245,1246,1247,1248

1249,1250,1251,1252,1253,1254

1255,1256,1257,1258,1259,1260

1261,1262,1263,1264,1265,1266

1267,1268,1269,1270,1271,1272

1273,1274,1275,1276,1277,1278

1279,1280,1281,1282,1283,1284

1285,1286,1287,1288,1289,1290

1291,1292,1293,1294,1295,1296

1297,1298,1299,1300,1301,1302

1303,1304,1305,1306,1307,1308

1309,1310,1311,1312,1313,1314

1315,1316,1317,1318,1319,1320

1321,1322,1323,1324,1325,1326

1327,1328,1329,1330,1331,1332

1333,1334,1335,1336,1337,1338

1339,1340,1341,1342,1343,1344

1345,1346,1347,1348,1349,1350

1351,1352,1353,1354,1355,1356

1357,1358,1359,1360,1361,1362

1363,1364,1365,1366,1367,1368

1369,1370,1371,1372,1373,1374

1375,1376,1377,1378,1379,1380

1381,1382,1383,1384,1385,1386

1387,1388,1389,1390,1391,1392

1393,1394,1395,1396,1397,1398

1399,1400,1401,1402,1403,1404

1405,1406,1407,1408,1409,1410

1411,1412,1413,1414,1415,1416

1417,1418,1419,1420,1421,1422

1423,1424,1425,1426,1427,1428

1429,1430,1431,1432,1433,1434

1435,1436,1437,1438,1439,1440

1441,1442,1443,1444,1445,1446

1447,1448,1449,1450,1451,1452

1453,1454,1455,1456,1457,1458

1459,1460,1461,1462,1463,1464

1465,1466,1467,1468,1469,1470

1471,1472,1473,1474,1475,1476

1477,1478,1479,1480

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

813. Lemmy Nwabuisi _

Re_ Injunction Order against Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (1)

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1481,1482,1483,1484,1485

 

60.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

813. Lemmy Nwabuisi _

Re_ Injunction Order against Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (1)

10/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1481,1482,1483,1484,1485

--

1481,

From: Lemmy Nwabuisi <Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 10 August 2017 10:53

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Injunction Order against Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Injunction Order with Power of Arrest.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached copy of Injunction Order with Power of Arrest that was served on Mr Cordell by a process server this morning. The matter has been listed for further hearing at 10am on 21 August 2017 at the Edmonton County Court.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN13XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1482,

Re: Injunction Order against Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]->Injunction Order with Power of Arrest. |

In the County Court at Edmonton Injunction Order             

Claim Number D02ED073  

Claimant Mr Simon Cordell

Defendant Mr Simon Cordell

109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield

EN3 7JQ        

(including ref.) LS/C/LI/157255

(including ref.)

Between

Mr Simon Cordell,

Defendant

and

London Borough of Enfield,

Claimant

London Borough of Enfield

If you do not obey this order you will be guilty of contempt of court and you may be sent to prison

If you, Mr. Simon Cordell (the Defendant) disobey this Order you will be guilty of contempt of Court and you may be sent to prison or fined or have your asset seized. You should read this Order carefully and are advised to consult a solicitor as soon as possible. You have the right to ask the Court to vary or discharge this Order.

Before Deputy District Judge Harris sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN,

Upon hearing Solicitor for the Claimant on without notice application,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell permit the Claimant's employees and contractors access into 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ to carry out routine maintenance inspections and necessary repairs within 48 hours of written notification.

2.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell keep his dog on a lead in communal areas outside his property.

3.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by instructing or encouraging or permitting any other person) from engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause physical violence and verbal abuse to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

4.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by intimating or encouraging or permitting any other person) from engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause intimidation, harassment, alarm and distress to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

5.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by intimating or encouraging or permitting any other person) engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause nuisance and annoyance to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

6.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by intimating or encouraging or permitting any other person) from using his pet dog to frighten, intimidate, or threaten violence to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

7.      A power of arrest is attached to paragraphs 3 to 6 above.

8.      This order shall remain in force until 8 August 2018 at 23:59 unless before then it is revoked by further order of the court.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyclaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by Adrian B

NI6 General Form of injunction for interlocutory application or originating application CJR105

1483,

9.      Matter be listed for a further hearing at 10:00AM on 21 August 2017 at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN with a time estimate of 30 minutes.        _

10.  Costs in the case.

You are entitled to apply to the court to reconsider the order before the day.

If your case does settle prior to the hearing date, please notify the court in writing.

Cases are listed in accordance with local hearing arrangements determined by the Judiciary and implemented by court staff. Every effort is made to ensure that hearings start either at the time specified or as soon as possible thereafter. However, listing practices or other factors may mean that delays are unavoidable. Furthermore, in some instances a case may be released to another judge, possibly at a different court or adjourned to another date. Please contact the court for further information on the listing arrangements that may apply to your hearing.

Your case has been listed at the same time as several other cases, but you are required to attend Court at the time given in your notice, or earlier if you need to speak to your legal representative. When you arrive at Court you should report to an Usher who will tell you if the other party are in attendance. You may wish to consult with them before going into Court to attempt to clarify/resolve any outstanding issues.

The Judge will decide the order in which cases are called based on who is in attendance, the time estimate and other factors. Please ensure that the Usher is aware of your whereabouts at all times. If you are not in the court at the required time and your case is called it will be heard in your absence.

You may be able to get free legal aid advice. Go online at www.gov.uk/legal-aid for further information.

Dated: 9 August 2017

1484,

Name of court

Claim No. of Enfield (LS/C/LI/157255)       

Claimant's address:

Enfield

PO Box 50

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield

EN1 3XA

Name of Claimant: The Mayor and Burgesses of The London Borough

Claimant s phone number: 0208 3796438

Power of arrest County Court at Edmonton D02ED073

Claimant's name (including ref.)

Name of defendant: Mr. Simon Cordell

Defendant's name (including ref.) Mr. Simon Cordell

Defendant's address:                       

109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield 

EN3 7JQ

           

Date order made: 09/08/2017

Name of judge: Deputy District Judge Harris

 

(insert The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 statutory provision)        

This order includes a power of arrest under (insert statutory provision)

The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 under the relevant paragraphs of the order to which a power of arrest has been attached are:

 

(set out those paragraphs of the order to which the power of arrest is attached, if necessary, continue on a separate sheet)

See attached

 

This power of arrest was ordered on | 00/00/2000 | - | 00/00/2000 and expires on the [00/00/2000]

 

Note to Arresting Officer

Where the defendant is arrested under the power given by section 155 of the Housing Act 1996, or section 27 of the Police and Justice Act 2006; or section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009; or

 

The Mayor and Burgesses of The London Borough of section 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: -

 

the defendant shall be brought before the judge within the period of 24 hours beginning at the time of their arrest.

 

a constable shall inform the person on whose application the injunction was granted, forthwith where the defendant is arrested under the power given by section 155 of the Housing Act 1996 or as soon as reasonably practicable where the defendant is arrested under the power given by section 27 of the Police and Justice Act 2006 or section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 or section 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

 

Nothing in section 155 of the Housing Act 1996 or section 27 of the police and Justice Act 2006 or section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 or section 4 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act —                                                                       

1014, shall authorise the detention of the respondent after the expiry >of the period of 24 hours beginning at the time of their arrest. On calculating any period of 24 hours, no account shall be taken of Christmas Day, Good Friday, or any Sunday.

I110A Power of arrest attached to injunction (06.15)            © Crown copyright 2015

1485,

1.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by instructing or encouraging or permitting any other person) from engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause physical violence and verbal abuse to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

2.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by instructing or encouraging or permitting any other person) from engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause intimidation, harassment, alarm and distress to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

3.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by instructing or encouraging or permitting any other person) engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that is likely to cause nuisance and annoyance to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors to the block of flats at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

4.      The Defendant, Mr. Simon Cordell be forbidden (whether by himself or by instructing or encouraging or permitting any other person) from using his pet dog to frighten, intimidate, or threaten violence to the Claimant's employees, tenants and visitors at Burncroft Avenue, Enfield.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

61

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

814. Neville Gary _Inspection Visit Wednesday 16th August 2017 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1486,1487,1488,1489,1490,1491,1492

 

 61

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

814. Neville Gary _Inspection Visit Wednesday 16th August 2017 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1486,1487,1488,1489,1490,1491,1492

--

1486,

From: Neville Gray <Neville.Gray@Enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 14 August 2017 13:32

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Obie Ebanks

Subject: Inspection Visit Wednesday 16th August 2017 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: 740772 - LBE V SIMON CORDELL.PDF.

Cordell Letter 14082017.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Lorraine

Please see attached letter as requested. I have also sent a copy out in the post today. Please ensure Mr Cordell is also aware of the visit on Wednesday.

Kind regards

Neville Gray

Legal Disrepair Surveyor

neville.Gray@enfield.gov.uk

EH-Legalrepairs@enfield.gov.uk

For and on behalf of London Borough of Enfield

Direct Dial: 0208 3758187

Mobile: 0758 0794213

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Jill Bayley

Sent: 14 August 2017 11:57

To: Neville Gray <Neville.Gray@Enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Cordell - injunction

Dear Neville,

Here is a copy of the injunction as requested.

Best wishes Jill

Jill Bayley

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 6475

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

1487,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1488,

1489,

1490,

1491,

1492,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Inks 15-0-2017 -1-4191 15-08-2017 10-31 1

15/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1493

 

 62.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Inks 15-0-2017 -1-4191 15-08-2017 10-31 1

15/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1493

--

1493

From: Get Canvas Plus <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 15/08/2017 10:30:52 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: HP Z6200-6900 Series Compatible Inks

Pigment Ink Cartridges 775ml

For HP Design jet

100% compatible with the original HP 771

cartridges making an easy change over as they mix and match with original inks.

The profiles are also identical for all our colours

ALL COLOURS INSTOCK          

Matt black, Photo black,1

Cyan. Magenta, Yellow, 1

Light cyan, Light magenta, 1

Light grey & Re

BBŁ110

Get Canvas Plus is now offering a brand-new ink tec compatible ink cartridge for

HP Z Series Printers.

These cartridges are compatible with models

HP Z6200 HP Z6600 HP Z6800 HP Z6900

The 775ml cartridges are plug and play and can be used alongside HP original cartridges. Cost saving and available in all colours with next day UK delivery.

 

 

 

 

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas -1-4184 17-08-2017 09-33 1

17/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1494

 

 63.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Get Canvas -1-4184 17-08-2017 09-33 1

17/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1494

--

1494

From: Get Canvas <info@getcanvasplus.co.uk>

Sent time: 17/08/2017 09:33:23 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Wide Format Inks

Save on Cartridges and Bulk Ink

Canon  EPSON

“Roland”

Inks are one of the main expenses for wide format printers and we at Get Canvas Plus are here to make ordering inks easier and cheaper for your printing business.

After years of development we now have 100's of users making huge savings on their ink costs using our systems and inks whilst retaining the longevity (fade resistance) and image quality of the original manufacturers inks.

We supply fully compatible cartridges and refillable ink systems for a large range of Epson, Canon, HP, Roland wide format printers.

Click here to find Compatible inks for your printer

You will find all our prices on our website www.getcanvasplus.co.uk and all order placed before 3:30pm will be out for delivery to you the very next day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

824. Lorraine Cordell _Re_

Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave

20/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1495,1496,1497,1498,1499

 

 64.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

824. Lorraine Cordell _Re_

Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave

20/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1495,1496,1497,1498,1499

--

1495,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 August 2017 17:36

To: OBIE.EBANKS@ENFIELD.GOV.UK

Obie.Ebanks@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave

Attachments: Obie Ebanks-20-08-2017.pdf

Dear Obie Ebanks

Please see attached letter dated 20/08/2017

Regards Lorraine Cordell

1496,

RE: Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave->Obie Ebanks-20-08-2017.pdf

20/08/2017

Dear Obie Ebanks,

After meeting you on the 16/08/2017 you asked me to write this email to you in regard to the issues. It was very nice to meet you and you seemed to want to hear the issues that my son has been having which have not been addressed by Enfield Council. You seem to understand when we spoke there were issues that have not been addressed. My son feels he cannot trust anyone in Enfield Council and I feel you hit the nail on the head when you said there seems to be a lot of outstanding issue that have not been addressed and I can see why he does not trust anyone in Enfield council.

When Mr Neville Gray called me on the 14/08/2017 to arrange the meeting for the Thursday which was the 17/08/2017 I said that's fine. I was on a phone call to my brother at the time also, and my brother heard what was said as both phones I was using were on load speaker. Then Mr Neville Gray changed this to the 16/08/2017, I knew I would not be able to make the 16/08/2017 as I had a hospital appointment on the 16/08/2017 which I said to Mr Neville Gray, I have very many health problems myself which I told Mr Neville Gray on the 12/07/2017 and I am under many doctors so have a lot of hospital appointments I have to attend. I asked him if the date could be done on the 17/08/2017 or the 18/08/2017 due to this he said no I am not working them days, and the meeting will have to be on the 16/08/2017 we have got an order by the court saying we need to give 48 hours which I intend to enforce, that can I get someone else to attend my son's flat on this date, which I said I could not I stated I will cancel my hospital appointment so I can attend, I know there is a court order which the council needs to give 48 hours’ notice, which I believe was given wrongly as my son has allowed over many years many council people into his home. I just hope while this order is in place Enfield council has some respect that people cannot just drop things when they call as they are well aware my son is unwell and needs me there with him.

I feel my son has been treated very unfairly and will try to outline it in this email and keep it as short as possible. So this will not include everything as I would be here a long time and this email would be like a book.

Firstly, my son's back garden it is well kept except for the greenery down the right-hand side which is coming from next door and as said we need advice is regards to cutting this back.

Issues pointed out to Neville Gray:

·         Hole in ceiling in bedroom where the tenant in 113 pushed something though my son's ceiling. Mr Neville Gray explained his concern if there was an asbestos Problem. You saw my son was decorating so if we can get a response to this as soon as possible I would be grateful.

·         Kitchen units: as you know when decent homes came into my son's property, they said to him the units he had were better than the ones Enfield Council would be fitting so they did not change them. You said this was a problem these would not be covered by the 25 years warranty so why do decent homes give you the option to keep the ones that are fitted.

·         Back step to back door and adjacent window handle. These where reported back in 2015 and have never been fixed correctly.

·         The wall in front room / kitchen that part was removed many years ago, which Enfield Council has seen many times and never had a problem with, until Neville

1

1497,

Gray came round on the 12/07/2017 this was then added to a report sent to me on the 19/07/2017 by Lemmy Nwabuisi, in there was a report by Sarah Fletcher dated 24/02/2017 about the wall. What I cannot understand if Sarah Fletcher had a problem with this dated back to 24/02/2017 why were we never informed. As said on the visit if this is a problem I will get my builder to replace the part of the wall that was removed it is not a big wall that was removed only half a section of part of a wall and not the full wall, and if I had been told at any time there was a problem with this I would have got it replaced via my builder. I cannot understand why no one informed us of this if anyone from Enfield Council through it was an issue. It does not look unsightly and was completed professionally.

I was very pleased when I asked the plumbers and they informed me the problem regarding the water pressure (which has continually been blamed on my son including by Mr Neville Gray who had never seen the plumbing) was in fact no fault of my son's and was in fact a problem with the pipe work outside the jurisdiction of my son property. There seems to be lies stemming from Enfield Council and the flats above which state my son has said he was restricting the water. Why would my son state this if he was having water pressure issues also and wanted it fixed? I would like this looked into to find out where these rumours and lies have come from, considering Enfield Council, Thames Water and private plumbers which were sent from 117 had been to my son's flat on numerous occasions and have categorically stated the water pressure problem was not my son's fault this should have been on Enfield Councils system and I would like reasons as to why they were not. Please tell me who is not doing their job.

On the 12/07/2017 in the AM, I would also like to know why Mr Neville Gray said that my son had something in his flat that was controlling the water to the other flats more than once while being rude and superior. Also I would like an explanation from Mr Neville Gray about his conduct on the same day in the PM as to why when he received a call from the tenants of 117 to say they had no water, that he tried to bully himself into my son's flat because he believed my son was messing with the water, If the systems were up to date he would have known there was no way my son could be tampering with the water. He had also been told my son was very unwell and made an appointment with me for my son for the Monday 17/07/2017 at 14:00 hours. I do not understand what he would have grained from getting into my son's flat as he is not a plumber and he did not have one with him at any point on the 12/07/2017. He was very unprofessional, and we believe that because he did not get his own way on this date this is why it has been taken to court and my son now has an injunction. To me this is sheer victimization. I believe the whole situation could have been avoided if Mr Neville Gray would have done his job with even a modicum of professionalism.

What I still cannot understand is why Mr Neville Gray arranged that meeting on the 12/07/2017 with the landlord and tenants of 117 they had been speaking for days before hand on the phone, It would have been courteous and professional to have looked at this system and rang me for an appointment to gain access to my son flat as it clearly states on the system to call me 1st before going to my son's home, also his lack of foresight by not checking the system about 113 at this point he would have released that tenant from 113 had been evicted and Enfield Council had the keys. It seems a private flat owner deserves courtesy, whereas council tenants have to jump when the council says jump. Tell me this is fair?

I was very upset and I think you saw this when you was about to leave and we were standing in the communal area of the block and Neville Gray saw the CCTV camera in the communal area and right away said see your son has got a CCTV camera in a way like he was happy he had found something on my son had done wrong, I stated that is not my son's and you need to stop blaming my son for everything, I was happy I think you noticed this too, and checked the wire and where it was going to and said this is not going into my son's flat it was going into the cupboard next to my son's front door which no tenant has access to. At that Mr Neville

2

1498,

Gray then saw that the wire he was talking about was in fact not even going to that dummy CCTV camera which I believe Enfield Councils owns, it was going in fact up and around the stairs. And in fact it is the BT phone wire for the block, Neville Gray did not even say sorry for blaming my son for something that was nothing to do with my son but yet as soon as he saw it was fast enough to blame my son for this. I would like to state this is a disgusting attitude and in point of fact Enfield Council acts this way all the time towards my son.

In regard to the main front door you noticed on the main door to the block there is an entry code system and not an intercom system. Unless you know the code to this door you cannot get access to any of the flats and the tenants do not even know you are there. This includes deliveries for food, medical, emergencies, and any person coming to see anyone that lives in the block, (that also includes yourselves Enfield Council) Please could this be addressed by fitting an intercom system or bell for the each flat or giving my son permission to fit his own wireless doorbell which he has asked Enfield Council on many occasions and he has been refused to do this.

I believe that you can also confirm that my son dog did not bark once or act aggressively to any of you while you were in my son's flat; she was just sitting in the garden outside the back door looking in at everyone. I have great concerns with what has been said about my son's dog and she has never hurt anyone, and my son would never use his dog in that way at all like people have said.

I would now like to approach the problems with my son's neighbours many emails, complaints and calls received by Enfield Council begging them to help my son with this problem, every single time they ignored our pleas for help, but it seems a year later when complaints went in about my son from neighbours Enfield Council were very willing to help them out, don't you think this is a case of double standards and also discrimination and what I mean by discrimination is racism. We have asked for help and you have ignored us please explain why? You have briefly seen some emails but was not able to read them but there are so many more.

On the 21/03/2017 I got a call back from Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi in this call we were talking about the emails I had sent Enfield Council, and believe me there are numerous, he then proceeded to tell me there was only 2 complaints and nothing else and implied I was a lair, unfortunately for him my phone was on load speaker and my brother and his friend heard what Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi said, my brother realised this upset me and said how dare you call my sister a lair, my brothers friend said that is disgraceful, is implying someone a lair anyway to act for any professional.

Also in this call I told Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi that my son does not leave his home due to his health which had been stated in emails before this, Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi stated he did not know anything about my son having any health problems. I said to him I cannot understand how you do not know anything about my son's health your team asked the mental health team if they knew my son and had a reply back from them saying they do, and it is in the subject access request I got from the council so how do you not know anything about this. At this I said so you don't even know my son was sectioned in late 2016 which he replied no. He asked me if I could send an email with information regarding this and showing my son does not leave his home, to him which I did. Can you please explain to me why everything regarding my son (Complaints, emails, health and repairs) seems to disappeared from the system or is constantly ignored just so you can make my son seem unreasonable and at fault, this is blatant victimization, to add insult to injury at the end of the email dated the 21/03/2017 I stated I would wait for a reply from him with what we can do to address this. I also asked him if he can check into why all the information that had been submitted seemed was missing could be addressed and for him to get back to me, why did he not do this?

By now I believe Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi knew my son would need a home visit to address issues why was this never done why was things just left what reason would there be to have

3

1499,

left this Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi was demanding my son to come for a meeting before this, yet when he seems to understand my son does not leave his home why was a date not set to see him with me there for a meeting to take place at my son's home? It seems house calls was made to every other tenant accept my son and reports taken.

It was not until after Mr Neville Gray came on the 12/07/2017 did I ever hear anything back from Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi until the 27/07/2017, and when I did get this correspondence it was to inform me that Enfield Council were Seeking a procession order and had more complaints listed which had been made about my son, yet not once did Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi have the common courteous to inform me there were new complaints being made since March 2017. Do you think it is right what has happened, to me it seem this is the way Enfield Council wants to handle things Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has all my information and my son's why just leave things if I had been contacted I could have then dealt with this instead I have to go over hours and hours of information and to me it seems unfair, unjust and unwarranted.

It would take someone that was willing to sit down, not blame and help my son with everything, as I believe everyone wants this matter resolved. All it would take is for someone to sit down look at the emails, video, and audios that we have, and then maybe you will understand where we are coming from and how wrong this whole situation has become. Meeting you it really seemed you wanted to listen and to help I really hope this is the case as honestly, I believe this is what is really needed. The idea of court petrifies my son, my son does not even want to leave his home let alone go to a court. Not only has my son's health deteriorated due to the issues which have never been addressed by Enfield Council, I have very bad health also and I am always at the hospitals due to being under many doctors.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

825. Obie Ebanks _RE_ Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave [SEC=OFFICIAL]

22/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1500,1501,1502,1503

 

 65.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

825. Obie Ebanks _RE_ Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave [SEC=OFFICIAL]

22/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1500,1501,1502,1503

1500,

From: Obie Ebanks <Obie.Ebanks@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 22 August 2017 10:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: 109 Burncroft Ave.doc

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mrs Cordell,

Thank you for your email and attached letter dated 20th August 2017.

Please find attached my response.

Kind regards

Obie Ebanks

Neighbourhood Officer

Enfield Council Housing

Regeneration & Environment Directorate

36-44 South Mall

Edmonton Green

N9 0TN

Tel: 0800 40 80 160

Email: Obie.Ebanks@enfield.gov.uk

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2017 17:36

To: Obie Ebanks

Obie.Ebanks@enfield.gov.uk

Obie Ebanks

Obie.Ebanks@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave

Dear Obie Ebanks

Please see attached letter dated 20/08/2017

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

1501,

Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1502,

1503,

 

 

 

 

 

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 21 lorraine32@blueyonder.co_

08.31.2017_RE urgent D02ED073

 

31/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1504,1505

 

 66.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 21 lorraine32@blueyonder.co_

08.31.2017_RE urgent D02ED073

 

31/08/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1504,1505

--

1504,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 31 August 2017 17:42

To: 'enquiries@edmonton.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: urgent D02ED073

Attachments: D02ED073-Country-Court-Letter-Dated-24-08-2017.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

After a call made to the court today regarding the attached letter from the court dated 24/08/2018 Claim number D02ED073 before Deputy District Judge Perry I have been asked to write this email.

On the 21/08/2017 when we were last in court Deputy District Judge Perry asked for the case not to be reheard until 28 days thereafter and that maybe this can be worked out between the parties.

As I explained to the Judge we were in the process of getting a date to see a solicitor in this matter we have not been able to get to see one until today 31/08/2017 Shepherd and Harris & Co. at 15:00 hours, who are now putting an application in for legal aid, as my son is not well enough to deal with this case on his own and does need a solicitors to act on his behalf as there are many issues within Enfield Council case. There is going to be a large amount of paperwork which will prove this.

I have also emailed Enfield Council with the view of trying to set up a meeting, as throughout this Enfield Council has not had one meeting with my son to address the issues he was having going way back before any complaints was put in about my son.

I am asking if the new date of 14/09/2017 could be extended so we can have the meetings with the solicitors and get all the paperwork and video and audio information we have and statements as to what the issues are within this case together.

We did believe that we would have had just over 28 days to be able to do this, as this is what the judge ordered, but it seems the date is before the 28 days we were thinking we had to get everything in order, and due to the time it has taken to have a 1st meeting with the solicitors the date of the 14/09/2017 gives us very little time to see if legal aid is granted and get this put in place. And have time to address the issues of concern in this case with the solicitors.

I hope this issue can be dealt with and the date can be extended, if a reply can be made via this email, I would be most grateful

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell Mr Simon Cordell

1505,

 

 

 

 

 

 

67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4193 01-09-2017 13-00

01/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1506,1507,1508,1509

 

 67.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4193 01-09-2017 13-00

01/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1506,1507,1508,1509

--

1506,

From: Pro Writing Aid <noreplys@prowritingaid.com>

Sent time: 01/09/2017 01:00:20 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Please confirm your email

Please confirm your email.

Welcome to Pro Writing Aid

We just need you to click on the following link (or paste the link into a browser) to activate your license: http://prowritinaaid.com/en/Account/EmailClick?

id=4413981&url=http%3a%2f%2fprowritinqaid.com%2fen%2fAccount%2fConfirmEmail%3fuserId%3d643375%26userKev%3d8994f9c2-

We also recommend that you save this information as you may need it again:

Username: re

Email: re_wired@ymail.com

What are the 25 Pro Writing Aid Reports?

Every writer has their own favourite report. Which one will be yours?

Find out about the reports.

Upgrade to Pro Writing Aid Premium

Pro Writing Aid's online editing tool is free to use, and always will be, but there are a few Premium features that make upgrading worth the $3.33/month:

Better Integrations Save You Time

Pro Writing Aid Premium integrates with MS Word, Open Office, Google Docs, Scrivener and Google Chrome so you can edit wherever you write, without losing your formatting and your precious time.

Mac and Windows Support

Your premium license covers Mac and Windows and all of our word-processor integrations through our desktop app.

No Word Count Limits

Free users are limited to running reports on 500 words at a time. For Premium users, there is no limit.

Upgrade to Pro Writing Aid Premium

Getting Started with Pro Writing Aid

Pro Writing Aid is chock-full of features that will improve your writing and reduce your editing time. There are too many to mention here, but some of our most popular features are below.

1507,

Receipt!

1508,

Receipt!

1509,

Receipt!

 

 

 

68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4194 02-09-2017 00-53

Double1

02/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1510    

 

 68.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4194 02-09-2017 00-53

Double1

02/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1510

--

1510

From: Pro Writing Aid <noreplys@prowritingaid.com>

Sent time: 02/09/2017 12:52:53 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your receipt for 1-year

Your receipt for 1-year.

Pro Writing Aid

Improve your writing

Pro Writing Aid

Thanks for your purchase.

Quantity Product

Price

Amount

1 1-year

USD40.00

USD40.00

Sales Tax

USD0.00

USD0.00

 

TOTAL

USD40.00

Registered in the United Kingdom Company number: 07341390 VAT number: 206-4210-56

Kind Regards

Chris Banks

Head of Product

Pro Writing Aid, all rights reserved.

unsubscribe from all our emails

Order ID: 1291005   

RECEIPT

Date: 01-Sep-2017

Payment by: Credit Card

Payment to:

Orpheus Technology Ltd

College Farmhouse Denton

Oxford OX44 9JJ United Kingdom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

69. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4195 02-09-2017 00-53

Double2

02/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1511,1512,1513

 

 69.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

69. 1. 2.

Pro Writing Aid -1-4195 02-09-2017 00-53

Double2

02/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1511,1512,1513

--

1511,

From: Pro Writing Aid <noreplys@prowritingaid.com>

Sent time: 02/09/2017 12:52:57 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your Pro Writing Aid License

Your Pro Writing Aid License.

Thank you for upgrading to Pro Writing Aid Premium

We just need you to click on the following link (or paste the link into a browser) to activate your license: http://prowritinqaid.com/en/Account/EmailClick?

id=4414529&url=http%3a%2f%2fprowritinqaid.com%2fen%2fApp%2fConfirmation%3flicenceCode%3d155DBCCC-

We also recommend that you save this information as you may need it again.

1.      License Code: 155DBCCC-40B1-465A-8A31-F9C25D7E9565

2.      License Valid Until: 01-Sep-2018

3.      Number of Users: 1

What are the 25 Pro Writing Aid Reports?

Every writer has their own favourite report. Which one will be yours?

Find out about the reports.

Which version of Pro Writing Aid is right for you?

1.      Desktop Version

Our desktop version has the most functionality. It allows you to open, edit and save the widest variety of files: Scrivener, MS Word, text, markdown and more. It also works for both Windows and Mac users.

2.      MS Word Add-in

If you usually write in MS Word, download this Add-in for smoothly integrated writing tools where you need them most.

3.      Google Docs Add-in

If you're a Google Docs user, download this Add-in to resolve issues on the go.

4.      Chrome Extension

You can also install the Chrome extension, which is great for checking emails, posts, pins, or tweets before you press “send”.

1512,

Sales!

1513,

Sales!

 

 

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70, 1. 2.  Pro Writing Aid -1-4198 05-09-2017 00-55

05/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1514

 

70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70, 1. 2.  Pro Writing Aid -1-4198 05-09-2017 00-55

05/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1514

--

1514,

From: Pro Writing Aid <noreplys@prowritingaid.com>

Sent time: 05/09/2017 12:54:31 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Friends and Family Discount

Friends and Family Discount.

Pro Writing Aid

Improve your writing

Hello,

Thanks for choosing Pro Writing Aid premium. We want to express our gratitude by giving you a 10% discount link for your friends and family. Additionally, for every person who signs up for Pro Writing Aid premium using your link, you’ll receive 30 days added to your license. See how many you can get. The record so far is 11 months.

Your discount link is:

http://prowritingaid.com/en/App/Purchase?rf=10&mafid=643375

Or you can just click one of these buttons to easily share in on social media:

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+

Kind Regards

Chris Banks

Head of Product

Copyright © 2017 Pro Writing Aid, all rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2.

Mother 25-09-2017 -05-41

25/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1515

 

71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2.

Mother 25-09-2017 -05-41

25/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1515

--

1515,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 25/09/2017 05:41:34 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: RE: desktop

Attachments: Desktop.Rar

Forgot to add the file Saved from Desktop.Rar

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 25 September 2017 17:39

To: 'Rewired '

Subject: RE: desktop

Saved from desktop

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2.

Report 30-09-2017 -06-41

30/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1516

 

72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2.

Report 30-09-2017 -06-41

30/09/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1516

--

1516,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 30/09/2017 06:41:22 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Attachments: New. Rar

please help me sort out up to number 65 in a different Color pen you choose or and 2017 I am working between thanks

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

835. Lorraine Cordell _Re_

Simon Cordell_ (56)

10/10/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1517,1518,1519

 

73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

835. Lorraine Cordell _Re_

Simon Cordell_ (56)

10/10/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1517,1518,1519

--

1517,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 10 October 2017 22:28

To: 'emmanuel@vlssolicitors.com'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Edmonton-Court-Letter-29-09-2017.pdf

Dear Emmanuel

Please see attached court letter the court sent to my son.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

1518,

1519,

 

 

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2.

Complaint CRM COM 45Ellis 1-20754 09-11-2017 14-36

09/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1520,1521

 

74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2.

Complaint CRM COM 45Ellis 1-20754 09-11-2017 14-36

09/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1520,1521

--

1520,

From: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent time: 09/11/2017 02:35:41 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Mr Simon Cordell - complaint CRM COM 4516 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

I am writing following our phone discussion earlier this week. I have consulted with Lemmy's team and been advised as follows:

You are aware that this matter is already in court and we have to follow due process. The trial Judge gave directions to both parties at the hearing on 25th September 2017 which both parties have to abide by. You have been instructed to file your defence and witness statement and forward same to the council. We will contact your solicitors directly if we need any further information in relation to this case.

Please note that any further complaints or requests for information from you should be made through solicitors. With this in mind, I will not be able to speak further with you on the phone about your case.

Regards,

Daniel Ellis

Complaints & Access to Information Officer Complaints & Access to Information Team

Phone: 020 8379 2808

Email: daniel.ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time - to set up your account today go to www.enfield.gov.uk/connected

From: complaints and information

Sent: 30 August 2017 14:50

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Mr Simon Cordell - complaint CRM COM 4516 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thanks for your call this afternoon. I have recorded your complaint. The reference is CRM COM 4516

We hope to reply within ten working days, but it may take longer due to the different teams involved and long history of the complaint.

If you have any queries about this, please contact us direct via email using complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

Kind regards,

Daniel Ellis

Complaints & Access to Information Officer Complaints & Access to Information Team

Phone: 020 8379 2808

Email: daniel.ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time - to set up your account today go to www.enfield.gov.uk/connected

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

1521,

Campaign

HTTP:/www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

75.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

Mother 10-11-2017 -06-23

10/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1522,1523,1524,1525,1526,1527,1528

 

75.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

Mother 10-11-2017 -06-23

10/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1522,1523,1524,1525,1526,1527,1528

--

1522,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time:       10/11/2017 06:23:11 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Does this read any better?

Attachments: flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

here read attached

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 10 November 2017 17:27

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Does this read any better?

Issues with My Housing Disrepair!

Working on My Website!

In 2006 when I first moved into my flat it never seemed to be in a bad state of living condition, due to it being decorated by the Enfield Council ready for me to move into.

After the first few months, I started to notice the walls and ceilings had started to get covered in mould and then on started to take picture evidence of my sufferings.

I declared to the relevant body’s that my flat had really bad damp and it took mutable calls and emails to the Enfield Complaints departments reasonable persons whom over that period of time sent many different visiting surveyors to get the emergency graded problems fixed and without any fault of my own this somehow took a couple of years to get rectified with a disappointing completion date of the year of 2008.

This damp caused me the loss of enjoyment of my flat and damage to most of my personal property at no fault of my own again I must stress and I had to have a machine in my bedroom to remove the water before and after the contractors started the important works.

The well needed Industrial water removal machine to dry out flat got installed right away, the only time I got allowed into the bedroom was to empty the bucket of water the machine collected that did, in the beginning, fill up many times a day, as the months continued to pass by the amount of unneeded stored water became less and less, right up until the council and the Enfield homes reasonable persons where able to start the needed work.

By this time the initial problem of cause for the damp had gotten documented to be because of bad ventilation within the estates premises around the year of 2007 and as a resolution to the problem an air ventilation system got agreed to get adapted to the premises, the works involved in the installation of this air system meant that I had to have large circular holes cut into my kitchen window that leads to my back garden and that of my bathroom window that leads to the main street, the hardware to the ventilation system got delayed to get installed for a much longer time frame than anticipated in fact it took another two or three years later in the year of 2010, leaving my home insured and this happened at no fault of my own yet again, I got left with holes in my windows.

Even low the flat stayed in an unliveable state of condition through the years of 2006 till 2008 I got made to live in my flat, and after some of the disrepair issues got fixed with the walls and ceilings inside of my flat continued to suffer from the damp issues due to the floorboards going rotten after the first repairs, causing sinking floors and this once again made the flat unliveable due to the dangerous risks involved from the year 2008 till 2010.

I had no flooring laid down in my bedroom as you walked into the room for a long time in between these years because my feet had fallen through the wooden floorboard.

In this time frame, my heating boiler started to also give me lots of issues and the council replaced the main board more than once.

1523,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

At the end of 2008 when the damp floorboards got lifted up in my bedroom I suffered the floorboards in the bathroom getting lifted up and afterwards not laid back down correctly in a timely and safe manner, I got told I could not get allowed back into to my bedroom but the bathroom was ok to enter.

The reason that the floorboards could not get re-laid in my bedroom and bathroom was because the bedroom radiator pipe leads to the other radiator in the bathroom, this is because they both share a u bend under the floorboards into each other and the radiators are on opposite sides of the wall from one and other!

The metal pipe had fractured under the floorboards causing each room to flood not noticeably since I moved into my home, until detected.

This error caused me to lose water pressure in my boiler system, so this leaking water added to the damp issues

when after noticed another survivor came out to my address to oversee the problem and agreed for a new heating system to get installed through the flat and order for the system to get decommissioned, so for the flat to be ready for the new installation, with an addition of a temporary peace of wooding for the floor to get laid, as by this stage I got left with no floor boards in the bathroom and bedroom inclusive of no working heating apparatus as intended to get fixed and fitted and holes in my kitchen window a bathroom window and a water collection machine.

No reasonable persons attended again for months until many more complaints went in again. And a person attended and laid temporary flooring!

This lack of organisation on the Councils behalf and their subcontractors caused me to suffer.

After many complaints, the floors did get replaced.

In the months of June and / or July 2015, the initial main emergency problems got finally addressed and the heating system got reinstated so to be rectified to a degree but the damp still prosiest to occur even years after!

Mutable emergency repairs that must get met to the correct ISO standard of fair living standards got neglected for years, at my loss of living.

The damage that my live got left in due to lack of negligence caused me sufferings because off housing disrepair and surely is not acceptable.

Undone housing repairs getting left to incline rather than getting made to be that of a none persistent issue, once reported to the councils reasonable persons caused these problems to escalate and this neglect made it so that in the winter months my bedroom smelt of damp and mouldy toxins, as an example of the extent of damage I suffered the complete loss of my clothing, bed and bedding, causing additional bills, electrical items and life’s stability also that of the extra house upkeep costs, and I lost mutable amounts of personal memorabilia!

This damp over the years and trying for the first years to get the problems addressed caused me, a great deal of stress and bad health.

In the time of me making my official complaints the Enfield Council came to their rented address and the council explained to me, when they also see the extent of the living conditions that they will upkeep the repairs in the flat to the correct living standards, without any work commencing, as agreed by them, after the councils survivors made their departure from my rented flat.

At no fault of my own and for an unfair amount of time my flat stayed so cold if it were not for me needing my home to live in, it

1524,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

would have equalled to the same conditions as being outside in the open cold air!

In the winter things go a lot worse, I needed more than just your normal extra protection off winter covers so to try my best to keep warm.

I realised that due to my housing disrepair issues I became unwell all the time due to being so cold all the time and this did have a large impact on my health, making me have a personal injury!

This unforgettably caused me sleep disturbance, headache, prevention of enjoyment, and a breach of trust for Enfield Councils legal working policy’s frameworks and employees.

Enfield Council not doing work that should have been done induced more infusing into the existing problems.

I did buy myself an electric heater but the cost of running this was very high also and at my expense.

As prior mentioned I had surveyor after surveyor out to my flat but each time every different person in attendance, would say the work would get done and yet it never got completed.

In 20015 after another complaint was put into the Enfield councils complaints department, but on this occasion my mother called in upset and this was in the year of 2015; regarding the heating, holes in the window, missing floorboards and re occurrence of damp, when on the phone she got shocked by the Enfield councils reasonable person whom explained to her that I had removed all my flats heating pipe work and this is why the heating never got replaced in them past years and that the Enfield Council were attempting to charge me nearly Ł4000 to replace my heating.

My mother got upset at hearing what the lady said to her on the phone, and as a consequence she explained to the lady that she wanted for her to arrange a manger and surveyor to come to the flat and that this must happen within the next few days from then on, so to re analyse the situation then in hand by the complaint departments reasonable persons, and my mother continued her conversation by expressing; if she had to she would lift the rest of the flooring up in my flat to prove the pipe work was all in place and show that the rest including the bedroom and bathroom were still there.

At this the lady explained while still on the phone that there is no need for what my mother told her to happen and that the council will replace the heating system, but the problems did not stop for me there again and as a continuation the Enfield Council employees then sent the surveyors out to my flat to oversee and then order to replace the heating system but survivors or council employees had told the sub-contractors that I had removed all the pipe work, to the point no one wanted to come out and do the work.

The sub-contractor was very shocked to see all the pipework still in place and also said that he is glad that he meets me and saw the truth himself.

I also worked on the

Confidentiality Agreement Between; - Company Director Simon Cordell of Too Smooth LTD and ******* and I continued to Study and finish at the Time Start: 08:00Am and Time End: 10:00Pm!

My mother worked on building my company website for me with others at the Time Start: 09:00 Am and Time End: 07:30 Pm!

1525,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

In 2006 when I first moved into my flat it never seemed to be in a bad state of living condition, due to it being decorated by the Enfield Council ready for me to move into. After the first few months, I started to notice the walls and ceilings had started to get covered in mould and then on started to take picture evidence of my sufferings.

I declared to the relevant body’s that my flat had really bad damp and it took mutable calls and emails to the Enfield Complaints departments reasonable persons whom over that period of time sent many different visiting surveyors to get the emergency graded problems fixed and without any fault of my own this somehow took a couple of years to get rectified with a disappointing completion date of the year of 2008.

This damp caused me the loss of enjoyment of my flat and damage to most of my personal property at no fault of my own again I must stress and I had to have a machine in my bedroom to remove the water before and after the contractors started the important works.

The well needed Industrial water removal machine to dry out flat got installed right away, the only time I got allowed into the bedroom was to empty the bucket of water the machine collected that did, in the beginning, fill up many times a day, as the months continued to pass by the amount of unneeded stored water became less and less, right up until the council and the Enfield homes reasonable persons where able to start the needed work.

By this time the initial problem of cause for the damp had gotten documented to be because of bad ventilation within the estates premises around the year of 2007 and as a resolution to the problem an air ventilation system got agreed to get adapted to the premises, the works involved in the installation of this air system meant that I had to have large circular holes cut into my kitchen window that leads to my back garden and that of my bathroom window that leads to the main street, the hardware to the ventilation system got delayed to get installed for a much longer time frame than anticipated in fact it took another two or three years latter later in the year of 2010, leaving my home insured and this happened at no fault of my own yet again, I got left with holes in my windows.

Even low thought the flat stayed in an unliveable state of condition through the years of 2006 till 2008 I got made to live in my flat, and after some of the disrepair issues got fixed with the walls and ceilings inside of my flat continued to suffer from the damp issues due to the floorboards going rotten after the first repairs, causing sinking floors and this once again made the flat unliveable due to the dangerous risks involved from the year 2008 till 2010.

I had no flooring laid down in my bedroom as you walked into the room for a long time in between these years because my feet had fallen through the wooden floorboard.

In this time frame, my heating boiler started to also give me lots of issues and the council replaced the main board more than once.

1526,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

At the end of 2008 when the damp floorboards got lifted up in my bedroom I suffered the floorboards in the bathroom getting lifted up and afterwards not laid back down correctly in a timely and safe manner, I got told I could not get allowed back into to my bedroom but the bathroom was ok to enter with boarding to walk on.

The reason that the floorboards could not get re-laid in my bedroom and bathroom was because the bedroom radiator pipe leads to the other radiator in the bathroom, this is because they both share a u bend under the floorboards into each other and the radiators are on opposite sides of the wall from one and other!

The metal pipe had fractured under the floorboards causing each room to flood not noticeably since I moved into my home, until detected.

This error caused me to lose water pressure in my boiler system, so this leaking water added to the damp issues

when after noticed another survivor came out to my address to oversee the problem and agreed for a new heating system to get installed thought the flat and order ordered for the system to get decommissioned, so for the flat to be ready for the new installation, installation, with an addition of a temporary temporary peace of wooding for the floor to get laid, as by this stage I got left with no floor boards in the bathroom and bedroom inclusive of no working heating apparatus as intended to get fixed and fitted and holes in my kitchen window a bathroom window and a water collection machine.

No reasonable persons attended again for months until many more complaints went in again. And a person attended and laid temporary, temporary flooring!

This lack of organisation on the Councils behalf and their subcontractors caused me to suffer.

After many complaints, the floors did get replaced.

In the months’ timeframe of 19 June 2015 and 31 July 2015, the initial main emergency problems got finally addressed and the heating system got reinstated so to be rectified to a degree but the damp still prosiest to occur even years after!

Mutable emergency repairs that must get met to the correct ISO standard of fair living standards got neglected for years, at my loss of living.

The damage that my live got left in due to lack of negligence caused me sufferings because off housing disrepair and surely is not acceptable.

Undone housing repairs getting left to incline rather than getting made to be that of a none persistent issue, once reported to the councils reasonable persons caused these problems to escalate and this neglect made it so that in the winter months my bedroom smelt of damp and mouldy toxins, as an example of the extent of damage I suffered the

1527,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

complete loss of my clothing, bed, and bedding, causing additional bills, electrical items, and life’s stability also that of the extra house upkeep costs, and I lost mutable amounts of personal memorabilia!

This damp over the years and trying for the first years to get the problems addressed caused me, a great deal of stress and bad health.

In the time of me making my official complaints the Enfield Council came to their rented address and the council explained to me, when they also see the extent of the living conditions that they will upkeep the repairs in the flat to the correct living standards, without any work commencing, as agreed by them, after the councils survivors made their departure from my rented flat.

At no fault of my own and for an unfair amount of time my flat stayed so cold if it were not for me needing my home to live in, it would have equalled to the same conditions as being outside in the open cold air!

In the winter things go a lot worse, I needed more than just your normal extra protection off winter covers so to try my best to keep warm.

I realised that due to my housing disrepair issues I became unwell all the time due to being so cold all the time and this did have a large impact on my health, making me have a personal injury!

This unforgettably caused me sleep disturbance, headache, prevention of enjoyment, and a breach of trust for Enfield Councils legal working policy’s frameworks and employees. Enfield Council not doing work that should have been done induced more infusing into the existing problems.

I did buy myself an electric heater but the cost of running this was very high also and at my expense.

As prior mentioned I had surveyor after surveyor out to my flat but each time every different person in attendance, would say the work would get done and yet it never got completed.

In 20015 after another complaint was put into the Enfield councils complaints department, but on this occasion my mother called in upset and this was in the year of 2015; regarding the heating, holes in the window, missing floorboards and re occurrence of damp, when on the phone she got shocked by the Enfield councils reasonable person whom explained to her that I had removed all my flats heating pipe work and this is why the heating never got replaced in them past years and that the Enfield Council were attempting to charge me nearly Ł4000 to replace my heating.

this section is wrong on the 02/03/2015 I was sick of making calls to the council regarding your heating and nothing getting done I emailed a complaint to them, regarding multiple issues and repairs not getting done including your heating, the council once they had this email started to get jobs done on the list but still nothing regarding your heating. in May 2015 I got a call from a lady from the council regarding your heating, saying you had removed all your pipework, in 2015 and you know the rest from here.

1528,

flat-damage-2006-onwards.doc

My mother got upset at hearing what the lady said to her on the phone, and as a consequence she explained to the lady that she wanted for her to arrange a manger and surveyor to come to the flat and that this must happen within the next few days from then on, so to re analyse the situation then in hand by the complaint departments reasonable persons, and my mother continued her conversation by expressing; if she had to she would lift the rest of the flooring up in my flat to prove the pipe work was all in place and show that the rest including the bedroom and bathroom were still there.

At this the lady explained while still on the phone that there is no need for what my mother told her to happen and that the council will replace the heating system, but the problems did not stop for me there again and as a continuation the Enfield Council employees then sent the surveyors out to my flat to oversee and then order to replace the heating system but survivors or council employees had told the sub-contractors that I had removed all the pipe work, to the point no one wanted to come out and do the work.

The sub-contractor was very shocked to see all the pipework, pipework still in place and also said that he is glad that he meets me and saw the truth himself.

I also worked on the Confidentiality Agreement Between; - Company Director Simon Cordell of Too Smooth LTD and ******* and I continued to Study and finish at the Time Start: 08:00Am and Time End: 10:00Pm!

My mother worked on building my company website for me with others at the Time Start: 09:00 Am and Time End: 07:30 Pm!

14/05/2008 the pictures were taken of your flat,

 

 

 

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 2.

Daniel Ellis -1-26390 10-11-2017 13-15

10/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1529,1530

 

76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 2.

Daniel Ellis -1-26390 10-11-2017 13-15

10/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1529,1530

--

1529,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 10/11/2017 01:14:57 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Fwd.: Mr Simon Cordell - complaint CRM COM 4516 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

On Thursday, 9 November 2017, 14:35, complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Mr Cordell,

I am writing following our phone discussion earlier this week. I have consulted with Lemmy's team and been advised as follows:

You are aware that this matter is already in court and we have to follow due process. The trial Judge gave directions to both parties at the hearing on 25th September 2017 which both parties have to abide by. You have been instructed to file your defence and witness statement and forward same to the council. We will contact your solicitors directly if we need any further information in relation to this case.

Please note that any further complaints or requests for information from you should be made through solicitors. With this in mind, I will not be able to speak further with you on the phone about your case.

Regards,

Daniel Ellis

Complaints & Access to Information Officer Complaints & Access to Information Team

Phone: 020 8379 2808

Email: daniel.ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time - to set up your account today go to www.enfield.gov.uk/connected

From: complaints and information

Sent: 30 August 2017 14:50

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Mr Simon Cordell - complaint CRM COM 4516 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thanks for your call this afternoon. I have recorded your complaint. The reference is CRM COM 4516

We hope to reply within ten working days, but it may take longer due to the different teams involved and long history of the complaint.

If you have any queries about this, please contact us direct via email using complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

Kind regards,

Daniel Ellis

Complaints & Access to Information Officer Complaints & Access to Information Team

Phone: 020 8379 2808

Email: daniel.ellis@enfield.gov.uk

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time - to set up your account today go to www.enfield.gov.uk/connected

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL Campaign

1530,

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4863 28-11-2017 23-07

28/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1531

 

77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4863 28-11-2017 23-07

28/11/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1531

--

1531,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropbox.com>

Sent time: 28/11/2017 11:07:24 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

Your Dropbox account password was recently reset.

While we've updated your password, any computers, or phones that you previously linked to your Dropbox account are still connected.

You can disconnect a lost or stolen device from your account settings.

If you changed your password for security reasons, we strongly recommend that you unlink any devices, web sessions, or apps that look unfamiliar or that you're concerned about. See this Help Centre article for more information.

If you didn't make this change, please let us know.

Thanks!

The Dropbox Team

2017 Dropbox

 

 

 

 

 

 

78.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4873 02-12-2017 05-32

02/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1532

 

78.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4873 02-12-2017 05-32

02/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1532

--

1532,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropboxmail.com>

Sent time: 02/12/2017 05:31:51 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

The Dropbox mobile app lets you view and share your files from any mobile device, no matter where you are. You can even mark your most important docs for offline viewing.

With apps for Android, iPhone, iPad, and Windows phones and tablets, Dropbox has you covered no matter where you are!

Looking for a central place to create and share ideas? Try Dropbox

Paper

Want to stop getting tips from Dropbox Unsubscribe

Dropbox, Inc., PO Box 77767, San Francisco, CA 94107

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

79.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

858. Emmanuel _Simon Cordell

15/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1533,1534,1535,1536 

 

79.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

858. Emmanuel _Simon Cordell

15/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1533,1534,1535,1536

--

1533,

From: Emmanuel <emmanuel@vlssolicitors.com>

Sent: 15 December 2017 11:11

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: Simon Cordell

Attachments: VLS-20171215-103522.pdf

VLS_20171215_103441.pdf

Dear Mrs Cordell,

I write to inform you that the court has discharged the injunction of 9 August 2017 against Simon and the council's claim is struck out because Enfield Council failed to comply with the order to file Directions Questionnaire by the 17 November 2017. Copies of the Court Orders are attached for your information.

Please contact me should you have any query.

Kind regards,

Emmanuel Onwusiri

VLS SOLICITORS

VLS Solicitors Gibson

House 800

High Road

London

N170DH

DX 36209

Edmonton Exchange

Tel: 0208 808 7999

Fax: 0208 808 1999

Mob: 07940728166

Direct email: emmanuel@vlssolicitors.com http://www.vlssolicitors.com

VLS Solicitors is a trading style of VLS Solicitors Ltd, a company registered in England & Wales with Registration number 8572584, having its registered address at Gibson House, 800 High Road, Tottenham London N17 0DH. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. (SRA No.627688)

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

VLS Solicitors cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this email as it has been transmitted over a public network. If you suspect that the email may have been intercepted or amended, please call the sender. When addressed to our clients any opinion or advice contained in this email is subject to our terms and conditions.

1534,

Simon Cordell-VLS-20171215-103522.pdf

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

HM Courts & Tribunals Service the County Court at Edmonton

59 Fore Street London N18 2TN

DX 136686 EDMONTON 3

T 020 8884 6500

www.gov.uk

Vis Solicitors

Gibson House 800

High Road Tottenham

London

N17 0DH

36209

EDMONTON EXCHANGE

Your ref: VLS/EO/H/CORDELL/17

Dear Sir

13 December 2017

Re: Case Number: D02ED073 London Borough of Enfield v Mr Simon Cordell

Enclosed please find copy of courts letter to the claimant's as directed by the District Judge.

Yours faithfully,

Ourvasse Cundapen Back Office Section Ext

BLANK

1535,

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

HM Courts & Tribunals Service the County Court at Edmonton

59 Fore Street London N18 2TN

DX 136686 EDMONTON 3

T 020 8884 6500

www.gov.uk

Dated: 13 December 2017

Your ref: LS/C/LI/157255

London Borough of Enfield

P O Box 50

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield

EN1 3XA

90615

ENFIELD 1

Dear Sir/Madam

Re: Case Number: D02ED073 London Borough of Enfield v Mr Simon Cordell

The file was referred to the District Judge and his comments are:

"Your Directions Questionnaire was received by the court on 20/11/17. Therefore the sanction on the order of 6/11/17 applies."

Yours sincerely,

Ourvasse Cundapen Back Office Section Ext

cc: defendants

1536,  

Simon Cordell – VLS-20171215-103441.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order        

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number D02ED073

Date 9 November 2017

Ref: LS/C/LI/157255

Ref VLS/EO/H

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

CORDELL

Before District Judge Cohen sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

Of the Court's own initiative and upon the claimant having failed to file a direction questionnaire.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

·         The Claimant do file a completed directions questionnaire by 4.00 pm on 17 November 2017.

·         If the Claimant fails to comply with paragraph 1 of this order the injunction of 9th August 2017 do stand discharged without further order and the claim do stand struck out without further order.     |

·         Omission to either party to apply to set aside, vary, or stay this order by an application on notice which must be filed at this Court not more than 3 days after service of this order.

Dated: 6 November 2017

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN, when corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number.

Tel: 020 8884 6500.

Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyclaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by Ms M Tucker    \

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order: CJR065C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4864 30-12-2017 10-15

Double1

30/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1537

 

80.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4864 30-12-2017 10-15

Double1

30/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1537

--

1537,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropbox.com>

Sent time: 30/12/2017 10:14:39 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

A new web browser just signed into your Dropbox account. To help keep your account secure, let us know if this is you.

Is this you?

Where: Near United Kingdom

When: Dec 30, 2017 at 10:14 am (GMT)

What: Yahoo! on Windows 7

Learn more on how to protect your account.

Thanks,

The Dropbox Team

2017 Dropbox

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

81.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4865 30-12-2017 10-15

Double2

30/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1538

 

81.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4865 30-12-2017 10-15

Double2

30/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1538

--

1538,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropbox.com>

Sent time: 30/12/2017 10:15:13 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

You've connected a new app, 'Yahoo!', to your Dropbox.

You can check on this and any other apps you've connected by visiting your account page.

Happy Drop boxing!

The Dropbox Team

P.S. Here are some other great apps that can connect to your Dropbox.

Website creation

RSS blog reader

App automation

2017 Dropbox

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

82.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4866 31-12-2017 14-21

31/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1539

 

82.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2.

Dropbox -1-4866 31-12-2017 14-21

31/12/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1539

--

1539,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropbox.com>

Sent time: 31/12/2017 02:20:43 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

A new web browser just signed into your Dropbox account. To help keep your account secure, let us know if this is you.

Is this you?

Where: Near Enfield Town, England, United

Kingdom

When: Dec 31, 2017 at 2:20 pm (GMT)

What: Chrome on Windows 7

Learn more on how to protect your account.

Thanks,

The Dropbox Team

2017 Dropbox

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville - 08-07-2017 04-33

08/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1540

 

83.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville - 08-07-2017 04-33

08/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1540

--

1540,

From: Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville <messages-noreply@linkedin.com>

Sent time: 08/07/2017 04:33:31 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn

Linked 03

Luvinia (Lou) would like to stay in touch on LinkedIn.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville

CEO & Manager D.E.M.S Graphic Designs Enfield, United Kingdom 1,398 connections

LinkedIn is a social network and online platform for professionals. Learn More

You are receiving Invitation emails. LinkedIn will use your email address to make suggestions to our members in features like People You May Know.

This email was sent to re_wired@ymail.com.

Linked H

2017 LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company, Wilton Plaza, Wilton Place, Dublin 2. LinkedIn is a registered business name of LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company. LinkedIn and the LinkedIn logo are registered trademarks of LinkedIn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

84.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville -13-07-2017 03-02

13/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1541

 

84.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville -13-07-2017 03-02

13/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1541

--

1541,

From: Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville via LinkedIn <invitations@linkedin.com>

Sent time:13/07/2017 03:02:56 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville's invitation is awaiting your response

Linked 03,

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville would like to connect on LinkedIn. How would you like to respond?

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville

CEO & Manager D.E.M.S Graphic Designs

You received an invitation to connect. LinkedIn will use your email address to make suggestions to our members in features like People You May Know. Unsubscribe This email was sent to re_wired@ymail.com.

If you need assistance or have questions, please contact LinkedIn Customer Service.

2017 LinkedIn Corporation, 1000 West Maude Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94085. LinkedIn and the LinkedIn logo are registered trademarks of LinkedIn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

85.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville -20-07-2017 05-06

20/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1542

 

85.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 2.

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville -20-07-2017 05-06

20/07/2017

/ Page Numbers: 1542

--

1542,

From: Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville via LinkedIn <invitations@linkedin.com>

Sent time: 20/07/2017 05:06:05 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville's invitation is    awaiting your response

Linked 03,

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville would like to connect on LinkedIn. How would you like to respond?

Luvinia (Lou) De-Terville

CEO & Manager D.E.M.S Graphic Designs

You received an invitation to connect. LinkedIn will use your email address to make suggestions to our members in features like People You May Know. Unsubscribe This email was sent to re_wired@ymail.com.

If you need assistance or have questions, please contact LinkedIn Customer Service.

2017 LinkedIn Corporation, 1000 West Maude Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94085. LinkedIn and the LinkedIn logo are registered trademarks of LinkedIn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Headers

2018

 

 

 

 

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2.

Google New device 29-01-2018 -03-08

29/01/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1

 

 1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2.

Google New device 29-01-2018 -03-08

29/01/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1

--

1,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time:29/01/2018 03:08:03 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert

Google too smooth 1

New device signed in to

re_wired@ymail.com

Your Google Account was just signed in to from a new Windows device. You're getting this email to make sure that it was you.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services.

© 2018 Google Inc.,1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

Mother Dear Tahir Raz over a week 04-02-2018 -10-21

04/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2

 

 2.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

Mother Dear Tahir Raz over a week 04-02-2018 -10-21

04/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2

--

2,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 04/02/2018 10:21:09 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: Simon Cordell Bail

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 4 February 2018 at 22:18:09 GMT

To: Tahir.Razzaq@met.police.pnn.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Bail

Dear Tahir Razzaq

My son Simon has been trying to contract you now for over a week, also his solicitor has also tried to contact you.

Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/2018 is due in court tomorrow he also has his bail to attend the police station to see you, his solicitor said the court takes priority over the police station so if at all possible could you rearrange his bail as he will not be able to attend the police station on the 05/02/2018 as he will be at court.

You do have his solicitors contract and I am sure his solicitor will again try to contact you tomorrow, my son is also going to try and call you again in the morning as he was told that is the next time you are on duty.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2.

Mother Dear Tahir Raz over a week 04-02-2018 -10-26

04/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 3

 

3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2.

Mother Dear Tahir Raz over a week 04-02-2018 -10-26

04/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 3

--

3,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 04/02/2018 10:26:09 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: Simon Cordell Bail

Simon, I sent this to the police officer so he knows you can’t not attend the police station tomorrow and the police can’t say you have not told him

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Date: 4 February 2018 at 22:18:09 GMT

To: Tahir.Razzaq@met.police.pnn.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell Bail

Dear Tahir Razzaq

My son Simon has been trying to contract you now for over a week, also his solicitor has also tried to contact you.

Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/2018 is due in court tomorrow he also has his bail to attend the police station to see you, his solicitor said the court takes priority over the police station so if at all possible could you rearrange his bail as he will not be able to attend the police station on the 05/02/2018 as he will be at court.

You do have his solicitors contract and I am sure his solicitor will again try to contact you tomorrow, my son is also going to try and call you again in the morning as he was told that is the next time you are on duty.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

910. Balbinder Kaur Geddes _LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

02/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 4,5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33,34,35,36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51,52,53,54

55,56

 

 4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

910. Balbinder Kaur Geddes _LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

02/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 4,5,6

7,8,9,10,11,12

13,14,15,16,17,18

19,20,21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33,34,35,36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51,52,53,54

55,56

 

--

4,

From: Balbinder Kaur Geddes <Balbinder.Kaur-Geddes@Enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 May 2018 13:44

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Ludmilla lyavoo

Subject: LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

Attachments: Committal Application - 05.02.18 - Simon Cordell.pdf

Committal Application 20.4.18 – Simon-Cordell.pdf

Dear Mrs Cordell

We have today attempted to serve the attached documents personally on your son Simon Cordell. We attach copies of the documents for your record. Copies of the same have been placed in the post to your address of 23 Byron Terrace, Edmonton, N97DG.

Yours sincerely

Balbinder Kaur Geddes Legal Officer

Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 4834

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

5,

6,

7,

8,

9,

10,

11,

12,

13,

14,

15,

16,

17,

18,

19,

20,

21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

Mother Here is the sc06_02_2018 - 10-02-2018 -02-14

10/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69,70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

 

 5.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

Mother Here is the sc06_02_2018 - 10-02-2018 -02-14

10/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69,70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

--

57,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 10/02/2018 02:14:39 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: new council-docs

Attachments: Si-New-Docs-Enfield-Council-06-02-2018.pdf

Simon

Here are the scanned documents for Enfield council dated 06/02/2018

--

58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

Google New device 14-02-2018 -06-41  

14/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 79

 

 6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

Google New device 14-02-2018 -06-41        

14/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 79

--

79,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 14/02/2018 06:41:29 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert

Google too smooth I

New device signed in to

re_wired@ymail.com

Your Google Account was just signed in to from a new Windows device. You're getting this email to make sure that it was you.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services.

2018 Google Inc.,1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Google New device 15-02-2018 -10-42  

15/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 80

 

 7.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Google New device 15-02-2018 -10-42        

15/02/2018

/ Page Numbers: 80

--

80,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 15/02/2018 10:42:17 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Template Gallery connected to your Google Account

Hi too,

Template Gallery now has access to your Google Account re_wired@ymail.com.

Template Gallery can:

• View and manage the files in your Google Drive

You should only give this access to apps that you trust. Review or remove apps connected to your account any time at My Account.

Find out more about what it means to connect an app to your account.

The Google Accounts team

This email can't receive replies. For more information, visit the Google Accounts Help Centre.

You have received this mandatory email service announcement to update you about important changes to your Google product or account.

2018 Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Mother Here Plz Read 05-03-2018-04-42           

05/03/2018

/ Page Numbers: 81,82,83,84,85,86

 

 8.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Mother Here Plz Read 05-03-2018-04-42     

05/03/2018

/ Page Numbers: 81,82,83,84,85,86

--

81,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time:       05/03/2018 04:42:58 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: re: Court Letter

Attachments: Si-Letter-to-court-03-03-2018.pdf

Here read please

82,

Si-Letter-to-court-03-03-2018.pdf

Mr. Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ 03/03/2018

• Case Ref: EOOED049

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this letter due to some confusion with the above case number, this case is with regards to an Injunction Order from, The London Borough of Enfield towards myself Mr. Simon Cordell.

1.      On the 09/08/2017 case ref: D02ED073 the Claimant was granted an interim injunction order, this order I disputed, but due to the Claimant not doing what the court ordered this interim injunction order was discharged and struck out by the court on the 17/11/2017.

2.      The Claimant tried on the 09/01/2018 to get case ref: D02ED073 reinstated which the judge did not allow.

3.      On the 09/01/2018 the Claimant put the new application in for the issue of the same interim injunction order which the court had refused to reinstate, which the court granted case ref: EOOED049.

4.      The Claimant have stated the interim injunction order of the 09/01/2018 was served to me on the 10/01/2018, which I am disputing this was served personally to myself on the 10/01/2018.

5.      On the 05/02/2018 we were to attend court the judge was not happy that the interim injunction order had been served correctly due to there being no affidavit of service filed to the court, also there was other application the Claimant has submitted to the

1

83,

Si-Letter-to-court-03-03-2018.pdf

court which I had not seen, the Judge did on the 05/02/2018 ask the Claimant to complete a list of things please see below.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

6.      The Claimant do by 4pm on 09/02/2018 file and serve an affidavit of service.

7.      The Claimant do by 4pm on 09/02/2018 serve on the Defendant by first class post its application of 05/02/2018.

8.      Matter be listed for further consideration of the order 09/01/2018 and the Claimant's application referred to above, on 30/05/2018 at 14:00pm (time estimate 1 hour).

9.      The Defendant's address for service is 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ

I have received the new application and within the documents is a statement of affidavit of service which I am still disputing was served correctly.

Within the statement of affidavit of service from Andy Philippou, a Process Server of Global Investigation Services Limited, Earnscliff House, London N99AB, it states please see below.

“1. That I am over sixteen years of age.

1.      That I did on Wednesday 10 January 2018 at approximately 10.20.am attend at the offices of VLS Solicitors, Gibson House, 800, High Road, Tottenham, London N17 ODH in order to meet with the Defendant's Solicitor. That I did at approximately 10.30.am. meet and personally serve Suzanne Ozdemir (receptionist) of VLS Solicitors with the following:

2.      An Injunction Order dated 09 January 2018 with Notice of Hearing on OS/02no18 at 2.pm

3.      A General Form of Judgement or Order dated 09 January 2018 A Power of Arrest dated 09 January 2018 An N244Application Notice

4.      A Statement of Lemmy Nwabusi dated 08 January 2018, with exhibits A Court Order •

5.      A Statement of Ludmilla lyavoo dated 03 January 2018, with exhibits

2

84,

Si-Letter-to-court-03-03-2018.pdf

6.      That I did on the same date at approximately 11.30.am and in the absence of a response from

7.      the Defendant's address of 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JQ post through the

8.      letterbox of 109 Burncroft -Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JQ copies of the aforementioned

9.      documents in a sealed plastic wallet for the attention of the defendant.

10.  That I did on the same date having had notification from the Claimant Solicitor of the Defendant's- arrest the previous evening attend at Wood Green Police Station in order to meet and personally serve the defendant with the aforementioned documents. That. I did after having had to wait post interview and having the matter referred to the duty Sergeant by Officer Tahir Razzaq; meet and serve the above-named defendant with the aforementioned documentation in the presence of five officers in the doorway of holding cell 9.

11.  That at the time of service the aforementioned defendant admitted his identity to me as Simon Cordell, namely an adult male of mixed race, possibly in his mid-20's, approximately 5'10" tall and slim build.

12.  This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and .1 make it knowing that, if it were tendered in evidence, I would be liable to prosecution if I wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or did-not believe to be true. ”

As stated, this is a new interim injunction order dated the 09/01/2018 so why did the Claimant serve this to a solicitor who in fact was not dealing and new nothing about this application, and in fact is not representing in this new case.

I believe posting this in someone door does not class this application as it being served.

And I believe the police allowing a person into the police custardy area where I was being held in a cell and then allowing this person along with five police officers is wrong in law.

There is also the fact that Andy Philippou has stated he personally serve the defendant with the aforementioned documents in the cell and that I give my name.

This is untrue as I stated to the judge on the 05th February 2018, I would not allow the above person to serve me any documents while I was in police custardy, I stated that

3

85,

Si-Letter-to-court-03-03-2018.pdf

the police came to my cell with the person, and I stood by the CCTV camera in the police cell with my hands over my ears and started shouting so I could not hear anything that was being said. Due to me doing this the police closed the cell door and asked the person to leave the police station.

There is also the fact that the police had told me they were going to allow this person to serve me in the police station, my solicitor and mother was also told this, I had told the police I would not allow this to happen, which my solicitor also told the police I would not allow this. My mother also spoke to the officer in change and told him it was a breach of law to allow this, the police are getting involved in a civil court matter which I would not have any control over as I was classed as not a free person, and the police had total control, that the order should only be served at my home address or a business work place. The officer in change said he would talk to the custardy officer and let her know what he said, when he asked the custardy officer he told the officer in charge he was going to allow this, which was then passed on to my mother and my solicitor.

At this point in time I have asked the police for a subject access request of the CCTV and also all records of me bring in the police station.

I dispute that the interim injunction order was served on me personally at the police station.

I also depute the facts which the Claimant have put in this interim injunction order, since 2014 I have been left in my home with no help from the Claimant, many calls have been made many emails have been sent as well as complaints, but it would seem to be the case that the Claimant have ignored everything regarding me and only go on what the neighbours have said, I have been left to live in hell with what the neighbours are doing, I have to live in my own home with CCTV in every room so my movements are recorded, I record everything as this is the way I have been left to live like in my own home, because I am being blamed for everything that goes on in my block of flats.

4

86,

There is many emails which show I asked the Claimant for help regarding what is going on where I can sit down in my home and show the Claimant what is going on with my family there with me, The Claimant has refused to come out and take any reports from me and tell me I have to go to them to do this but they have been told I do not cope well when I have to leave my flat, but it seems the Claimants have no problem with going to the neighbours when they say anything.

It is ironic that I was begging for help in many emails and phone calls before any complaints when into to the Claimants about me, yet I am left to deal with it on my own with no help when I was asking for help. But as soon as a complaint went in from the neighbour the Claimants act on it. I believe there is reasons for this, and I believe they will be fully seen by the court.

I have made so many calls to the police which I do have all the CAD numbers begging for help I just get told they won’t get involved but as soon as the neighbours put a complaint in the police are there to arrest me.

I asked for help so many times the abuse is still ongoing every day by the neighbours, yet the council will take no reports, we were told to only have contact with the acting solicitors.

This has had a large impact on my health which the Claimants are well aware off. My mother has had to help write this to the court.

I am unsure if this order is in place or not, and when I made a call to the police over the last days, they have told me they do not believe it has been served correctly. Could the court please update me regarding this.

Regards

Mr S Cordell

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Mother 12-04-2018 -08-36 

12/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 87        

 

 9.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

Too Smooth Mother 12-04-2018 -08-36       

12/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 87  

--

87,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 12/04/2018 08:36:35 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: re: more 002

Attachments: SI-SEND-12-04-2018.rar

002

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 2.

Too smooth Mother 12-04-2018-11-40 - Deon Benjamin

12/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95

 

 10.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2.

Too smooth Mother 12-04-2018-11-40 - Deon Benjamin

12/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95

--

88,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time:       12/04/2018 11:40:05 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: re: some bits

Attachments: Simon Needs. Rar

PIP-Consultaion-filled-15-03-2018-signed.pdf

I am getting all the things I do the request it may take me a while I am looking for the Barlylands bits, but I got a lot of information running access my whole hard drives

Sc get on with this I am trying to get all info

89,

Deon Benjamin

90,

Deon Benjamin

91,

Deon Benjamin

92,

Deon Benjamin

93,

Deon Benjamin

94,

PIP-Consultaion-filled-15-03-2018-signed.pdf

·         JH653813B PIP.6000

·         Your reply

·         Please tell us why you couldn't attend your consultation and why you couldn't contact us to re- arrange it. If you have recently moved address, please provide your new address details.

After my form was filled I got a date of the 02/12/2017 for a home assessment, the lady came on this date, but it seemed she did not bring the forms so that the assessment could be recorded, we were told a new date would be made for a home assessment and a letter sent to us in the post, it may take a little while to get the new date but one would come and the paperwork would be there this time to have it recorded, a recorded assessment was asked for and it was checked it was going to be recorded and we were told yes.

We waited for the new date and a letter came for an assessment for the 01/02/2018 but this was not a home assessment so a call was made and it seems a mistake was made so the request went in for the home assessment and we were told a new letter would come with the date.

About a week later a call was again made to check for any updates to the assessment centre, where my contact telephone number was also updated. We were told to wait for the letter with the new date we were not told on this date the home assessment was refused. We have never had a new date or letter form the assessment centre since the one dated for the 01/02/2018 which was cancelled by the assessment centre when the call was made to them to say about the home assessment.

After I got your letter dated the 15/03/2018 on the 23/03/2018 a call was made to the assessment centre on the 24/03/2018 to find out what was going on, Where we were told, it seemed after the home assessment date of the 02/12/2017 the file was sent back to the DWP I am not sure as to the reason why this happened as the assessment dated the 02/12/2017 never went ahead due to their fault with no paperwork for recording the assessment, I do not understand why the assessment centre did not do a new date for a home assessment and sent the file back to yourselves the DWP.

The lady on the phone was not able to tell me the reason the file was sent back to the DWP and a new date not set.

The DWP sent back the file in January 2018 to the assessment centre and it was then the new assessment date of the 01/02/2018 was made without anyone looking into the home assessment until after the call was made asking why a home assessment was not due to take place this call was made before the 01/02/2018 assessment date to the assessment centre,

It seems also that my knew phone number was not updated in there system as the lady said on the phone that a call was made to me and I was told the home assessment was refused on the 01/02/2018 and the 02/02/2018, I stated at this time how could I have been told it had been refused my phone number was not updated with my knew phone number on your system so how did someone call me and tell me. The lady then said sorry we tried to call you and got no reply, we stated you just said I had been told via

1

95,

hone the home assessment had been refused now you are saying you tried to call and got no reply how you can change what you are saying so easy. But I am sure when you call a cut of number it beeps to show it is cut of and no longer in use.

I was also told on the call that the DWP letter was wrong that had been sent to me stating about the missed date of assessment as being the 01/02/2018. I asked how is it wrong we had no knew dates for an assessment only the letter for the assessment of the 02/03/2018, they told us that a new date had been made of the 18/02/2018 for us to attend the assessment centre that a letter had been sent to me and a text sent to my old phone number, I was shocked when we were told this, as no knew letters had come and they had not updated there system with my knew phone number.

I told the lady I was not happy with what had gone on and asked her for an email address for a complaint to be filled, we were told they don't have an email address to send a complaint in and that they would send a complaint file pack out to us to deal with the complaint which we are now waiting on.

I do not understand why this has happened if the paperwork for having my assessment recorded on the 02/12/2017 my assessment would have gone ahead on this date. I do not understand why my file was sent back to the DWP after this and a new date was not setup. I do not understand why when the DWP sent my file back to the assessment centre it was not looked at and a home assessment addressed at this time. I do not understand why there system was not updated with my new phone number, and I do not understand why the new letter for an assessment of the 18/02/2018 has never been received as it seems that is the only letter that seems to have gone missing. and it would seem that the DWP date of the 01/02/2018 is the only date they have on their system or why would that date be put on your letter dated the 15/03/2018.

I do believe that something has gone wrong at no fault of myself, and I do believe good cause has been laid out in this letter why I did not attend the assessment centre on the 01/02/2018 and that being that this date was cancelled by the assessment centre after a call was made to them regarding why it was not a home assessment. I have not failed to call the assessment centre at any point.

Regards

Deon Benjamin

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother omg Simon I can't find it 13-04-2018 -06-08

13/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 96

 

 11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother omg Simon I can't find it 13-04-2018 -06-08

13/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 96

--

96,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 13/04/2018 06:08:41 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: re: check these

Attachments: SI-SEND-12-04-2018-001.rar

omg Simon I have check and recheck and recheck this document for the festival and I can’t find it if it is not in any of these files I don’t know what to say I even check all emails and your emails I think you used barley land and changed the name to lee valley so I have also included them in this Rar

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

901. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641

25/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 97,98,99,100,101        

 

 12.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

901. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641

25/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 97,98,99,100,101

--

97,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 25 April 2018 19:07

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Fwd.: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641

Attachments: Other Gateways for Disclosure.pdf

ATT00342.htm

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: <DPAMailbox-.SAR@met.pnn.police.uk>

Date: 27 March 2018 at 11:04:21 BST

To: <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641

Good morning,

OUR REFERENCE: 2018020000641 REQUEST DEADLINES: 25.03.2018

I am writing in response to your email enquiring about the progress of your Subject Access Request. Unfortunately, we are not in a position to provide you with a timescale for completion; this is due to the high volume of requests currently being received by the MPS; therefore your case is taking longer to process.

Your request was reviewed when first received and is now waiting to be allocated to a caseworker for processing.

We are not able to prioritise any application and all requests are being processed strictly by the date they have been received.

We are not taking telephone calls at the moment with regard to the progress of any application because the team are currently dedicating their available work-time to the processing of the requests in order of receipt to manage the workload effectively without interruption; ensuring that responses are sent to everyone in the shortest time possible.

If you require information for court or other legal proceedings, family court proceedings or employment tribunals, please see the attached document for suitable disclosure methods.

Please note this is not intended to infringe in any way on your right to access your personal data, as granted by Section 7 of the Data Protection Act.

Please accept my sincere apologies for any inconvenience this is causing you.

Regards,

Anna Sokol |Administration Assistant for Privacy Team| Strategy and Insight | Strategy and Governance |

Met HQ | Metropolitan Police Service

Telephone: 020 7161 3500

Email: DPA Mailbox - SAR

Address: Information Rights Unit, 3rd Floor, Empress State Building SW6 1SF

Protective Marking: RESTRICTED Not Suitable for Publication:

98,

Recipients of this email should be aware that all communications within and to and from the Metropolitan Police Service are subject to consideration for release under the Data Protection Act, Freedom of Information Act and Environmental Information Regulations. The MPS will consider all information suitable for release unless there are valid and proportionate public interest reasons not to, therefore, sensitive information not for public disclosure must be highlighted as such. Further advice can be obtained from the Information Rights Unit - 020 7161 3500 (783500).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 23 March 2018 12:59

To: SAR Mailbox –

DPA Enquiries SARenquiries@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: RE: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email to see if there is any update as to when I will get the subject access request, I believe the 40 days is the 25/03/2018 so was wondering if the subject access reply would be within this time or after it.

Any update I would be grateful

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 14 February 2018 14:27

To: SARonlineapplications@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: RE: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

I am very sorry I added the wrong letter please see all attached files I have done a complete knew set. Regards

From: Marv.Gibson@met.pnn.police.uk

mailto: Marv.Gibson@met.pnn.police.uk

On Behalf Of

SARonlineapplications@met.pnn.police.uk

Sent: 14 February 2018 13:49

To: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your email.

We are unable to process your request as we require:

·         A copy of a proof of current address (dated within the last 6 months) for example, a copy of a utility bill or a bank statement.

The letter you have sent is not dated within 6 months.

When you re-send the application, please re-send all documents together in one email (Form 3019, proof of ID and proof of address) as we do not keep returned applications.

99,

Many thanks,

Mary Gibson| Administration Assistant | Information Rights Unit

Strategy & Insight | Strategy & Governance | Met HQ | Metropolitan Police Service

Telephone 0207 161 3500 |

Email SARonlineapplications@met.pnn.police.uk

Address Information Rights Unit,

PO Box 57192,

LONDON

SW6 1SF

Protective Marking: RESTRICTED

Not Suitable for Publication: N

Recipients of this email should be aware that all communications within and to and from the Metropolitan Police Service are subject to consideration for release under the Data Protection Act, Freedom of Information Act and Environmental Information Regulations. The MPS will consider all information suitable for release unless there are valid and proportionate public interest reasons not to, therefore, sensitive information not for public disclosure must be highlighted as such. Further advice can be obtained from the Information Rights unit - 020 7161 3500 (783500).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 February 2018 17:40

To: SAR Mailbox - Online Applications

SARonlineapplications@met.pnn.police.uk

SAR Mailbox - DPA Enquiries

SARenquiries@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: Re: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached documents with my request for information which is held about me.

Regards Simon Cordell

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

100,

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

101,

Fwd.: Subject Access Request Simon Cordell 2018020000641->0ther Gateways for Disclosure.pdf

Other Gateways for Disclosure

Contact Details for Third Party for use in Legal Proceedings

If you or your solicitor require the contact details of a third party in relation to pursuing legal proceedings, you can write to the Commander of the Borough where the incident occurred quoting Section 35 of the DPA. Your request will then be risk assessed to decide if it can be released.

Disclosure for Civil Action/Family Court Proceedings

Should you require disclosure of documents (or CCTV) held by the MPS for a Civil Action or for Family Court Proceedings, you may wish to apply for a disclosure order via the courts specifying which documents are necessary and why. Specifying what information within each document is necessary.

Please send the disclosure order to.

Directorate of Legal Services Metropolitan Police Service 10 Lambs Conduit Street London WC1N 3NR

Court Order

Should the information you have requested be required for a court case, it may be prudent to obtain a court order for the information. Your legal representative or HM Courts Service will be able to assist you with this. If the court case is not current but anticipated, you should request the documents under Section 35 of the DPA.

Disclosure through these routes may enable you to receive more information than you would get via the Subject Access provisions of the DPA, because your rights under Subject Access are for personal data only. The 40-day time limit on Section 35 requests also does not apply.

All such requests should be directed to: -

Directorate of Legal Services,

Metropolitan Police Service 10, Lambs Conduit Street,

London WC1N 3NR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

898. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (2) 

25/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128

 

 13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

898. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (2)       

25/04/2018

/ Page Numbers: 102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128

--

102,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 25 April 2018 16:08

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: LBE v Cordell- Application for committal.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

I am the solicitor in conduct of the injunction proceedings against your son. It is my understanding that during his last attendance your son has expressed the fact that all correspondence in relation to the above case should be served to his personal address. We are therefore not aware that all court correspondence should be sent to you as you expressed in your email.

However we confirm that an application for Mr Cordell committal was issued on 20th April 2018, in the Edmonton County Court and a hearing has now been listed on Tuesday 1st May 2018 at 10am. The application was issued on the basis of a breach of undertaking. A copy of the application is attached to this email. Your son is advised to attend the hearing and to seek independent legal advice.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

THE

London

LEGAL

To raise money for free legal advice charities to help those in need We would be very grateful if you would sponsor our efforts — ask me for more details

As above please feel free to ask for more details regarding the walk and for donations for this worthy cause please go to - https://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/LondonBoroughofEnfield18

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

103,

Sent: 25 April 2018 13:33

To: Lemmy Nwabuisi Lemmy.NWABUISI@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Lemmy

Could you please send all paperwork that has been sent to my son to me. As you will be aware all paperwork and letter sent from the council should also be sent to me which has not been happening this would include all court paperwork.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

104,

RE: Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]->LBE v Cordell- Application for committal.pdf

The London Borough of Enfield

Legal Services

Po Box 50

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield

EN13XA

90615

ENFIELD 1

25 APR 2018

LEGAL SERVICES

105,

--

106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,

127,128,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

910.

Balbinder Kaur Geddes _LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

02/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176,177,178,179,180

181

 

 14.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

910.

Balbinder Kaur Geddes _LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

02/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176,177,178,179,180

181

--

129,

From: Balbinder Kaur Geddes <Balbinder.Kaur-Geddes@Enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 May 2018 13:44

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Ludmilla lyavoo

Subject: LBE -v- Simon Cordell - Committal Applications

Attachments: Committal Application - 05.02.18 - Simon Cordell.pdf

Committal Application 20.4.18 – Simon-Cordell.pdf

Dear Mrs Cordell

We have today attempted to serve the attached documents personally on your son Simon Cordell. We attach copies of the documents for your record. Copies of the same have been placed in the post to your address of 23 Byron Terrace, Edmonton, N97DG.

Yours sincerely

Balbinder Kaur Geddes Legal Officer

Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 4834

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

130,

131,

132,

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176,177,178,179,180

181

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2.

DPR -1-4250 05-05-2018 17-58

05/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 182,183

 

 15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2.

DPR -1-4250 05-05-2018 17-58

05/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 182,183

--

182,

From: DPR Wholesalers <sales@dprwholesalers.com>

Sent time: 05/05/2018 05:57:38 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: DPR Wholesalers - Bank Holiday  Opening Hours & Squishes

Squishes Available now! See the online version

Bank Holiday Opening Hours Running for the Brain Tumour Charity

Bank Holiday Opening Hours and Squishes

May Bank Holiday Opening Hours

We will be closed on Monday 7th & 28th May 2018, whilst Dhiren runs the Vitality London 10,000 (See below for sponsorship details)

Normal Opening hours operate on all other days.

Change of Opening Hours

From the 1st June 2018, we will be changing our opening hours slightly.

On Mondays we will now be opening at 8:30am instead of 7am and on Fridays we will be closing at 4:30pm instead of 5:30pm. As always last entry is 30mins before closing

Last entry 30mins before closing.

183,

Sales!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

916.  Ludmilla Lyavoo _LBE v Mr Cordell E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

 

 16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

916.  Ludmilla Lyavoo _LBE v Mr Cordell E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

--

184,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 14 May 2018 09:51

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: LBE v Mr Cordell E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments:

Covering letter to Mr Cordell dated 11.05.2018.pdf

Application notice dated 11.05.2018.pdf.

Amended application notice dated 20.04.2018.pdf

Affidavit of Markandu Mathiyalagan.pdf

Affidavit Revathy Mathiyalagan 20.04.2018.pdf

Amended draft order.pdf

WS of Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi 10.05.2018.pdf

WS of Ms Kaur Geddes 10.05.2018.pdf

Importance: High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of our application notice dated 11.05.2018 seeking to amend our committal application dated 20.04.2018 in light of the incident which took place in the Edmonton County Court on 01.05.2018.

Our process server attended your son's property, but he refused to open the door despite identifying himself. A copy was left to his door and he was made aware of it.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL Campaign

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient

185,

should perform their own virus checks.

186,

187,

188,

189,

190,191,192,193,194,195,

196,197,198,199,200,201,

202,203,204,205,206,207,

208,209,210,211,212,213,

214,215,216,217,218,219,

220,221,222,223,224,225,

226,227,228,229,230,231,

232,233,234,  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

917.  Ludmilla Lyavoo   _London Borough of Enfield v Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

 

 17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

917.  Ludmilla Lyavoo   _London Borough of Enfield v Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

14/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289,290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310,311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322,323,324

325,326,327,328,329,330

331,332,333,334,335,336

337,338,339,340,341,342

343,344,345,346,347,348

349,350,351,352,353,354

355,356,357,358,359,360

--

235,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 14 May 2018 17:36

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: London Borough of Enfield v Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Court Order made by the Edmonton County Court on 14.05.2018.pdf

Pdf bundle of the application - notice 11.05.2018.pdf

pdf version of application to dispense with service dated 14.05.2018.pdf

Application for committal dated 05.02.2018.pdf

Application for committal dated 20.04.2018.pdf

Importance: High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Lorraine Cordell,

We have attempted service of our committal applications dated 05.02.2018 and 20.04.2018 upon Mr Simon Cordell and also attempted service of our application to amend our committal application in light of the incident which took place at Court on 01.05.2018 but Mr Simon Cordell refused to accept personal service of those documents.

In light of Mr Cordell's refusal to accept personal service, the threats of violence towards the neighbours and the fact that a hearing has been listed on 30.05.2018, we have decided to issue an ex parte application for service to be dispensed with. The application was considered by Deputy District Judge Genn in the Edmonton County Court who made the following order:

·         Permission to the Applicant is given to amend the application for committal

·         Permission is given pursuant to CPR 81.10(5)(b) to serve the amended application by email on you.

In light of the Court order made by the Court this morning, the attached applications are deemed served upon Mr Simon Cordell. Please note that your son is entitled to seek independent legal advice.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of

236,

Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

237,

238,

239,

240,241,242,243,244,245,

246,247,248,249,250,251,

252,253,254,255,256,257,

258,259,260,261,262,263,

264,265,266,267,268,269,

270,271,272,273,274,275,

276,277,278,279,280,281,

282,283,284,285,286,287,

288,289,290,291,292,293,

294,295,296,297,298,299,

300,301,302,303,304,305,

306,307,308,309,310,311,

312,313,314,315,316,317,

318,319,320,321,322,323,

324,325,326,327,328,329,

330,331,332,333,334,335,

336,337,338,339,340,341,

342,343,344,345,346,347,

348,349,350,351,352,353,

354,355,356,357,358,359,

360,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

920. Ludmilla Lyavoo _London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

23/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433,434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467,468

469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488    

 

 18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

920. Ludmilla Lyavoo _London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

23/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 361,362,363,364,365,366

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433,434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467,468

469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488

--

361,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 23 May 2018 14:35

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: LBE-SV-PRN-002_PR-ECCBS-LYB09571-IRC2020_4349_001.pdf

London Borough of Enfield v Cordell-E00ED049 [SEC=OFFICIAL] (6.07 MB)

Importance: High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Lorraine Cordell,

Please find attached an amended Order dated 14.5.2018 which gives the Claimant permission to serve the committal applications dated 05.02.2018 and 20.04.2018 and the application notice dated 11.05.2018 by email upon you. The order was amended by the Court under the slip rule.

The applications have already been served upon you on 14th May 2018 at 17.36pm (please see attached email) and as far as the Claimant is concerned personal service of all applications have now been affected upon Mr Simon Cordell.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.Enfield.Gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

362,

Blank Page!

363,

364,

365,

366,

367,368,369,370,371,372

373,374,375,376,377,378

379,380,381,382,383,384

385,386,387,388,389,390

391,392,393,394,395,396

397,398,399,400,401,402

403,404,405,406,407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427,428,429,430,431,432

433,434,435,436,437,438

439,440,441,442,443,444

445,446,447,448,449,450

451,452,453,454,455,456

457,458,459,460,461,462

463,464,465,466,467,468

469,470,471,472,473,474

475,476,477,478,479,480

481,482,483,484,485,486

487,488          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

DPR -1-4262 25-05-2018 08-56

25/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491

 

 19.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

DPR -1-4262 25-05-2018 08-56

25/05/2018

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491

--

489,

From: DPR Wholesalers <sales@dprwholesalers.com>

Sent time: 25/05/2018 08:56:06 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: DPR Wholesalers - Bank Holiday Opening Hours & Squishes

Privacy Policy Update            See the online version

Opening Hours Changes Squishes Available now!

Bank Holiday Opening Hours Running for the Brain Tumour Charity

Late Bank Holiday Opening Hours and Squishes

Late May Bank Holiday Opening Hours

We will be closed on Monday 28th May 2018, whilst Dhiren runs the Vitality London 10,000 (See below for sponsorship details)

Our new opening hours will resume from Tuesday 29th May, more information can be found below.

Change of Opening Hours

From the 4th June 2018, we will be changing our opening hours slightly.

On Mondays we will now be opening at 8:30am instead of 7am and on Fridays we will be closing at 4:30pm instead of 5:30pm. As always last entry is 30mins before closing

490,

Sales!

491,

Sales!

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Mother This has nothing in it 07-06-2018 -12-01

07/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 492      

 

 20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Mother This has nothing in it 07-06-2018 -12-01

07/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 492

--

492,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 07/06/2018 12:01:09 AM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Re: list

The email has nothing in it Sent from my iPhone

On 6 Jun 2018, at 21:34, Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1102. Chief Executive _Fwd._ Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

06/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 493,494,495,496

 

 21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1102. Chief Executive _Fwd._ Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

06/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 493,494,495,496

--

493,

From: Chief Executive <Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 December 2018 11:53

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: complaints and information

Subject: FW: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell

Thank you for your email address to the Chief Executive. I am writing in acknowledgement and to advise you that a copy of your correspondence has been passed to the Complaints and Access to Information Team. A response will be sent to you direct on the issues raised.

Regards

Heather Littler

Senior Admin Officer

Chief Executive's Unit

London Borough of Enfield

Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XY

Tel: 020 8379 4037

Email: heather.littler@enfield.gov.uk

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities"

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 05 December 2018 14:09

To:

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Sarah Cary

Sarah.Cary@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremy.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

James Rolfe

James.Rolfe@enfield.gov.uk

Tony Theodoulou

Tony.Theodoulou@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached letter regarding issues I have.

Regards

Classification: OFFICIAL

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

494,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

495,

FW: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]->On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

4. Complaint 05/12/2018

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

I am writing this email due to issues I have regarding a member of staff who works for Enfield Council by the name off Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator,

Since 2016 when Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator started working for Enfield Council he has been working on investigations relating to my son Mr. Simon Cordell.

In this time not once has Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator, come to see my son’s side to the alleged allegations regarding what the neighbours have put in about my son.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator has taken one side to these said alleged allegations without no investigations,’ Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi it seem has taken one side to everything that has been said and that is the side of the neighbours, Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has been told many times we have information which would proof my son had not done things which have been stated by the neighbours

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator knows my son does not leave the flat he was told this, and also told that if he wanted to attend a meeting with my son he could do so with police there to have a meeting to hear my son’s side, he has never got back to me regarding having a meeting at my son’s home because he never wanted to, which I am sure if someone is a vulnerable person where was the duty of care where has it ever been for my son?

I believe Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator just through to himself that my son is in the wrong he is a vulnerable person I will put pressure on him and get him out without even thinking there is 2 side to anything. And just blamed my son without even talking to him this is how it has been since Mr Lemmy

1

496,

Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator starting working for Enfield Council.

I also feel Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has taken information and not relayed it back correctly many times regarding my son’s health even to the courts. Information is being passed and obtained relating to my son which should never have been passed to 3 parties or used, how can this be allowed. There are many other points and failings which have been allowed to happen and this needs to stop. I will be drafting up a full complaint of failings and submitting it but this will take a while to draft up as I have got to go back some years.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi also had my son arrested on the 09/01/2018 and even though we asked many times, even my own son’s solicitors could not understand why he was the person still investigating my son. When his case was part of the court actions being taken against my son by Enfield Council this is against the law that someone is investigating something within their own case, and it beaches many other things.

At this point in time I want Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi taken off dealing with anything to do with my son or related to him, I feel he has not done acted correctly and feel he has not investigated anything which would prove my son has done nothing wrong and only wanted to blame him for everything, I have asked this before and heard nothing back regarding this. But it has got to the point in time that this needs to happen.

Could someone please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

2

 

 

 

 

 

22,

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Mother Court-Letter-June 2018.pdf 15-06-2018 -04-39

15/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 497,498,499

 

 22,

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Mother Court-Letter-June 2018.pdf 15-06-2018 -04-39

15/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 497,498,499

--

497,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 15/06/2018 04:39:15 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: check this is pls

Attachments: Court-Letter-15th June.2018.pdf

can you check the attached documents I want to send the court and say if it ok to send it please. it has to be short and to the point as Enfield council have not followed orders from the court

498,

Court-Letter-15th June 2018.pdf

15th June 2018 Case Ref: E00ED049

Attention of Judge Dias

I am writing this letter regarding the above case ref: E00ED049 and the hearing that took place on the 30th May 2018.

As stated, Mr Cordell did not attend court on this day due to him being unwell, this was explained to the court when we asked for the case to have an adjournment due to Mr Cordell being unwell.

A list of details was spoken about and at the end of the hearing you asked the barrister for the claimant to write the details down email them to you and you would then sign them off.

I have been waiting for the court order to be sent and as of today’s date 15th June 2018 I have not had anything sent to me via the claimant.

In this time since the hearing on the 30th June 2018 I have called the court 3 times and been told there was nothing on the system and it can take up to two weeks. Today however I spoke to Paul and was told the order was sent out on the 05th June 2018 which the claimant was meant to send to me which they have not, I would say that the claimants would have had this order by now and cannot understand why they have not sent it as they were the ones that put the application in on the 14th May 2018 asking the court to make the order that everything is sent to me. Which I still need to make an application to the court to be able to get this removed, I do not believe the court should have accepted a without notice application from the claimants to the court regarding having all documents served on me without me being there.

At this point of time I am not aware of anything that was due to take place and the claimants have not had any contact with me at all.

499,

I need the order from the court so an application can be put to the court regarding many issues.

There are many issues I feel that happened in court on the 30th June 2018, but due to the claimant barrister stating in court that I was not allowed to speak on behalf of Mr Cordell I was not allowed to say the information was misleading which was stated in court. As you stated it was helpful me being there as you could ask things to me, but I still am very unsure as to why an adjournment was not granted due to Mr Cordell being unwell as this was not stated in court. It just seemed the claimant barrister in fact was saying I was not telling the truth that Mr Cordell was unwell, and you just seemed to accept that, and the hearing carried on.

I would also like to be able to pick up from the court the 3 bundles I handed in with my application of the 29th May 2018 which was not heard by the court as I will need the 3 bundles so that I am able to make a court application.

But as of today’s date 15th June 2018 I have had no information to the order that claimant barrister done for the court and sent to the court and was signed off by you so have no idea what is going on.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

931. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell_ (50)

20/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 500,501,502,503,504

505,506,507,508,509,510

511,512,513,514,515,516

517,518,519,520,521,522

523,524,525,526,527,528

529

 

 23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

931. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell_ (50)

20/06/2018

/ Page Numbers:

500,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 June 2018 17:46

To: 'Kiran Johal'

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Attachments: Court Order made by the Edmonton County Court on 14.05.2018.pdf

Court-Letter-dated-09-02-2018.pdf

Court-Order-Date-Changed.pdf

Edmonton-Court-Letter-12-06-2018.pdf

legal-aid- crm14-signed.pdf

Lorraine Cordell's WS-001.pdf

ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf

Dear Kiran

Please see attached documents for Simon Cordell, please let me know if you need anything else,

Could you write to the court and ask for an adjournment and let me know please he is next due in court on the 26/06/2018, I hope the crim 14 has been signed in the right place.

The last order is dated 12/06/2016 and I only got this yesterday from the court as the council has not sent me anything as of today's date.

What I will do is over the next few days I will try and write some form of write up so you can understand better what the council is ding to him.

Lorraine

501,

502,

503,

504,

505,506,507,508,509,510,511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518,519,520,521,522,523,524,525,

526,527,528,529,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

932. Ludmilla Lyavoo _LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

21/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 530,531,532,533,534

535,536,537,538,539,540

541,542,543,544,545,546

547,548,549,550,551,552

553,554,555,556,557,558

559,560,561,562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578,579,580,581,582

583,584,585,586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650,651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661,662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671,672

673,674,675,676,677,678

679,680,681,682,683,684

685,686,687,688,689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701,702

703,704,705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712,713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

721,722,723,724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737,738

739,740,741,742,743,744

745,746,747,748,749,750

751,752,753,754,755,756

757,758,759,760,761,762

763,764,765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850  

 

 24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

932. Ludmilla Lyavoo _LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

21/06/2018

/ Page Numbers:

530,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 21 June 2018 17:40

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: LBE v Cordell – bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 1.pdf

LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 2.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of the hearing bundle, for your attention. A hardcopy has also been sent to you by Post.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

Http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

531,

532,

533,

534,

535,

536,

537,

538,

539,

540,

541,542,543,544,545,546

547,548,549,550,551,552

553,554,555,556,557,558

559,560,561,562,563,564

565,566,567,568,569,570

571,572,573,574,575,576

577,578,579,580,581,582

583,584,585,586,587,588

589,590,591,592,593,594

595,596,597,598,599,600

601,602,603,604,605,606

607,608,609,610,611,612

613,614,615,616,617,618

619,620,621,622,623,624

625,626,627,628,629,630

631,632,633,634,635,636

637,638,639,640,641,642

643,644,645,646,647,648

649,650,651,652,653,654

655,656,657,658,659,660

661,662,663,664,665,666

667,668,669,670,671,672

673,674,675,676,677,678

679,680,681,682,683,684

685,686,687,688,689,690

691,692,693,694,695,696

697,698,699,700,701,702

703,704,705,706,707,708

709,710,711,712,713,714

715,716,717,718,719,720

721,722,723,724,725,726

727,728,729,730,731,732

733,734,735,736,737,738

739,740,741,742,743,744

745,746,747,748,749,750

751,752,753,754,755,756

757,758,759,760,761,762

763,764,765,766,767,768

769,770,771,772,773,774

775,776,777,778,779,780

781,782,783,784,785,786

787,788,789,790,791,792

793,794,795,796,797,798

799,800,801,802,803,804

805,806,807,808,809,810

811,812,813,814,815,816

817,818,819,820,821,822

823,824,825,826,827,828

829,830,831,832,833,834

835,836,837,838,839,840

841,842,843,844,845,846

847,848,849,850        

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

933. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

22/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 851,852

853,854,855,856,857,858

859,860,861,862,863,864

865,866,867,868,869,870

871,872,873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883,884,885,886,887,888

889,890,891,892,893,894

895,896,897,898,899,900

901,902,903,904,905,906

907,908,909,910,911,912

913,914,915,916,917,918

919,920,921,922,923,924

925,926,927,928,929,930

931,932,933,934,935,936

937,938,939,940,941,942

943,944,945,946,947,948

949,950,951,952,953,954

955,956,957,958,959,960

961,962,963,964,965,966

967,968,969,970,971,972

973,974,975,976,977,978

979,980,981,982,983,984

985,986,987,988,989,990

991,992,993,994,995,996

997,998,999,1000,1001,1002

1003,1004,1005,1006,1007,1008

1009,1010,1011,1012,1013,1014

1015,1016,1017,1018,1019,1020

1021,1022,1023,1024,1025,1026

1027,1028,1029,1030,1031,1032

1033,1034,1035,1036,1037,1038

1039,1040,1041,1042,1043,1044

1045,1046,1047,1048,1049,1050

1051,1052,1053,1054,1055,1056

1057,1058,1059,1060,1061,1062

1063,1064,1065,1066,1067,1068

1069,1070,1071,1072,1073,1074

1075,1076,1077,1078,1079,1080

1081,1082,1083,1084,1085,1086

1087,1088,1089,1090,1091,1092

1093,1094,1095,1096,1097,1098

1099,1100,1101,1102,1103,1104

1105,1106,1107,1108,1109,1110

1111,1112,1113,1114,1115,1116

1117,1118,1119,1120,1121,1122

1123,1124,1125,1126,1127,1128

1129,1130,1131,1132,1133,1134

1135,1136,1137,1138,1139,1140

1141,1142,1143,1144,1145,1146

1147,1148,1149,1150,1151,1152

1153,1154,1155,1156,1157,1158

1159,1160,1161,1162,1163,1164

1165,1166,1167,1168,1169,1170

1171,1172

 

 25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

933. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

22/06/2018

/ Page Numbers:

851,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 22 June 2018 09:36

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: FW: LBE v Cordell -bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments:   LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 1.pdf

LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 2.pdf

Dear Trishna Kerai

Please see attached documents that were sent from Enfield Council yesterday the 21/06/2018, sent to my email at 17:40 which I did not see till this morning.

They say they have put a hard copy in the post to me as of, yet nothing has come.

They have not done anything of the order of 12/06/2018 we have had no dates for Simon to go see any doctors, yet on the order it states everything was meant to be done by the 13/06/2018, but yet the court order is dated the 12/06/2018

The only reason I got the order is I called the court 3 times 2 of them times I was told nothing was on the system and that it can take 2 weeks for us to get the order, the last call on the 15/06/2018 on the I spoke with Paul a member of court staff he said he did not know why I did not have the order and sent it in the post to me so I got that on the 19/06/2018 and I called Kiran.

I said to Kiran I will do a write-up over the next few days and send it to give a sort of timeline things happened.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 21 June 2018 17:40

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of the hearing bundle, for your attention. A hardcopy has also been sent to you by Post.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

852,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

853,

IN THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT  

CLAIM NO: E00ED049

BETWEEN:

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

-and-

MR. SIMON CORDELL

Claimant

Defendant

BUNDLE FOR THE HEARING OF 26.06.2018

--

854,855,856,857,858

859,860,861,862,863,864

865,866,867,868,869,870

871,872,873,874,875,876

877,878,879,880,881,882

883,884,885,886,887,888

889,890,891,892,893,894

895,896,897,898,899,900

901,902,903,904,905,906

907,908,909,910,911,912

913,914,915,916,917,918

919,920,921,922,923,924

925,926,927,928,929,930

931,932,933,934,935,936

937,938,939,940,941,942

943,944,945,946,947,948

949,950,951,952,953,954

955,956,957,958,959,960

961,962,963,964,965,966

967,968,969,970,971,972

973,974,975,976,977,978

979,980,981,982,983,984

985,986,987,988,989,990

991,992,993,994,995,996

997,998,999,1000,1001,1002

1003,1004,1005,1006,1007,1008

1009,1010,1011,1012,1013,1014

1015,1016,1017,1018,1019,1020

1021,1022,1023,1024,1025,1026

1027,1028,1029,1030,1031,1032

1033,1034,1035,1036,1037,1038

1039,1040,1041,1042,1043,1044

1045,1046,1047,1048,1049,1050

1051,1052,1053,1054,1055,1056

1057,1058,1059,1060,1061,1062

1063,1064,1065,1066,1067,1068

1069,1070,1071,1072,1073,1074

1075,1076,1077,1078,1079,1080

1081,1082,1083,1084,1085,1086

1087,1088,1089,1090,1091,1092

1093,1094,1095,1096,1097,1098

1099,1100,1101,1102,1103,1104

1105,1106,1107,1108,1109,1110

1111,1112,1113,1114,1115,1116

1117,1118,1119,1120,1121,1122

1123,1124,1125,1126,1127,1128

1129,1130,1131,1132,1133,1134

1135,1136,1137,1138,1139,1140

1141,1142,1143,1144,1145,1146

1147,1148,1149,1150,1151,1152

1153,1154,1155,1156,1157,1158

1159,1160,1161,1162,1163,1164

1165,1166,1167,1168,1169,1170

1171,1172

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Mother LBE Please fiur attention 24-06-2018 -09-49

24/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1173,1174,1175,1176

1177,1178,1179,1180,1181,1182

1183,1184,1185,1186,1187,1188

1189,1190,1191,1192,1193,1194

1195,1196,1197,1198,1199,1200

1201,1202,1203,1204,1205,1206

1207,1208,1209,1210,1211,1212

1213,1214,1215,1216,1217,1218

1219,1220,1221,1222,1223,1224

1225,1226,1227,1228,1229,1230

1231,1232,1233,1234,1235,1236

1237,1238,1239,1240,1241,1242

1243,1244,1245,1246,1247,1248

1249,1250,1251,1252,1253,1254

1255,1256,1257,1258,1259,1260

1261,1262,1263,1264,1265,1266

1267,1268,1269,1270,1271,1272

1273,1274,1275,1276,1277,1278

1279,1280,1281,1282,1283,1284

1285,1286,1287,1288,1289,1290

1291,1292,1293,1294,1295,1296

1297,1298,1299,1300,1301,1302

1303,1304,1305,1306,1307,1308

1309,1310,1311,1312,1313,1314

1315,1316,1317,1318,1319,1320

1321,1322,1323,1324,1325,1326

1327,1328,1329,1330,1331,1332

1333,1334,1335,1336,1337,1338

1339,1340,1341,1342,1343,1344

1345,1346,1347,1348,1349,1350

1351,1352,1353,1354,1355,1356

1357,1358,1359,1360,1361,1362

1363,1364,1365,1366,1367,1368

1369,1370,1371,1372,1373,1374

1375,1376,1377,1378,1379,1380

1381,1382,1383,1384,1385,1386

1387,1388,1389,1390,1391,1392

1393,1394,1395,1396,1397,1398

1399,1400,1401,1402,1403,1404

1405,1406,1407,1408,1409,1410

1411,1412,1413,1414,1415,1416

1417,1418,1419,1420,1421,1422

1423,1424,1425,1426,1427,1428

1429,1430,1431,1432,1433,1434

1435,1436,1437,1438,1439,1440

1441,1442,1443,1444,1445,1446

1447,1448,1449,1450,1451,1452

1453,1454,1455,1456,1457,1458

1459,1460,1461,1462,1463,1464

1465,1466,1467,1468,1469,1470

1471,1472,1473,1474,1475,1476

1477,1478,1479,1480,1481,1482

1483,1484,1485,1486,1487,1488

1489,1490,1491,1492,1493

 

26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Mother LBE Please fiur attention 24-06-2018 -09-49

24/06/2018

/ Page Numbers:

1173,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/06/2018 09:49:20 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 1.pdf

LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 2.pdf

Simon here

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo <Lidmilla.lYavoo@enrield.gov.uk>

Date: 21 June 2018 at 17:40:10 BST

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine3 2@.blueyonder. co.uk>

Subject: LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of the hearing bundle, for your attention. A hardcopy has also been sent to you by Post.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1174,

IN THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT  

CLAIM NO: E00ED049

BETWEEN:

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

-and-

MR. SIMON CORDELL

Claimant

Defendant

BUNDLE FOR THE HEARING OF 26.06.2018

--

1175,1176,

1177,1178,1179,1180,1181,1182

1183,1184,1185,1186,1187,1188

1189,1190,1191,1192,1193,1194

1195,1196,1197,1198,1199,1200

1201,1202,1203,1204,1205,1206

1207,1208,1209,1210,1211,1212

1213,1214,1215,1216,1217,1218

1219,1220,1221,1222,1223,1224

1225,1226,1227,1228,1229,1230

1231,1232,1233,1234,1235,1236

1237,1238,1239,1240,1241,1242

1243,1244,1245,1246,1247,1248

1249,1250,1251,1252,1253,1254

1255,1256,1257,1258,1259,1260

1261,1262,1263,1264,1265,1266

1267,1268,1269,1270,1271,1272

1273,1274,1275,1276,1277,1278

1279,1280,1281,1282,1283,1284

1285,1286,1287,1288,1289,1290

1291,1292,1293,1294,1295,1296

1297,1298,1299,1300,1301,1302

1303,1304,1305,1306,1307,1308

1309,1310,1311,1312,1313,1314

1315,1316,1317,1318,1319,1320

1321,1322,1323,1324,1325,1326

1327,1328,1329,1330,1331,1332

1333,1334,1335,1336,1337,1338

1339,1340,1341,1342,1343,1344

1345,1346,1347,1348,1349,1350

1351,1352,1353,1354,1355,1356

1357,1358,1359,1360,1361,1362

1363,1364,1365,1366,1367,1368

1369,1370,1371,1372,1373,1374

1375,1376,1377,1378,1379,1380

1381,1382,1383,1384,1385,1386

1387,1388,1389,1390,1391,1392

1393,1394,1395,1396,1397,1398

1399,1400,1401,1402,1403,1404

1405,1406,1407,1408,1409,1410

1411,1412,1413,1414,1415,1416

1417,1418,1419,1420,1421,1422

1423,1424,1425,1426,1427,1428

1429,1430,1431,1432,1433,1434

1435,1436,1437,1438,1439,1440

1441,1442,1443,1444,1445,1446

1447,1448,1449,1450,1451,1452

1453,1454,1455,1456,1457,1458

1459,1460,1461,1462,1463,1464

1465,1466,1467,1468,1469,1470

1471,1472,1473,1474,1475,1476

1477,1478,1479,1480,1481,1482

1483,1484,1485,1486,1487,1488

1489,1490,1491,1492,1493

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

cPanel Hosting -1-4731 25-06-2018 12-51

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1494,1495

 

 27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

cPanel Hosting -1-4731 25-06-2018 12-51

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1494,1495

--

1494,

From: cPanel Hosting <cpanelsupport@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 25/06/2018 12:50:58 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your website hosting is ready.

24/7 support: 020 70841™

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 374

Your hosting account is ready. It’s time to build your website.

Building the site yourself? Upload your files.

If you have a lot of content, use your IP address, username, and password to connect an FTP program.

If you prefer to upload individual files, look for Files > File Manager on your hosting dashboard. Browse your computer for files and upload them directly.

WordPress?

Look for the WordPress icon in the Building Tools section of your dashboard.

If you have any questions or comments, our specially trained hosting experts are standing by around the clock. Give them a call at 020 70

1495,

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4729 25-06-2018 11-46

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1496,1497

 

 28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4729 25-06-2018 11-46

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1496,1497

--

1496,

From:  GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 25/06/2018 11:45:55 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell, thank you for your order.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

Thanks for your order, Simon.

Here's your confirmation for order number 1328802991. Review your receipt and get started using your products.

Order Number: 1328802991

Product

Quantity

Term

Price

Economy Linux Hosting with cPanel

1 Plan

1 Year

Ł47.88

Office 365 Starter Email

1 User

1 Year

Ł0.00

 

Subtotal:

Tax:

 

Ł47.88

Ł9.58

 

Total:

 

Ł57.46

View Full Receipt

Access All Products

NOTE: Your purchase includes enrolment in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part. If you do not wish to continue automatic renewal service, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

1497,

Start Shopping

Activate your products today.

You have new products or services in your account waiting to be activated. You've paid for them - now put them to work.

Get Started

[1]Offer good towards new product purchases only and cannot be used on product renewals. Cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer, sale, discount, or promotion. Not applicable to ICANN fees, taxes, transfers, premium domains, premium templates, cloud server plans, WP Premium Support services, any marketing or design services performed by our Professional Web Services team, gift cards or Trademark Holders/Priority Pre-registration or pre-registration fees. After the initial purchase term, discounted products will renew at the then-current renewal list price. Offer may be changed without notice.

Prices are current as of 25/06/2018 and may be changed without notice.

By using these products, you agree that you are bound by the Universal Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Learn more about our Refund Policy.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4730 25-06-2018 12-27

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1498

 

 29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4730 25-06-2018 12-27

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1498

--

1498,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 25/06/2018 12:26:35 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your domain contact info was updated.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 2.

Mother LBE Please fiur attention 25-06-2018 -05-27

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1499,1500

1501,1502,1503,1504,1505,1506

1507,1508,1509,1510,1511,1512

1513,1514,1515,1516,1517,1518

1519,1520,1521,1522,1523,1524

1525,1526,1527,1528,1529,1530

1531,1532,1533,1534,1535,1536

1537,1538,1539,1540,1541,1542

1543,1544,1545,1546,1547,1548

1549,1550,1551,1552,1553,1554

1555,1556,1557,1558,1559,1560

1561,1562,1563,1564,1565,1566

1567,1568,1569,1570,1571,1572

1573,1574,1575,1576,1577,1578

1579,1580,1581,1582,1583,1584

1585,1586,1587,1588,1589,1590

1591,1592,1593,1594,1595,1596

1597,1598,1599,1600,1601,1602

1603,1604,1605,1606,1607,1608

1609,1610,1611,1612,1613,1614

1615,1616,1617,1618,1619,1620

1621,1622,1623,1624,1625,1626

1627,1628,1629,1630,1631,1632

1633,1634,1635,1636,1637,1638

1639,1640,1641,1642,1643,1644

1645,1646,1647,1648,1649,1650

1651,1652,1653,1654,1655,1656

1657,1658,1659,1660,1661,1662

1663,1664,1665,1666,1667,1668

1669,1670,1671,1672,1673,1674

1675,1676,1677,1678,1679,1680

1681,1682,1683,1684,1685,1686

1687,1688,1689,1690,1691,1692

1693,1694,1695,1696,1697,1698

1699,1700,1701,1702,1703,1704

1705,1706,1707,1708,1709,1710

1711,1712,1713,1714,1715,1716

1717,1718,1719,1720,1721,1722

1723,1724,1725,1726,1727,1728

1729,1730,1731,1732,1733,1734

1735,1736,1737,1738,1739,1740

1741,1742,1743,1744,1745,1746

1747,1748,1749,1750,1751,1752

1753,1754,1755,1756,1757,1758

1759,1760,1761,1762,1763,1764

1765,1766,1767,1768,1769,1770

1771,1772,1773,1774,1775,1776

1777,1778,1779,1780,1781,1782

1783,1784,1785,1786,1787,1788

1789,1790,1791,1792,1793,1794

1795,1796,1797,1798,1799,1800

1801,1802,1803,1804,1805,1806

1807,1808,1809,1810,1811,1812

1813,1814,1815,1816,1817,1818

1819         

 

 30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 2.

Mother LBE Please fiur attention 25-06-2018 -05-27

25/06/2018

/ Page Numbers:

1499,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 25/06/2018 05:27:28 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: LBE v Cordell – bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL] test

Attachments: LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 1.pdf

LBE v Cordell Bundle Part 2.pdf

test

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 21 June 2018 17:40

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: LBE v Cordell - bundle [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of the hearing bundle, for your attention. A hardcopy has also been sent to you by Post.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Campaign

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1500,

Defendant's conduct we would seek permission to have service of the application dispensed with.

The Judge read the application and the Claimant's witness statements and agreed that service could not be affected and as a result agreed to have all 3 applications served by email upon the Defendant's mother Ms Lorraine Cordell, pursuant to CPR 81.10(5)(b).         '

Therefore what is missing from the Court order is an additional paragraph which gives the Claimant permission to serve BOTH committal applications (05.02.2018 and 20.04.2018) by email on Mrs Cordell. Such position was accepted by the Judge at the hearing but unfortunately is not reflected in the Court Order. This was requested in the application notice and agreed by the Judge, we would therefore like the order to be amended accordingly.

We would be grateful if this letter could be passed on to the Judge to have the order amended accordingly. Please note that the next hearing on this case is listed on 30 May 2018, 2pm and we would be grateful if the order could be amended as a matter of urgency.

faithfully,

lyavoo

Lawyer

For the Director of Law and Governance

1501,

1502,

1503,

1504,

1505,

1506,

1507,

1508,

1509,

1510,

1511,

1512,

1513,

1514,1515,1516,1517,1518

1519,1520,1521,1522,1523,1524

1525,1526,1527,1528,1529,1530

1531,1532,1533,1534,1535,1536

1537,1538,1539,1540,1541,1542

1543,1544,1545,1546,1547,1548

1549,1550,1551,1552,1553,1554

1555,1556,1557,1558,1559,1560

1561,1562,1563,1564,1565,1566

1567,1568,1569,1570,1571,1572

1573,1574,1575,1576,1577,1578

1579,1580,1581,1582,1583,1584

1585,1586,1587,1588,1589,1590

1591,1592,1593,1594,1595,1596

1597,1598,1599,1600,1601,1602

1603,1604,1605,1606,1607,1608

1609,1610,1611,1612,1613,1614

1615,1616,1617,1618,1619,1620

1621,1622,1623,1624,1625,1626

1627,1628,1629,1630,1631,1632

1633,1634,1635,1636,1637,1638

1639,1640,1641,1642,1643,1644

1645,1646,1647,1648,1649,1650

1651,1652,1653,1654,1655,1656

1657,1658,1659,1660,1661,1662

1663,1664,1665,1666,1667,1668

1669,1670,1671,1672,1673,1674

1675,1676,1677,1678,1679,1680

1681,1682,1683,1684,1685,1686

1687,1688,1689,1690,1691,1692

1693,1694,1695,1696,1697,1698

1699,1700,1701,1702,1703,1704

1705,1706,1707,1708,1709,1710

1711,1712,1713,1714,1715,1716

1717,1718,1719,1720,1721,1722

1723,1724,1725,1726,1727,1728

1729,1730,1731,1732,1733,1734

1735,1736,1737,1738,1739,1740

1741,1742,1743,1744,1745,1746

1747,1748,1749,1750,1751,1752

1753,1754,1755,1756,1757,1758

1759,1760,1761,1762,1763,1764

1765,1766,1767,1768,1769,1770

1771,1772,1773,1774,1775,1776

1777,1778,1779,1780,1781,1782

1783,1784,1785,1786,1787,1788

1789,1790,1791,1792,1793,1794

1795,1796,1797,1798,1799,1800

1801,1802,1803,1804,1805,1806

1807,1808,1809,1810,1811,1812

1813,1814,1815,1816,1817,1818

1819   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

940. Trishna Kerai_(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order

26/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1820,1821,1822

 

 31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

940. Trishna Kerai_(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order

26/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1820,1821,1822

--

1820,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmiNersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 26 June 2018 15:18

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order.docx

Importance:   High

Dear Lorraine,

Further to our telephone conversation, please find attached the Order I was referring to.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

1821,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Draft Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON  

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant, Solicitor for the Defendant having recently been instructed and the Defendant not attending

UPON agreeing that the report of Angela Hague, Manager of Enfield Assessment Services produced following an assessment held with the Defendant on 19 June 2018, does not deal with the Defendant’s capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018

UPON the Claimant agreeing to refer the Defendant to a Consultant Psychiatrist so a mental capacity assessment could be commissioned

UPON the parties agreeing to an adjournment giving the circumstances

AND UPON the Defendant’s newly instructed solicitors confirming that it will accept service of the order on behalf of the Defendant

IT IS ORDERED

1.      By 4pm on 10 July 2018 the Defendant shall undergo a mental capacity assessment by a Consultant Psychiatrist at an appointment to be arranged of which the Defendant shall be given at least 24 hours’ notice and a report shall be prepared in relation to the

1822,

Defendant’s capacity to litigate and capacity to understand the meaning of the interim injunction dated 09 January 2018 and that report shall be filed at court and served on each party to the litigation.

2.      The Claimant shall, if so advised, file and serve a witness statement appending any relevant documentation dealing with the question of the Defendant’s capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the meaning of the interim injunction dated 09 January 2018 by 4pm on 17 July 2018.

3.      The matter will be re-listed urgently on the first open date after 28 days with a time estimate of one hour to consider further directions. The matter to be reserved to District Judge Dias.

4.      No earlier than seven and no later than three days prior to the relisted hearing the Claimant shall file and serve a paginated bundle of documents for use at the hearing.

5.      This order will be deemed served on the Defendant if the Claimant emails a copy of the order to the Defendant’s solicitor.

6.      The costs of today’s hearing and the costs of the hearing dated 30th May 2018 may be in the case.

Dated: 26 June 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

113 Trishna@stuartmillersoliS1CR3265929V) RE Simon Cordell

26/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1823,1824

 

 

32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

113 Trishna@stuartmillersoliS1CR3265929V) RE Simon Cordell

26/06/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1823,1824

--

1823,

From: Trishna Kerai <Tnshna@stuartmiNersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 26 June 2018 14:12

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) RE: Simon Cordell

Importance: High

Dear Lorraine,

That's great news.

Enough time for us to apply for legal aid and have that arranged.

I doubt that they will arrange to assess him within the next 3 days, but if any issue, you can give Simon my number and ask him to contact me whilst you're away.

Have a good trip.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 26 June 2018 12:47

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

1824,

Dear Trishna Kerai

Just would like to say thank you for all your help in this matter.

Just got home from the court it has been adjourned for 28 days so things can be done one of them is the assessment of my son.

I am going away today and will be back on the 30th June, so I hope that the council does not arrange a date for this week for the assessment to take place.

Lorraine

 

 

 

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

944. Trishna Kerai _(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment Service

02/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1825,1826,1827,1828

 

 33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

944. Trishna Kerai _(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment Service

02/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1825,1826,1827,1828

--

1825,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmiNersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 02 July 2018 09:50

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment Service

Attachments: Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment-Service.pdf

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

1826,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V)

Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment Service->

Report from Angela Hague, Enfield Assessment Service.pdf

Entries by Angela Hague - Manager, Enfield Assessment Service

Originator: HAGUE, Angela 15 Jun 2018,14:25 [Nursing]

Telephone call from Simon, long conversation, asking about his appointment he has been offered for next week, who made the referral and why. Same discussed and remembers that they had already spoken with lain Williams. Difficult to follow his conversation and to interrupt. Says he has been on a 10pm curfew for the past 9 years afraid to leave his house as he feels the police have set this up. Mistaken identity reports he has read all give descriptions of different people, 4 in total, not him. All happened because of a party on Lincoln Road, he was not involved but happened because people were disturbed by the noise. Because of the curfew says he lost his relationship with his first love has or had a second girlfriend. Said he has been dialling 999 they get 15,000 calls per day; their time is going backwards on their records and do not have a RUN number.

Says he does not have a mental illness no previous contact with services has been good. Sectioned in the past human rights broken, people coming into his house, says he was giving them access. Has tape recordings and LinkedIn, Facebook pages of all involved, has set up a web page. Discussed that they reason I had contacted him was to offer an appointment next Tuesday 11am, asking why we are coming, offered to see at Lucas House instead he declined this says prefers to be seen at home. Asked why I am not treating with dignity and respect that he has told me all about my colleagues and their treatment of him and I have not apologised to him and investigating. Discussed that he has the right to compliant which he says he already has and knows how to make a complaint, reported that he was taping our conversation and was making a digital copy which he has made of most interactions with people. He agreed to a home visit next week. The home visit is with EIS Amal Pomphrey.

Originator: HAGUE, Angela 19 Jun 2018,13:57 [Nursing]

Telephone call from Simon's mother Lorraine Cordell. Sounded tearful on the phone, reported that she has spoken with Simon and he told her that we went to see him today, myself and Amal. Said that he told her that the appointment went well and that we had told him there is nothing mentally wrong with him, that he does not need psychiatric services and is well. Says she is finding it distressing, very worried about her son as she believes, and everyone else can see that her son is ill. Said he is struggling to cope, not leaving the house, feels persecuted by his neighbours. Not managing the court case well. Believes that the has lost trust in services and feels he needs to build trust with professionals again.

Reported that when she was in court the information that was given was that her son had PTSD and was discharged form services, believes it was inaccurate and did not know where the information came from, though perhaps it was lain Williams as he had around the same time called to speak to Simon about his referral.

Discussed that we would need Simons consent to discuss his case. Reported that her mother suffered with schizophrenia and she has a lot of experience around people who have mental

1827,

illness not believing they have a mental health problem and don't require treatment. Says she is happy to encourage her son to engage with services as far as possible.

Originator: HAGUE; Angela 19Jun 2018, 14:33 [Nursing]

Home visit today as arranged with Amal Pomphrey from EIS. Client previously under EIS from 2015 discharged in January this year, difficult to engage. History well known so not repeated.

Simon was friendly and welcoming into his home. Put his pet dog outside in the garden, visible through patio doors. Dog appeared in good health though Simon reported that his dog is stressed about his neighbours the police and mental health services to the point it has chewed some of the fur off his front paws.

Simon stood for some time keen to talk about the evidence he has gathered against the police, and local authority, has taped and logged everything on a website. Showed his website says not live as yet, all he has to do is click a button and it will show how he has been unfairly treated by the local authority and police. Website and all written video and audio recordings linked. Showed a couple of examples CCTV inside his flat, conversation with ASBO team and written documents. Also showed us paper files that the has maintained in large ring binders, containing copies of e-mails and all correspondence. Informed us that he tapes all conversations he has with health, local authority, and police staff. Has CCTV cameras placed internally and externally around his flat.

Spoke of how his issues began many years ago trouble with the police over holding illegal parties. Reported that he is currently not going out feels afraid. No restrictions placed on him regarding going out other than not allowed in Industrial areas or 24-hour venues such as Mac Donalds or Tescos. Reported recently in court with regards to his neighbour, representing himself does not feel he needs a solicitor. Recommendation is that he has an assessment with a psychiatrist. However said he will not attend as the letter has not been properly dated and stamped and therefore believes he is not bound by it.

Mental state:

Simon was casually dressed, his hygiene appeared fair. He maintained good eye contact and rapport. His speech appeared slightly pressured difficult to interrupt but not irritable when interrupted.

Grandiose ideas around his intelligence, says he is a millionaire property from wealthy relatives who have deceased, successful businesses, earning hundreds and thousands of pounds. Paranoid about his neighbours, believes they and others have spread information that he may have had herpes. Paranoid delusions believe his neighbours are deliberately following him from room to room banging on his ceiling. Believes they want to kill him. Though he did not express any thoughts of wanting to harm anyone. Believes he is being paid to look after vulnerable people in poor situations.

1828,

Appears to be a mood element to his condition pressured speech grandiose, tangential jumping from topic to topic. However reported that at times his mood can be depressed and upset by his neighbours. On one occasion he drank some liquid in an attempt to poison himself, found by mother and taken to A&E discharged. Denied having any current suicidal ideation or thought to harm himself.

There was no evidence of any hallucinations. Personality appears to be intact.

Simon appears to lack insight, asked if he believes he has a mental health condition denied this said he has never taken medication as he does not believe he has any mental health problem to require medication.

Impression:

37-year-old male appears to have had a difficult childhood spoke about scars on his legs from beatings form his father. Wants to protect children, and vulnerable people believes it is his duty. 2015 diagnosed with psychotic illness and referred to EIS does not appear to have engaged with treatment offered, previously prescribed Olanzapine. Does not appear to require crisis team or mental health act assessment at this time. But would benefit from assertive follow up in the community. EIS state that has gone beyond EIS three-year treatment period.

Plan therefore to refer to North Locality Team Locality Team. E-mail sent.

EIS agree to liaise and advise court regarding the request for a report.

Closed to EIS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4732 05-07-2018 18-31

05/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1829

 

 34.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4732 05-07-2018 18-31

05/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1829

--

1829,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 05/07/2018 06:31:05 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Thanks for calling. Let us know how Kris did.

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 374

Your feedback makes us better.

Thanks for calling GoDaddy Customer Support.

We're all about providing first-class care — it's our top priority. Please fill out this quick survey to let us know how Kris did.

Enter gdbb1005b at checkout or mention it the next time you call.

[1]See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260, USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4733 05-07-2018 20-31

05/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1830

 

 35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4733 05-07-2018 20-31

05/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1830

--

1830,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 05/07/2018 08:31:24 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Status Alert: Domain Change Notification

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

Domain status notification.

This notification is generated automatically as a service to you.

We have received a request that the name servers be changed for the following domain name(s):

TOOSMOOTH.CO.UK

Manage Domain Name Servers

You do not need to respond to this email. If, however, you think this change may have been made in error or fraudulently, please contact us within 15 days.

If you need to address this matter, or in any way need further assistance or technical support, call 24/7 Support at 020 7084 1810. We appreciate your business!

[1]Offer good towards new product purchases only and cannot be used on product renewals. Cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer, sale, discount, or promotion. Not applicable to ICANN fees, taxes, transfers, premium domains, premium templates, cloud server plans, WP Premium Support services, any marketing or design services performed by our Professional Web Services team, gift cards or Trademark Holders/Priority Pre-registration or pre-registration fees. After the initial purchase term, discounted products will renew at the then-current renewal list price. Offer may be changed without notice.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

949. Trishna Kerai _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

10/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840

 

 

36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

949. Trishna Kerai _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

10/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1831,1832,1833,1834,1835,1836,1837,1838,1839,1840

--

1831,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Sent: 10 July 2018 15:05

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Letter to Stuart Miller Solicitors 10.7.2018 pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment.pdf

report 10.7.2018.pdf

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 July 2018 15:05

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Trishna,

Please see attached a copy of our correspondence to the Court enclosing the assessment report of Dr Dhinakaran.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services

1832,

Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1833,

1834,

1835,

1836,

Psychiatric Report on Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

1.      Introduction

This report is prepared at the request of London Borough of Enfield, Antisocial Behaviour Team following directions from the Edmonton County Court to undertake an assessment on Mr Cordell. My instructions were received in a letter dated 5 July 2018 and outlined as below:

(1)      Whether the defendant has the mental capacity to litigate and give instructions in his defence.

(2)     Whether the defendant understands the terms of the injunction order dated 9 January 2018.

2.      Details of current proceedings

The current proceedings relate to an interim injunction order issued against Mr Cordell, at the Edmonton County Court on 9 January 2018. This followed numerous complaints from neighbours about Mr Cordell’s acts of harassment and antisocial behaviour. However it has been reported that Mr Cordell has continued to breach the order. It has been reported that a neighbour has been assaulted, harassed, and has received threats from Mr Cordell. He has also made threats towards certain council employees. The local authority issued applications for committal due to Mr Cordell’s breach of the injunction, however the applications could not be considered due to concerns about his mental capacity.

3.      Sources of information

3.1  I was provided with the following information to aid in the assessment:

1. Claim form for an injunction with supporting documents

2. Order for an injunction dated 9.1.2018

3. Report of Angela Hague from the Enfield Assessment Team

4. Court order made by DJ Dias, Edmonton County Court at the hearing on 30.05.2018 and 26.6.2018.

1

1837,

3.2  I assessed Mr Cordell on 6 July 2018, at his flat 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ, accompanied by two officers from the Enfield Housing Team. I can confirm that prior to my assessment; I explained to Mr Cordell my role and the purpose of my visit. I also explained to him that I was acting on the instructions of the Enfield Council at the directions of the Court.

4.      Assessment of Mr Cordell

4.1  Mr Cordell spoke to us for a few minutes outside his flat and upon explaining the purpose of the visit, he allowed us into his flat. He agreed to tie the dog outside in the garden. The flat although disorganised with papers and folders scattered around, did not appear overly cluttered. Mr Cordell presented as a young, slim built, mixed race male with reasonable hygiene. We explained our roles and the purpose of our visit. Mr Cordell informed us that he was recording our conversation.

4.2  Mr Cordell seemed very keen and enthusiastic to talk and we had to explain the reason of our visit several times to maintain some structure and focus. He maintained appropriate eye contact and we managed to establish a rapport after a while. His demeanour was polite and appropriate. There was evidence of psychomotor agitation as he appeared generally restless and overactive. Mr Cordell described his appetite and sleep pattern as fine. Objectively I would regard his mood as labile, rapidly fluctuating between euthymia (normal mood) and irritability.

4.3  Mr Cordell’s comprehension of information presented to him appeared adequate. He was able to understand the queries presented to him. His responses however were very elaborate and circumstantial. His speech was very pressured, difficult to interrupt and at times frankly rambling. There was clear evidence of thought disorder with flight of ideas (rapid shift of ideas with some superficial apparent connection). Mr Cordell struggled to sustain his goal of thinking as he often derailed to themes of relevance to him, digressing away from the topic of discussion. It was very difficult to obtain a direct response to the queries posed to him and follow his thread of conversation.

4.4  Mr Cordell’s thought content was replete with various delusional beliefs of persecutory and grandiose nature. He spoke of an elaborate conspiracy which involves the Enfield local authority and the metropolitan police, dating back since 2013, when he claimed that he was arrested for putting up a gazebo in his garden which led to him being barred from visiting

2

1838,

places in central London and placed on a curfew from 10 pm. Mr Cordell informed that he followed these restrictions imposed on him for about a year and returned to Court and won the case. Mr Cordell then went on to talk about Sally Gilcrest, the legal executive for the metropolitan police who he alleged set him up for a million pounds and brought on an ASBO against him, which ended with him being imposed on a nine-year curfew. Mr Cordell stated that Sally Gilcrest in conjunction with the borough commander Jane Johnson and the community officer started spreading rumours that he was “suffering from herpes and has hurt a woman” which the neighbours in his block became aware of and started sending him messages addressing him as “you black boy”. Mr Cordell implied that Sally Gilchrest colluded with the neighbours as she had a vested interest in getting him out of this country. He stated that the neighbours above him deliberately bang on his ceiling and have also subject him to other forms of harassment since 2014. Mr Cordell implied that the neighbours were responsible for the miscarriage suffered by his then girlfriend and also held them responsible for the separation from his previous girlfriends. He further stated that between 2014 and 2016, his mother has made numerous complaints to the council regarding the harassment he has been subject to and he has won a criminal case against his neighbours

4.5  Mr Cordell then went on to elaborate his grievance against Lemmy, the officer who works for the Enfield local authority. He claimed that he received an email from Lemmy threatening that he would obtain a possession order against him and asking him to attend a meeting. He then stated that the ASBO that was served against him was not valid due to lack of signature. Therefore Lemmy built a false case against him by using “lower grade cases" to pursue a possession order and subsequently an injunction order, by falsifying statements and using “statements from dead cases”. According to Mr Cordell this was declared as invalid by a Judge, however Lemmy has continued to produce false orders against him in the way of a second injunction, which he claimed has never been served on him. Mr Cordell described this as “targeted malice" by Lemmy as he has used the injunction as a smoke screen to cover up the ASBO by providing false statements and witnesses.

4.6  In addition, Mr Cordell also described a number of grandiose beliefs, stating that he was building a constitution on CIC, which he explained to be Community Interest Company. He also spoke of a number of other businesses. He was keen to show us the various documents, emails, and recordings he has accrued as evidence to support his case.

3

1839,

5.      Opinion and Recommendations

Mr Cordell is a resident at the Enfield borough, who was served an injunction on 9 January 2018, following numerous complaints by his neighbours of antisocial behaviour and harassment. Despite this, Mr Cordell has continued to breach the order with further incidents of harassment, threats, and assault against the neighbours. In addition, it has been reported that some council employees have also received threats from Mr Cordell. According to available information, Mr Cordell has had sporadic contact with the mental health services and has been recently assessed by the Enfield Mental Health Assessment Service. During my assessment, Mr Cordell was preoccupied with a number of persecutory and grandiose delusional beliefs. In addition, he also presented with other symptoms such as labile mood, pressured speech, overactivity, and flight of ideas. In my view, Mr Cordell’s current presentation is consistent with Schizoaffective Disorder, which is recognised as an enduring mental illness.

I have received specific instructions to address the following issues:

1.      Whether Mr Cordell has the mental capacity to litigate and give instructions to his defence?

As highlighted above, Mr Cordell’s mental state is replete with complex persecutory delusional belief system. During my assessment, Mr Cordell was convinced that the local authority and the police have been colluding alongside his neighbours to pursue false claims and allegations against him. In his view, the possession order and the injunction order were based on false statements, created against him and this did not stand up in Court and therefore an injunction was not issued against him. In my view, although there are no significant deficits in Mr Cordell’s comprehension or retention of information, his ability to process information relevant to the current proceedings is likely to be influenced by his underlying delusional beliefs. During my interaction, it was evident that his interpretation of events and actions of others are influenced by his abnormal beliefs. Mr Cordell perceives himself as a victim and is aggrieved by the injustice carried out against him. In my view,

Mr Cordell’s ability to weigh the information relevant to the current proceedings is impaired due to his tendency to misinterpret any information presented to him to fit into his entrenched persecutory delusional beliefs. Moreover Mr Cordell presents with significant thought disorder and it is unlikely that he will be able to give coherent instructions to the defence.

It is therefore my opinion that Mr Cordell lacks capacity to litigate and give appropriate instructions to the defence.

4

1840,

2.      Whether Mr Cordell understands the terms of the injunction order dated 9 January 2018?

Mr Cordell is currently suffering from symptoms of Schizoaffective Disorder and presents with florid psychotic symptoms. His thinking and behaviour are influenced by his underlying persecutory beliefs. Mr Cordell is convinced that the injunction order is a cover up by the local authority for the errors and mistakes of the ASBO and therefore did not stand up in Court. Mr Cordell is convinced that the injunction order has been falsified by certain individuals (particularly Lemmy possibly in conjunction with others). He therefore does not value the order, or the contents contained within it. In my opinion Mr Cordell’s capacity to process the information relevant to the order is again impacted by his delusional beliefs.

Dr Dhara Dinakaran, MBBS, MSc, MR C Psych

Consultant Psychiatrist

Approved under Section 12 (2) of MHA

08/07/2018

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.16 lorraine32@blueyonder.coassessment complaint [SEC=OFFI

13/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1841,1842

 

 37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.16 lorraine32@blueyonder.coassessment complaint [SEC=OFFI

13/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1841,1842

--

1841,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 13 July 2018 14:48

To: complaints and information

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell - assessment complaint [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Daniel

Thank you for the reply, I believe what you have been told is misleading, as the council are very aware everything is recorded our side.

I also notice you have only covered one issue that was spoke about when you called me after my brother called you, but I had a feeling that would happen.

I do understand that things are complexed as Enfield Council has only ever gone one sided and never heard or wanted to hear anything we had to say, this was clearly shown in the call when you stated we have not been able to talk to anyone regarding issues, but that is the way that Enfield Council wanted it they just wanted to believe what they wanted, but only hearing one side to everything is not correct as there is two sides to everything.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Sent from my iPhone

On 11 Jul 2018, at 14:25, complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Lorraine,

I am writing further to our recent telephone conversation about your son’s mental health assessment.

I have been provided with the following comments from the team handling the case:

On 30th May 2018, the Court ordered the Claimant (Enfield Council) to appoint a consultant psychiatrist to assess whether Mr Cordell has capacity to litigate. Before we arranged the appointment with the consultant psychiatrist, we sought approval from Mr Cordell's solicitors who were provided with the consultant's details and CV. The consultant was an independent consultant. The court does not appoint assessors. The solicitors did not oppose the proposed appointment and their consent was sought at all times, we also agreed the appointment with them including dates and times.

I can confirm that two council officers attended Mr Cordell's flat with the Consultant Psychiatrist at 9.30am on Friday 6th July 2018 and waited while the consultant assessed Mr Cordell. It was necessary to send the officers to ensure that the consultant was not at risk. Previously, on 3 July 2018, a previous consultant had met with Mr Cordell on her own to carry out an assessment but did not feel safe and had to leave without completing the assessment. The council officers were not part of the assessment and only attended the appointment to ensure that the consultant was not at risk.

I do understand from our conversation that you intend to pursue this matter further via solicitors.

Kind regards,

Daniel Ellis

Statutory Complaints Officer

Complaints & Access to Information Team London Borough of Enfield

1842,

Phone: 020 8379 2808

Email: daniel.eNis@enfield.gov.uk

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Classification: OFFICIAL

[Campaign]

https://www.england.nhs.uk

http://www.enfield.gov.uk    

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.     

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2.

Wix 15-07-2018 -15-07-2018 09-01

15/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1843

 

 38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2.

Wix 15-07-2018 -15-07-2018 09-01

15/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1843

--

1843,

From: Wix Team <newsletter@i.wix.com>

Sent time: 15/07/2018 09:01:28 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your Domain Contact Information Has Changed

If you can't see this e-mail, click here

Get social with us!

Your Domain Contact Information Has Changed

The contact information for your domain, horrificcorruption.com, has been changed. If you authorized these changes, there's nothing more you need to do. If you don't recognize this activity, please contact Support.

To prevent unauthorized or accidental transfers, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) regulations require that a 60-day lock be placed on all domains after they are registered or transferred, or their contact details have been changed. This means that you will not be able to transfer your domain until Sep 13, 2018. To learn more about ICANN's policy,

Visit the Help Centre or contact us.

Please do not reply to this email 500 Terry A Francois Blvd San Francisco, CA 94158 Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Inc.

View our privacy policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4734 17-07-2018 05-52

17/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1844,1845

 

 

39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4734 17-07-2018 05-52

17/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1844,1845

--

1844,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 17/07/2018 05:52:04 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your July account summary inside.

24/7 Support: 020 70

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 3748

July Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

Did you register a

co.uk

org.uk or

me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019. Learn more.

Thanks for your recent purchases. Review them here.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers.

Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

Domains

Important: Some of your domains expire soon. Renew them today. Update your domain settings

1845,

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

toosmooth.co.uk

Manage Your Domains

cPanel Hosting

Ł16.10 Ł5.99

Ł28.10 Ł0.99

Ł16.10 Ł3.10

See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

40.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

956. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] (2)

17/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1846,1847,1848

 

 

40.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

956. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] (2)

17/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1846,1847,1848

 

--

1846,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 17 July 2018 11:08

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Hi Trishna

I was just wondering if you got the below email, I sent it on Friday, and was wondering about tomorrow and if a new court date has been set.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Date: 13 July 2018 at 16:24:00 BST

To: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Subject: Re: LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Hi Trishna

Just wanted to ask I told Simon about coming to see you on the 18th at 13:00 and he asked if it can be done at his home address, I am not sure if you can do this but I would be there with him of you can. I said I would ask you.

Also is a date fixed yet for the next hearing at court as far as I know we have not got the real court letter yet with the new date.

Also have you got any of the emails from the council yet that was sent to the mental health and what the mental health replied to them

Regards

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 11 Jul 2018, at 11:36, Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Ludmilla,

Thank you for your email and providing me with the report.

Can you please confirm that this report will be used in the next hearing and NOT the previous one as I believe the previous one will have no precedent now?

Thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

1847,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 July 2018 15:05

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Trishna,

Please see attached a copy of our correspondence to the Court enclosing the assessment report of Dr Dhinakaran.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building

strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

1848,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2.

Mother Please find ament report. 20-07-2018 -05-32

20/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857

 

 41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 2.

Mother Please find ament report. 20-07-2018 -05-32

20/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1849,1850,1851,1852,1853,1854,1855,1856,1857

--

1849,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 20/07/2018 05:32:28 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report

image001.jpg

image002.jpg

image003.jpg

image004.jpg

image005.jpg

image006.png

image007.png

Letter to ECC attaching Dr

Attachments: Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Simon see email Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Date: 20 July 2018 at 16:28:13 BST

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon’s Assessment Report

Dear Lorraine,

Please find attached Simon's medical assessment report. Please note that this works in our favour as it will allow us to possibly get rid of the Injunction Order completely.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

1850,

1851,

1852,

Psychiatric Report on Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

1853,1854,1855,1856,1857,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

962. Trishna Kerai_(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Simon's Assessment Report

20/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865

 

42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

962. Trishna Kerai_(DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Simon's Assessment Report

20/07/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865

--

1858,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmiNersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 20 July 2018 16:28

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report

Attachments: Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Dear Lorraine,

Please find attached Simon's medical assessment report. Please note that this works in our favour as it will allow us to possibly get rid of the Injunction Order completely.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

1859,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V)

Simon's Assessment Report ->Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

ENFIELD

Connected

ENFIELD Council

Edmonton County Court DX 136686 Edmonton 3

Also by email Dear Sirs

Please reply to: Legal Services

PO Box 50

Civic Centre Silver Street

Enfield

EN1 3XA

E-mail: Ludmilla.lyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Phone: 0208 379 8323

DX: 90615

Enfield 1

Fax: 0208 379 6492

My Ref: LS/C/LI/155584

Your Ref:

Date: 10th July 2018

URGENT

Re: The London Borough of Enfield v Cordell Claim number: E00ED049- Edmonton County Court

· We write further to the Order made by District Judge Dias following the hearing on 26th June 2018.

· Paragraph 1 of the order states the following: ‘By 4pm on 10 July 2018 the Defendant shall undergo a mental capacity assessment by a Consultant Psychiatrist at an appointment to be arranged of which the Defendant shall be given at least 24 hours’ notice and a report shall be prepared in relation to the Defendant’s capacity to litigate and capacity to understand the meaning of the interim injunction dated 09 January 2018 and that report shall be filed at court and served on each party to the litigation’.

· We confirm that the Defendant was assessed by Dr Dhinakaran, a psychiatrist consultant on 5th July 2018. A copy of her assessment report is attached to this email and it confirms that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate/ understand the terms of the injunction order.

· The Claimant was also directed to file a witness statement in response to this assessment if so, advised by 10th July 2018. We confirm that the Claimant has no comments to make at this stage. We have asked the Defendant’s solicitors to contact the Enfield Assessment Mental Health team and instruct them to release the Defendant’s medical documents so the Claimant could consider them and make further comments. However we have had no confirmation from the Defendant’s solicitors as to whether the Defendant has provided the relevant consent and we therefore reserve the right to make further submissions until these documents are

Jeremy Chambers Director of Law & Governance

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver Street

Enfield EN13XY

EQUALITY

FRAMEWORK FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

www.enfield.gov.uk

EXCELLENT

If you need this document in another language or format, contact the service using the details above.

1860,

faithfully,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Lawyer

For the Director of Law and Governance

1861,

Psychiatric Report on Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

1862,1863,1864,1865,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4735 07-08-2018 13-50

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1866,1867

 

 43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4735 07-08-2018 13-50

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1866,1867

--

1866,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 07/08/2018 01:50:22 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

Your domains are about to auto-renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

Manage Your Renewals

If the credit card we have associated with each domain has expired or been closed, we may be unable to automatically renew your domain(s). To ensure your products are successfully renewed, please review, and update your credit card information, or if you wish to cancel automatic renewal, log in to My Account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 8 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. Active free products created in association with free credits from this domain registration will expire 1 year from the renewal of the domain name if they have been activated. Credits that have not been activated will expire and be removed at the time the domain renews. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

If you wish to cancel automatic renewal of your product(s), you can turn off this feature in your GoDaddy account.

1867,

Sales!

 

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

980. Ludmilla Iyavoo _FW_ London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearin2

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1868,1869,1870,1871,1872

1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878

1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884

1885,1886,1887,1888,1889,1890

1891,1892,1893,1894,1895,1896

1897,1898,1899,1900,1901

 

 44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

980. Ludmilla Iyavoo _FW_ London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearin2

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers:

1868,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 07 August 2018 18:03

To: Trishna Kerai

Cc: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: FW: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearing listed on 9th August 2018, 10am

Attachments: letter to ECC 07.08.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 - Continuation Sheet.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 -Continuation Sheet.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 -Continuation Sheet.pdf; Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

You will see that I have copied you and Mrs Cordell to my email to the Court, enclosing an application notice to appoint Mrs Cordell as Simon's litigation friend. Following the report produced by Dr Dhinakaran on 7th July 2018 which confirms Mr Cordell's lacks capacity to litigate, we believe that it will be reasonable that Mr Cordell be assisted by a litigation friend. Giving Lorraine Cordell's involvement in this case we are of the view that she will be the best person to be appointed as a litigation friend.

I have copied Mrs Cordell to this email correspondence as she's expected to be served and to respond to the application at the hearing. I will be grateful if you could seek instructions from Mr Cordell and let me know whether the application will be agreed or opposed. I would also like to have Mrs Cordell's position in response to the application ahead of the hearing.

I have asked that the application be dealt with by DJ Dias at the hearing on 9th August 2018, 10am.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 07 August 2018 17:47

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries

Cc: 'Trishna Kerai'; 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearing listed on 9th August 2018, 10am

Importance: High

1869,

Dear Sirs

Re: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049

Please find attached a copy of our correspondence with an application notice. We would like the application notice to be dealt with by DJ Dias at the hearing on Thursday 9th August 2018, 10am and we hope that it can be processed and placed on the Court's file as a matter of urgency.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1870,

1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,

1877,18781879,1880,1881,1882,

1883,18841885,1886,1887,1888,

1889,18901891,1892,1893,1894,

1895,18961897,1898,1899,1900,

1901

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

979. Ludmilla Lyavoo _London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearing li2

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1902

1903,1904,1905,1906,1907,1908

1909,1910,1911,1912,1913,1914

1915,1916,1917,1918,1919,1920

1921,1922,1923,1924,1925,1926

1927,1928,1929,1930,1931,1932

1933,1934,1935

 

 45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

979. Ludmilla Lyavoo _London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearing li2

07/08/2018

/ Page Numbers:

1902,

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 07 August 2018 17:48

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries

Cc: Trishna Kerai; Lorraine Cordell

Subject: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049 Extremely Urgent hearing listed on 9th August

2018, 10am

Attachments: letter to ECC 07.08.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 -Continuation Sheet.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 -Continuation Sheet.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Application Notice LBE v Cordell 07082018 2.pdf

Section 10 -Continuation Sheet.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10.7.2018.pdf

Importance: High

Dear Sirs

Re: London Borough of Enfield v Simon Cordell- E00ED049

Please find attached a copy of our correspondence with an application notice. We would like the application notice to be dealt with by DJ Dias at the hearing on Thursday 9th August 2018, 10am and we hope that it can be processed and placed on the Court's file as a matter of urgency.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong

1903,

communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1904,

Same as Above!

1905,1906,1907,1908,1909,

1910,1911,1912,1913,19141915,

1916,1917,1918,1919,19201921,

1922,1923,1924,1925,19261927,

1928,1929,1930,1931,19321933,

1934,1935

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

46.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Google New device 13-08-2018 -11-56

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1936

 

 46.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Google New device 13-08-2018 -11-56

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1936

--

1936,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 13/08/2018 11:56:15 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Google

Long Gone l

Your account re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for longgoneone1@gmail.com. Don't recognize this account?

New sign-in to your linked account

longgoneone1@gmail.com

Your Google Account was just signed in to from a new Windows device. You're getting this email to make sure it was you.

CHECK ACTIVITY

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2018 Google LLC,1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Wix 13-08-2018 -13-08-2018 11-06

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1937,1938

 

 47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Wix 13-08-2018 -13-08-2018 11-06

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1937,1938

--

1937,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@emails.wix.com>

Sent time: 13/08/2018 11:06:36 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Submit Your Wix Site and  Win the Opportunity of a Lifetime

Can't see this email?

Wix Stunning Awards

Submit Your Website for a Chance to Win

We’re celebrating your website and everything you’ve done with Wix.

Submit your Wix website to get your brand in the spotlight. 3 Wix users will win a tailor-made online campaign* produced by the Wix marketing team. Plus - all finalists will be featured in our Wix Stunning Awards Showcase for the world to see.

1938,

IN NO WAY SPONSORED, ENDORSED OR ADMINISTERED BY, OR ASSOCIATED WITH ANY SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. A PURCHASE WILL NOT INCREASE CHANCES OF WINNING.

Void where prohibited. Online entry only. Binding arbitration; no class relief. Open only to legal residents of a jurisdiction where this type of contest is permitted, who are in the age of majority in their jurisdiction of residence at the time of entry and who have a live and published website created on the Wix platform, which conforms to Sponsor’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Entry to the Contest from 12:00 am EST August 13, 2018, until 12:00 am EST August 20, 2018. Subject to Contest Rules. Wix.com Ltd. 40 Namal Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Stay up to date with our latest news & features

Please do not reply to this email.

500 Terry A Francois Blvd., San Francisco, CA 94158 Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Inc. www.wix.com View our Privacy Policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

992. Trishna Kerai _FW_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1939,1940,1941,1942

 

 

48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

992. Trishna Kerai _FW_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

13/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1939,1940,1941,1942

--

1939,

Importance:   High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

Solicitors

Fraud 1 Cybercrime Criminal Defence

Modem

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmiNersoNdtors.co.uk>

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018.docx

1940,

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1941,

FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018.docx

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON   Claim No: E00ED049

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018

UPON the Defendant’s mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant’s neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

And UPON the Defendant’s mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

IT IS ORDERED:

1.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

1942,

2.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4736 14-08-2018 22-44

14/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1943,1944

 

 49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4736 14-08-2018 22-44

14/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1943,1944

--

1943,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 14/08/2018 10:44:10 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your August account summary inside.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

August Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

Did you register a

. co.uk,

org.uk or

me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

What's in your account:

Domains

Update your domain settings

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

toosmooth.co.uk

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

Manage Your Domains

1944,

cPanel Hosting

Need to add or remove an account?

Get Started

Ł31.46 Ł1.67*

Ł14.99 Ł5.99*

Ł18.10 Ł12.49*

See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

993. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (2)

14/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950

 

 50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

993. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (2)

14/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1945,1946,1947,1948,1949,1950

--

1945,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 14 August 2018 12:36

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018.docx

Dear Trishna

Thank you for sending over the document I have made remarks in the document in red where I feel it needs rewording.

I hope that helps but I am not sure how to reword it, if you can do that and send it back to me to take a look at, I would be grateful

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

1946,

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

1947,

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1948,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018.docx

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON   Claim No: E00ED049

Before District Judge Dias

B ETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

--

ORDER

--

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018

UPON the Defendant’s mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant’s neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

This is in progress and it was stated my son would need a 2-bedroom place due to needing someone with him. The council is already trying to get away with this by saying a like to like place which I see they are trying to do a 1-bedroom place.

1949,

And UPON the Defendant’s mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

The above section is wrong I did not agree to engage with Enfield Mental Health Unit team, so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. (what was stated I was dealing with the mental health team due to a complaint, and it was stated I would ask the mental health team if they would help regarding moving Simon, this is being done ATM, I cannot say my son will take assistance with his mental health conditions, due to the fact that will be down to him and not me I can try and get him to get help, but it’s not down to me if he takes it.

IT IS ORDERED:

 The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

It was stated it would be dismissed not discharged the judge asked them if they wanted discharged or dismissed and they stated dismissed, I see now why they are trying to change this to discharged. As discharged means discharge is an unconditional discharge where the Court finds that a crime has technically been committed, but that any punishment of the defendant would be inappropriate, and the case is closed. It has never been proven that my son done anything.

The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

This should be all police as it on record and if he gets arrested at any police station this can come up if it’s not removed from full record.

There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

1950,

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Wix 16-08-2018 -16-08-2018 11-06

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1951,1952

 

 51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Wix 16-08-2018 -16-08-2018 11-06

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1951,1952

--

1951,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@emails.wix.com>

Sent time: 16/08/2018 11:06:36 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Last Chance: Submit Your Website to the Wix Stunning Awards

Can't see this email?

Last Chance to Submit Wix Stunning Awards

Final hours to submit your Wix website for a chance to win!

You can win a tailor-made online campaign* produced by the Wix marketing team. Plus—all finalists will get featured in our Wix Stunning Awards Showcase for all to see.

Submit your Wix website today.

IN NO WAY SPONSORED, ENDORSED OR ADMINISTERED BY, OR ASSOCIATED WITH ANY SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. A PURCHASE WILL NOT INCREASE CHANCES OF WINNING. Void

1952,

where prohibited. Online entry only. Binding arbitration; no class relief. Open only to legal residents of a jurisdiction where this type of contest is permitted, who are in the age of majority in their jurisdiction of residence at the time of entry and who have a live and published website created on the Wix platform, which conforms to Sponsor’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Entry to the Contest from 12:00 am EST August 13, 2018, until 12:00 am EST August 20, 2018. Subject to Contest Rules. Wix.com Ltd. 40 Namal Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Stay up to date with our latest news & features

Please do not reply to this email.

Click here to unsubscribe.

500 Terry A Francois Blvd., San Francisco, CA 94158 Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Inc. www.wix.com View our Privacy Policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

997. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell_ (2)

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 1953,1954,1955,1956

1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962

1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968

1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974

1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980

1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986

1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992

1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998

1999,2000, 2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006

2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012

2013,2014,2015,2016,2017,2018

2019,2020,2021,2022,2023,2024

2025,2026,2027,2028,2029,2030

2031,2032,2033,2034,2035,2036

2037,2038,2039,2040,2041,2042

2043,2044,2045,2046,2047,2048

2049,2050,2051,2052,2053,2054

2055,2056,2057,2058,2059,2060

2061,2062,2063,2064,2065,2066

2067,2068,2069,2070,2071,2072

2073,2074,2075   

 

 52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

997. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell_ (2)

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers:

1953,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 16 August 2018 17:15

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Attachments: enfield-allocations-scheme-2012-2017 (3).pdf

Dear Mrs Cordell,

I write in response to your email below and further to our telephone conversation held a few minutes ago.

As explained, it is not usual practice for a management transfer application to be forwarded to the applicant as this is a document which is usually completed by a housing officer and used internally. So please accept my apologies if you may have been advised previously that this would be the case. However we are happy to discuss its contents with you should you wish to.

I enclose a copy of the Enfield Housing Allocation Scheme, which is used by the exceptions panel before considering a management transfer application.

I explained to you that if the application goes ahead tomorrow (this was the earliest exceptions panel meeting), Simon could only be considered for a transfer of property which is similar to the one he currently occupies (like for like transfer).

You explained to me that you believe that your son requires supported accommodation. You also said that he has agreed to see a consultant of the Enfield Mental Health Team and was given an appointment on 31/08/2018 at 9.30am. I have explained that Simon will need to be assessed by the team in order to be considered for supported accommodation. On that basis you agreed to have the management transfer application deferred to be considered at the next panel meeting which will take place on 28/09/2018, this would allow more time for an assessment to be carried out by the Mental health team. Please confirm that this is agreed by yourself and Simon.

I also confirmed that the exceptions panel meetings are attended by professionals which means that tenants or members of their family are not allowed to attend. However the meetings can be attended by mental health workers.

I hope this email answers your queries, please do not hesitate to contact me if you have further questions.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 16 August 2018 12:16

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

1954,

Dear Ludmilla, lyavoo

Could you please forward the housing management transfer application that Lemmy called me about last night 15/08/2018 at 16:15 hours, as I have the mental health team calling me regarding the like to like section in the application. I have not yet seen the application that has been filled in for my son by Enfield Council, and I would like to see it before it is submitted to the broad tomorrow.

Also would it be possible to get a copy of Enfield Councils guidelines and policies for the management transfer application, I do believe I have a copy but want to make sure I have the correct one.

As you are aware at court it was stated I had to fill an application in by today, but it was not stated as to what application it was, and then it was found out the application had to be done by the council so all the wrong information was told to the judge, and as you are aware what I said to the judge regarding a 2 bedroom and then what Lemmy said to the judge that my son would not get one, then what the judge said to Lemmy regarding a 2 bedroom.

I do not want my son placed into a new home that is not going to be appropriate, I want to get it right for him, after all his health has gone downhill due to all the court cases and what the neighbours were and are still doing to him and Enfield council took no notice of the hell my son was living in all they done was believed the neighbours, then on top Enfield Council basically telling the courts there was nothing wrong with my son's health even though I was telling Enfield Council since the start of 2015 via emails the impact this was having on my son regarding what the neighbours were doing, I want Enfield Council to take this seriously as so far where my son has been concerned you have only blamed him for everything and gone one sided and never heard what my son or I have had to say, I believe if Enfield Council had done the correct investigations they would have seen there was a lot more going on here then what the neighbours was saying, but Enfield Council only blamed without wanting to know the facts.

My son has to be re-housed and I want that to be done correctly even if more time is needed and this is not taken to the panel until next week, I do want it done as soon as possible due to what the neighbours are still doing, I don't want things rushed by Enfield Council because they know now they have done wrong and made beaches regarding my son I want it done correctly, as stated I want the mental health input if they are willing to give it as it seems since I put the complaint in they do not seem to want to talk with me as stated to you outside the court room, but that is being addressed and I am waiting for a call back today regarding the housing issue, I have spoken with a few people over the last week regarding this, but due to a change over with the people dealing with my son and him not given a named worker yet it has been hard.

Also can you tell me if I am allowed to attend the panel hearing and also maybe a mental health worker if they are willing to attend also? I will await to hear from you today.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 15:06

To: Lorraine Cordell; 'Trishna Kerai'

Cc: Lemmy Nwabuisi

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Mrs Cordell,

I have emailed Michael Adu- Gyamfi and asked him to contact you as soon as possible, please note that he's aware of the deadline and will be in touch in due course.

I have emailed a draft order to Trishna Kerai of Stuart Miller solicitors and I'm currently waiting her approval. Once I have this, I will be in a position to email the Court with the agreed order. I can't confirm the time it will take the Court to approve the order but as soon as this is done, I am sure Ms Kerai will contact you and let you know.

We will contact the police regarding the discharge of the injunction order; however we would need a sealed copy of the court order to be received first before such notification takes place.

1955,

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:40

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Trishna Kerai

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla, lyavoo

Thank you for the update email, as you will see form my below email I had already been told it would been a housing management transfer, my brother had a long talk with Nadine and he did try and speak to Michael Adugyamfi but he was in a meeting, Nadine kindly sent him an email with my email details for him to contract me, but the best phone number to call me on is 07807 333545.

Would it be possible to have a contract email for Michael Adugyamfi as you know I am on a short time scale ordered by the judge of 7 days to get this addressed.

Also would it be possible to get the time scale as to when I will get the order form the court, and has the police been informed regarding the dismissal of both the injection orders.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:28

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Trishna Kerai; Lemmy Nwabuisi

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ms Cordell,

Thank you for your emails.

I have made enquiries with our housing allocation manager and since Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he will need to apply for a transfer, so he does not need to make a new rehousing application.

This transfer application must be done via Simon Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer in question and will ask him to contact you as soon as possible. Can you please provide me with a preferred contact number so the officer can make an appointment with you and Mr Cordell? I have copied Mr Cordell's solicitors to this email.

1956,

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:18

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla, lyavoo

I believe what we need as this is what we have just been told on the phone we need to do a housing management transfer to be able to get this done as Simon should not need to fill out a new housing application as he is already a tenant.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 13:38

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla Iyavoo

Could you please send me the link to the application form as I have been looking all day my brother even went up to the civic centre and they could not give him a link they said there is not one.

I wanted to get this done as soon as possible and Enfield Council website is not great to use.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

1957,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1958,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

1959,

1960,

1961,

1962,

1963,

1964,

1965,

1966,

1967,

1968,

1969,

1970,

1971,

1972,

1973,

1974,

1975,

1976,

1977,

1978,

1979,

1980,

1981,

1982,

1983,

1984,

1985,

1986,

1987,

1988,

1989,

1990,

1991,

1992,

1993,

1994,

1995,

1996,

1997,

1998,

1999,

2000,

2001,

2002,

2003,

2004,

2005,

2006,

2007,

2008,

2009,

2010,

2011,

2012,

2013,

2014,

2015,

2016,

2017,

2018,

2019,

2020,

2021,

2022,

2023,

2024,

2025,

2026,

2027,

2028,

2029,

2030,

2031,

2032,

2033,

2034,

2035,

2036,

2037,

2038,

2039,

2040,

2041,

2042,

2043,

2044,

2045,

2046,

2047,

2048,

2049,

2050,

2051,

2052,

2053,

2054,

2055,

2056,

2057,

2058,

2059,

2060,

2061,

2062,

2063,

2064,

2065,

2066,

2067,

2068,

2069,

2070,

2071,

2072,

2073,

2074,

2075,

 

 

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

996. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell_ (45)

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2076

 

 53.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

996. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell_ (45)

16/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2076

--

2076,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 16 August 2018 11:10

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla Lyavoo

Could you please forward the housing management transfer Application that Lemmy called me about last night at 16:15 hours, as I have the mental health team calling me regarding the like for like section in the application. I as of yet have not seen the application and would like to see it and what has been said.

Also would it be possible to get a copy of Enfield council guidelines and policies for the management transfer, I do believe I have a copy but want to be 100% I have the right one.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

54.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2.

Wix to google -20-08-2018 23-00

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2077

 

 54.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 2.

Wix to google -20-08-2018 23-00

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2077

--

2077,

From:   Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 20/08/2018 11:00:26 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google account

Wix.com connected to your Google Account

You received this message because re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for longgoneone1@gmail.com. If longgoneone1@gmail.com is not your Google Account, click here to disconnect from that account and stop receiving emails.

Hi Long,

Wix.com now has access to your Google Account longgoneone1@gmail.com.

Wix.com can:

• View and manage the files in your Google Drive

You should only give this access to apps you trust. Review or remove apps connected to your account any time at My Account.

Learn more about what it means to connect an app to your account.

The Google Accounts team

This email can't receive replies. For more information, visit the Google Accounts Help Centre.

You received this mandatory email service announcement to update you about important changes to your Google product or account.

© 2018 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

55.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1000. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2078,2079,2080,2081,2082,2083,2084,2085,2086

 

 55.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1000. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2078,2079,2080,2081,2082,2083,2084,2085,2086

--

2078,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 20 August 2018 14:35

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: SM Court Att note—August 9th 18 CORDELL S.DOC

Hi Lorraine,

I will try to rewrite the order by tonight and send it over to you.

Please find attached last attendance note from David Greville who attended the last hearing.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed. I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

2079,

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

2080,

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/newsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

2081,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2082,

2083,

INSTRUCTIONS

Client not present, as he is ill.

Def's mother and Uncle attend.

Mother has a large correspondence file, which proves that emails were sent by her to the Council telling them about Def's mental illness.

(Mother is of the belief that the Council already knew what is contained in the latest Report).

Probably the most helpful thing mother tells me is that the construction of the flats where Def lives means that Def hears a lot of noise from the flat above. This causes tensions. If Def were moved to a more suitable flat, the current problems are less likely to recur.

Mother does not want to be a Litigation Friend as---Def might agree to this today, but 2 days later he could be accusing mother of being in league with the Council Mother does not want this case to drive a wedge between her and Def.

Mother says that the statements that the complainants made in this case are different to the statements they made against Def in the criminal case (no charge yet), which proves that they are lying in this case, and mother wants to take them to court for lying.

Spoke to representative from Enfield B.C. They appear to have no great plan, following the Report that says Def doesn't understand the injunction, and is not fit to take part in proceedings. They will suggest that the Court should make some Directions, to protect other residents, but they cannot suggest any particular Directions, and appear to want to leave that to the Judge.

There is the possibility of the Official Solicitor acting as Litigation Friend, but this would take some time to set up.

CLIENT'S OBJECTIVES (Client not here).

2084,

2085,

2086,

 

 

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

999. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (1)

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2087,2088,2089,2090,2091

 

 56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

999. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (1)

20/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2087,2088,2089,2090,2091

--

2087,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018-001.docx

Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed.

I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

Solicitors.

Criminal Defends!

modern LAW

CELEBRATING EXCELLENCE

288,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

2089,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2090,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018-001.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made. The Claimant will also take into account the need for a two bedroom so that Mr Cordell can get the support needed from his family so that Mr Cordell can have someone with him that he trusts.

TT TS ORDERED:

2091,

1.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 be dismissed forthwith.

2.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection order dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4737 - 23-08-2018 19-21

23/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2092    

 

 

57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4737 - 23-08-2018 19-21

23/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2092

--

2092,  

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 23/08/2018 07:21:05 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Renewal receipt for order #1357431481.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

Your renewal receipts.

Just a heads up. The items below have been automatically renewed. To review all your products and services, please go to My Account.

Product

Quantity

Term

Price

.UK

(. CO.UK)

Domain Renewal

1 Domain

1 Year

Ł9.99

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

 

 

 

 

Subtotal:

 

Ł9.99

 

Tax:

 

Ł2.00

 

Total:

 

Ł11.99

Go to My Account

We have billed your PayPal agreement ending with the last two digits: 0V for the amount of Ł11.99.

Your product(s) includes enrolment in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running by automatically charging the then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file just before they're set to expire, with no further action on your part. You may cancel this service at any time by turning off the auto-renewal feature on the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Review Legal Agreements

By using these products, you agree that you are bound by the Universal Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Learn more about our Refund Policy.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260, USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

58.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2.

Google New device 27-08-2018 -04-48

27/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2093,2094

 

 58.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 2.

Google New device 27-08-2018 -04-48

27/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2093,2094

 

--

2093,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 27/08/2018 04:48:29 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google account

Template Gallery connected to your Google Account

You received this message because re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for longgoneone1@gmail.com. If longgoneone1@gmail.com is not your Google Account, click here to disconnect from that account and stop receiving emails.

Hi Long,

Template Gallery now has access to your Google Account longgoneone1@gmail.com. Template Gallery can:

• View and manage the files in your Google Drive

You should only give this access to apps you trust. Review or remove apps connected to your account any time at My Account.

Learn more about what it means to connect an app to your account.

The Google Accounts team

This email can't receive replies. For more information, visit the Google Accounts Help Centre.

You received this mandatory email service announcement to update you about important changes to your Google product or account.

2018 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

2094,

Extra Page!

 

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2.

Google Wix 27-08-2018 -12-19

27/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2095,2096

 

 59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 2.

Google Wix 27-08-2018 -12-19

27/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2095,2096

--

2095,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 27/08/2018 12:19:37 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google account

Wix.com connected to your Google Account

You received this message because re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for longgoneone1@gmail.com. If longgoneone1@gmail.com is not your Google Account, click here to disconnect from that account and stop receiving emails.

Hi Long,

Wix.com now has access to your Google Account longgoneone1@gmail.com.

Wix.com can:

• View and manage the files in your Google Drive

You should only give this access to apps you trust. Review or remove apps connected to your account any time at My Account.

Learn more about what it means to connect an app to your account.

The Google Accounts team

This email can't receive replies. For more information, visit the Google Accounts Help Centre.

You received this mandatory email service announcement to update you about important changes to your Google product or account. 2018 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

2096,

Extra Page!

 

 

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 2.

Wix 30-08-2018 -30-08-2018 04-19

30/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2097,2098

 

 60.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 2.

Wix 30-08-2018 -30-08-2018 04-19

30/08/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2097,2098

--

2097,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@emails.wix.com>

Sent time: 30/08/2018 04:19:08 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: 8 Design Tricks to Hook Your Visitors

WIX com

Essential Tips for Your Business

Get the latest web design trends, SEO guidelines, online marketing tips and more,

delivered straight to your inbox.

Check Out Articles We Think You'll Love

8 Awesome Design Tricks to Grab Your Visitors’ Attention Read Article >>

Benjamin Diaz

Photography & Art Direction

Logo Trends of 2018: How to Make Your Brand Shine Read Article >>

The 7 Deadly Sins of

DIY SEO: 5 Tips for Beginners That You

2098,

Marketing Revealed Read Article >>

Can Apply Right Now Read Article >>

Stay up to date with our latest news & features

Please do not reply to this email.

500 Terry A Francois Blvd., San Francisco, CA 94158 Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Inc. www.wix.com View our Privacy Policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

61.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4757 01-09-2018 14-12

01/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2099,2100

 

 61.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4757 01-09-2018 14-12

01/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2099,2100

--

2099,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 01/09/2018 02:11:54 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 374

Your domains are about to auto-renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

Manage Your Renewals

If the credit card we have associated with each domain has expired or been closed, we may be unable to automatically renew your domain(s). To ensure your products are successfully renewed, please review, and update your credit card information, or if you wish to cancel automatic renewal, log in to My Account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 8 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. Active free products created in association with free credits from this domain registration will expire 1 year from the renewal of the domain name if they have been activated. Credits that have not been activated will expire and be removed at the time the domain renews. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

If you wish to cancel automatic renewal of your product(s), you can turn off this feature in your GoDaddy account.

Your recommended domains are a click away*. Register now:

ts. enterprises

 

t-s-enterprises. Enterprises

t-s-enterprises.net

 

tsactions.com

 

2100,

This email does not assure the availability of the specific domains; only that they were still available as of 01 September 2018.

*Offer good towards new product purchases only and cannot be used on product renewals. Cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer, sale, discount, or promotion. Not applicable to ICANN fees, taxes, transfers, premium domains, premium templates, cloud server plans, WP Premium Support services, any marketing or design services performed by our Professional Web Services team, gift cards or Trademark Holders/Priority Pre­registration or pre-registration fees. After the initial purchase term, discounted products will renew at the then- current renewal list price. Offer may be changed without notice.

**ICANN fee of Ł0.11 per domain name per year is included.

"Renewal rates do not include fees from Private Registration, Deluxe Registration, Protected Registration or Certified Domains. Domains automatically renew at previous registration length.

Prices are current as of 01/09/2018 and may be changed without notice. All domain name registrations and renewals are non-refundable and are subject to the terms and conditions of our Registration Agreement.

Certain domains will be billed up to 30 days prior to the renewal date.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1007. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2101,2102,2103,2104,2105

 

 

62.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1007. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2101,2102,2103,2104,2105

--

2101,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Importance: High

Dear Ludmilla,

Please find our final draft of the Order. You will see the amendments we have made.

Please provide us with your views.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 15 August 2018 15:49

To: Dias, DJ Allison

Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Judge,

2102,

Further to the hearing which took place on 9th August 2018, I attach a draft order for the Court's approval. I apologise for the delay in sending this draft order to you, I have been waiting for the Defendant's solicitor’s approval which has not been received as yet.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

2103,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2104,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2105,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

1.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

2.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1004. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (1)

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2106,2107,2108,2109,2110,2111,2112

 

 63.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1004. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (1)

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2106,2107,2108,2109,2110,2111,2112

-

2106,

Dear Trishna

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:50

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended-Order.docx

Hi Lorraine,

I was on annual leave and just got back today.

I have just had a look at the Order and amended it slightly as attached.

Please let me know if you agree (it's just an amendment of words) and then I will send to the Court. Thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

2109,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:45

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

2107,

I have not heard from you and I believe you was away on holiday I hope you have a great time.

I really need this order dealt with so it can be signed off and sealed by the court as of yet the order has not been sent to the court by Enfield Council and this needs to be done ASAP so it can be sealed.

Please see the attached Document I have rewritten for it to be sent to Enfield Council so this can be done, if this can be sent to Enfield Council, I would be most grateful.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 14:35

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Hi Lorraine,

I will try to rewrite the order by tonight and send it over to you.

Please find attached last attendance note from David Greville who attended the last hearing.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

2109,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

2108,

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed.

I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

2109,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

2110,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

 http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2111,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2112,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

5.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

6.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

7.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

8.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1003. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (2)

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2113,2114,2115,2116,2117,2118       

 

 64.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1003. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018_ (2)

04/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2113,2114,2115,2116,2117,2118 

--

2113,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:45

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018-002.docx

Dear Trishna

I have not heard from you and I believe you was away on holiday I hope you have a great time.

I really need this order dealt with so it can be signed off and sealed by the court as of yet the order has not been sent to the court by Enfield Council and this needs to be done ASAP so it can be sealed.

Please see the attached Document I have rewritten for it to be sent to Enfield Council so this can be done, if this can be sent to Enfield Council, I would be most grateful.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto: Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 14:35

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Hi Lorraine,

I will try to rewrite the order by tonight and send it over to you.

Please find attached last attendance note from David Greville who attended the last hearing.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

2114,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed.

I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

2115,

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

2116,

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

2110,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

 http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2117,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2118,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2112,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

1.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

2.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4741 07-09-2018 18-34

07/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2119

 

 65.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4741 07-09-2018 18-34

07/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2119

 

--

2119,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 07/09/2018 06:34:20 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Renewal receipt for order #1364739237.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 374

Your renewal receipts.

Just a heads up. The items below have been automatically renewed. To review all your products and services, please go to My Account.

Product

Quantity

Term

Price

1 Domain

1 Year

 

Ł13.10

.COM Domain Renewal

t-s-enterprises.com

Subtotal:

Tax:

 

Ł13.10

Ł2.62

 

Total:

 

Ł15.72

Go to My Account

We have billed your PayPal agreement ending with the last two digits: 0V for the amount of Ł15.72.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process, you agreed to GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and all other agreements applicable to your purchase. You can obtain a list of all agreements and policies to which you agreed by contacting GoDaddy customer service. Your use of the purchased products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel your purchase, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process, you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part. If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your account.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2.

Mother I was on annul Order.docx 12-09-2018 -11-14

12/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2120,2121,2122,2123,2124,2125

 

 

66.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2.

Mother I was on annul Order.docx 12-09-2018 -11-14

12/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2120,2121,2122,2123,2124,2125

--

2120,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 12/09/2018 11:14:13 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

here is the order it has not been sealed yet by the court Trishna is waiting for a reply from the council

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmiNersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:50

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Hi Lorraine,

I was on annual leave and just got back today.

I have just had a look at the Order and amended it slightly as attached.

Please let me know if you agree (it's just an amendment of words) and then I will send to the Court.

Thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 077Q0 QQ3 860

E: trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:45

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

I have not heard from you and I believe you was away on holiday I hope you have a great time.

I really need this order dealt with so it can be signed off and sealed by the court as of yet the order has not been sent to the court by Enfield Council and this needs to be done ASAP so it can be sealed.

2121,

Please see the attached Document I have rewritten for it to be sent to Enfield Council so this can be done, if this can be sent to Enfield Council, I would be most grateful.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto: Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 14:35

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Hi Lorraine,

I will try to rewrite the order by tonight and send it over to you.

Please find attached last attendance note from David Greville who attended the last hearing.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed.

I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

2122,

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services

2123,

Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

2116,

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

 http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2124,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

TN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

and

Claimant

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2125,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

5.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

6.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

7.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

8.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4739 14-09-2018 21-25

14/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2126,2127       

 

 67.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4739 14-09-2018 21-25

14/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2126,2127

--

2126,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 14/09/2018 09:25:29 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your September account summary inside.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

September Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

Did you register

a. co.uk,

. org.uk or

. me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019. Learn more.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

What's in your account:

Domains

Update your domain settings

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

TOOSMOOTH.CO.UK

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

Manage Your Domains

2127,

cPanel Hosting

Get Started

A. site web address is easy for visitors to understand at a glance—this is your online presence. Shop. site domains today for just Ł28.10 Ł0.99.

Ł30.70

Ł1.63*

Ł14.99

Ł5.99*

Ł18.10

Ł12.49*

See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1021. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018_ (2)

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2128,2129,2130,2131,2132,2133,2134

 

 68.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1021. Trishna Kerai _RE_ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018_ (2)

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2128,2129,2130,2131,2132,2133,2134

--

2128,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Sent: 17 September 2018 10:32

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Dear Sirs,

Further to the email below, please confirm whether you have received our drafted amended order.

I have attached it again for your attention.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Trishna Kerai

Sent: 17 September 2018 09:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Hi Ludmilla,

Further to my email below, could I please have a response with your views in relation to our proposed amended Order.

2129,

Many thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Trishna Kerai

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Ludmilla,

Please find our final draft of the Order. You will see the amendments we have made. Please provide us with your views.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

2130,

STUARTMILLER

EXCELLENCE

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 15 August 2018 15:49

To: Dias, DJ Allison

Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Judge,

Further to the hearing which took place on 9th August 2018, I attach a draft order for the Court's approval. I apologise for the delay in sending this draft order to you, I have been waiting for the Defendant's solicitor’s approval which has not been received as yet.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

2131,

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your in box

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to

2132,

recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2133,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2134,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

1.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

2.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.31 Trishna@stuartmillersoliell-E00ED049 amended Order 090

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2135,2136,2137,2138,2139,2140,2141

 

 

 69.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.31 Trishna@stuartmillersoliell-E00ED049 amended Order 090

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2135,2136,2137,2138,2139,2140,2141

--

2135,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Sent: 17 September 2018 10:30

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended    Order   09082018

Yeah, I will send to them again.

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 17 September 2018 10:28

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: Re: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 Hi Trishna

Do you mean you sent to the court?

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 17 Sep 2018, at 09:57, Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk> wrote: Hi,

Yes. I did respond saying I sent the order...apologies if you did not get the email.

2136,

I will email her now and see what the position is.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 September 2018 09:57

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: Re: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Hi Trishna

Was wondering if you sent the order to the court really need it badly for the 28/09/2018 as said in the below email can you give me an update please.

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 13 Sep 2018, at 10:10, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk> wrote:

Hi Trishna

I was wondering if Ludmilla had contracted you in regards to the order yesterday I know she emailed you and me about a call that was made to her yesterday from Simon, but was wondering if she had also made any reply regarding the order as well.

If she has not can you please send the rewritten order to the judge at the court, as by her sending the email yesterday about the call from Simon it shows she is just Ignoring the email regarding the court

2137,

order, hoping we will not get a sealed order until after it goes to the panel on the 28/09/2018 so once again the council can get away with ignoring the hat the judge said in court.

Regards

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 10 Sep 2018, at 15:50, Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk> wrote:

HI Lorraine,

Haven't heard anything from her yet. I will email her now and CC you in.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell rmailto:lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 September 2018 12:50

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: Re: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 Hi Trishna

I was wondering if you had heard anything from Ludmilla yet, as this is going to the housing panel on the 28/09/2018 and I need the sealed order from the court by then.

Or they are going to put this to the housing panel for like for like move which will only be a 1 bedroom.

2138,

Regards

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 4 Sep 2018, at 16:01, Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk> wrote:

Ludmilla will be required to forward this to the DJ, but if she doesn't get back to me then I will do this myself.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 04 September 2018 16:00

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

Do not forget it has to be made for the attention of District Judge Dias who heard the case.

Regards

Lorraine

2139,

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 August 2018 12:48

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna

I was wondering if you had time as yet to rewrite the order as it need to go to the court so that the order is sealed.

I have made edited it not sure if it can be worded this way but please see attached.

The reason I do not believe they can put

"And UPON the Defendant's mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing. "

Is due to Simon rights I can give input but there is little I can do if Simon does not agree to take help and this is where I run into issues and have for a while now. If it is ordered that I will do it and can’t then I am breaking the order. so I have just removed this from the order as I do what I can anyways I do not need the council telling me I have to do it.

Also are there any notes from the barrister who was there for Simon or any documents I have not got as Simon likes to keep all documents from all his cases.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Trishna Kerai mailto: Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Sent: 13 August 2018 15:14

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

2140,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly,

2141,

delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfiekigov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the Whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1022. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2142,2143,2144,2145,2146,2147,2148

 

 70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1022. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

17/09/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2142,2143,2144,2145,2146,2147,2148

--

2142,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 17 September 2018 11:28

To: 'enquiries@edmonton.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Importance:   High

Dear DJ Dias,

I was wondering if you can help at this time the hearing of the 09/08/2018 there is still an outstanding order to be sealed by the court. I know my son's solicitor has been trying to address this with Enfield Council and as yet has had no reply from them regarding the amended order. I know my son's solicitor has sent the amended order over to the court directly.

I have also been working with them regarding the housing move for my son, but am being told they will only move him to a like to like property; this will be going to the housing panel on the 28/09/2018 regarding the move for my son, I know in Enfield Council order that was made up they included in this regarding the order from the court my son is moved I believe this was to give my son more weight with the housing panel.

My son is not at all well and the and I believe he does need a two bedroom property so he can get the support he needs from his family as I said in court on the 09/08/2018, I am not just saying this to be able to get my son a two bedroom, I am saying this so my son can have family with him all the time so that I can try and get my son back to some sort of a normal life and the help he needs.

It is at this point that Enfield Council does not seem to want to reply to my son's solicitor's amended order that a two bedroom is looked into they have put everything else but that in there order, I am trying my hardest to work with everyone so my son gets the help that is needed and I do feel a two bedroom is needed so there can be someone for my son at all times as I feel that this is the best option for my son.

If you can look into the amended order attached, I would be most grateful as I believe if it is added to the order it would give more weight when it goes to the panel on 28/09/2018.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Trishna Kerai [mailto:Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk]

Sent: 17 September 2018 10:32

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Dear Sirs,

Further to the email below, please confirm whether you have received our drafted amended order.

I have attached it again for your attention.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

2143,

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Trishna Kerai

Sent: 17 September 2018 09:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Hi Ludmilla,

Further to my email below, could I please have a response with your views in relation to our proposed amended Order. Many thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

 

2144,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Trishna Kerai

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Ludmilla,

Please find our final draft of the Order. You will see the amendments we have made.

Please provide us with your views.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

2145,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 15 August 2018 15:49

To: Dias, DJ Allison

 Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Judge,

Further to the hearing which took place on 9th August 2018, I attach a draft order for the Court's approval. I apologise for the delay in sending this draft order to you, I have been waiting for the Defendant's solicitor’s approval which has not been received as yet.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an

2146,

existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2147,

RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx

Claim No: E00ED049

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

2148,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

5.      The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

6.      The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

7.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

8.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1022. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

07/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2149,2150       

 

 71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1022. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

07/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2149,2150 

--

2149,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   07 October 2018 23:57

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla Lyavoo

I was wondering if you had any update yet regarding the panel meeting on the 28/09/2018 as I have not heard anything. Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

On 2 Oct 2018, at 16:08, Ludmilla Iyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Dear Lorraine Cordell,

Thank you for your emails and your phone calls. I have been in meetings so was unable to attend to them.

I am taking instructions from my officers and will respond to your emails in due course.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 02 October 2018 15:32

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Ludmilla Lyavoo

Could you please get back to me with an update as to what's going on. I have spoken to Lemmy today and he does not know anything, but when he gets back to the office he would give you a message to contract me, I have left voice messages for a call back for an update on your office number and I have also sent emails and heard nothing from you, could you please get back to me with an update, as my son can't take much more of what he is having to live with.

2150,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

On 1 Oct 2018, at 17:56, Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Ludmilla Lyavoo

Could you give me an update please as I have not heard anything.

Regards

Lorraine

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1036. Ludmilla Lyavoo _Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (2)

12/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2151,2152,2153,2154

 

 72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1036. Ludmilla Lyavoo _Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL] _ (2)

12/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2151,2152,2153,2154

--

2151,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 October 2018 11:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Letter to Mrs Cordell 12.10.2018.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mrs Cordell,

Please find attached a copy of our correspondence, in response to your recent emails.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2152,

should perform their own virus checks.

2153,

2154,

 

 

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1038.  Ludmilla Lyavoo _Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15

15/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2155,2156

2157,2158,2159,2160,2161,2162

2163,2164,2165,2166      

 

 73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1038.  Ludmilla Lyavoo _Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15

15/10/2018

/ Page Numbers:

2155,

From: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 15 October 2018 16:46

To: Trishna Kerai

Cc: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Pre-action letter Simon-Cordell 15.10.2018.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Trishna,

We are receiving continuous report of harassment against Mr Cordell by his neighbours. We therefore enclose a pre-action letter for your client's attention.

Mrs Lorraine Cordell is also copied in.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government

2156,

Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2157,

2158,

2159,

2160,

2161,

2162,

2163,

2164,

2165,

2166,

 

 

 

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.36 lorraine32@blueyonder.couk_10.15.2018_Re Simon CORDELL

15/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2167

 

 74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.36 lorraine32@blueyonder.couk_10.15.2018_Re Simon CORDELL

15/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2167

--

2167,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 15 October 2018 19:24

To: Trishna@stuartmiNersolicitors.co.uk

Subject:          Re: Simon CORDELL

Dear Trishna

Could you pls call me regards Enfield council please, I did try to call the office last week to speak to you but was told you will not be back until tomorrow, my phone number is 07807 333545

Regards

Lorraine CORDELL

Sent from my iPhone

 

 

 

 

 

75.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4748 16-10-2018 01-45

16/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2168,2169

 

 75.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4748 16-10-2018 01-45

16/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2168,2169

--

2168,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 16/10/2018 01:44:43 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your October account summary inside.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

October Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

Did you register a

. co.uk,

. org.uk or

. me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019. Learn more.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

Shop now >

What's in your account:

Domains

Update your domain settings

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

toosmooth.co.uk

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

Manage Your Domains

2169,

cPanel Hosting

Build trust with a .org web address. Use this respected domain to promote your cause, increase awareness or inspire support. Shop .org domains for just Ł16.10 Ł5.99 today.

Ł17.10

Ł3.10*

Ł923

Ł0.86*

Ł7.71*

See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 2.

Mother We are receiving neighbours 17-10-2018 -09-13

17/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2170,2171,2172,2173,2174,2175,2176,2177,2178,2179,2180,2181 

 

 76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 2.

Mother We are receivs neighbours 17-10-2018 -09-13

17/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2170,2171,2172,2173,2174,2175,2176,2177,2178,2179,2180,2181

--

2170,

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo <Lidmilla.lYavoo@enrield.gov.uk>

Date: 15 October 2018 at 16:46:16 BST

To: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@sluartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Cc: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Trishna,

We are receiving continuous report of harassment against Mr Cordell by his neighbours. We therefore enclose a pre-action letter for your client's attention.

Mrs Lorraine Cordell is also copied in.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/newsletters

httpy/www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 17/10/2018 09:13:12 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Fwd.: Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018.pdf

Here

2171,

recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2172,

Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

2173,

Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

2174,

Pre-action letter Simon Cordell 15.10.2018 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

2175,2176,2177,2178,2179,2180,2181,

 

 

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1041. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ (DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Simon's Assessment Report (2)

25/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2182,2183,2184,2185,2186

2187,2188,2189,2190,2191,2192

2193,2194,2195,2196,2197,2198

2199,2200,2201,2202,2203

 

 77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1041. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ (DPS_1_CR_326592_9V) Simon's Assessment Report (2)

25/10/2018

/ Page Numbers:

2182,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 25 October 2018 14:48

To: Nawal@stuartmiNersolicitors.co.uk

Subject: Fwd.: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report

Attachments: image001.jpg

ATT00164.htm; image002.jpg

ATT00167.htm

image003.jpg

ATT00170.htm

image004.jpg

ATT00173.htm

image005.jpg

ATT00176.htm

image006.png

ATT00179.htm

image007.png

ATT00182.htm

ATT00185.pdf

ATT00188.htm

Hi Nawal

Pls see report for Simon Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Date: 20 July 2018 at 16:28:13 BST

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: (DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report

Dear Lorraine,

Please find attached Simon's medical assessment report. Please note that this works in our favour as it will allow us to possibly get rid of the Injunction Order completely.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

STUARTMILLER

2183,

Blank Page!

2184,

Blank Page!

2185,

Blank Page!

2186,

Blank Page!

2187,

Blank Page

2188,

Blank Page!

2189,

Blank Page!

2190,

Blank Page!

2191,

Blank Page!

2192,

Blank Page!

2193,

Blank Page!

2194,

Blank Page!

2195,

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

2196,

2197,

2198,

2199,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report!

2200,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report!

2201,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report!

2202,

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report!

2203

(DPS:1:CR: 326592:9V) Simon's Assessment Report!

 

 

 

 

 

78.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2.

Mother The doctor gark in the end 29-10-2018-06-17

29/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2204,2205,2206,2207,2208,2209,2210

 

 78.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 2.

Mother The doctor gark in the end 29-10-2018-06-17

29/10/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2204,2205,2206,2207,2208,2209,2210

--

2204,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 29/10/2018 06:17:19 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Re: Section-2-Paperwork

Attachments: Section-2-chase-farm-25-10-2018.pdf

Simon

The doctor gave me the paperwork in the end so I took it so it could be scanned and sent to you that way it can’t be taken away again. with attachment

Mum

2205,

2206,

2207,

2208,

2209,

2210,

***

 

 

 

79.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 2.

Mother Please see attached 06-11-2018 -06-45

06/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2211,2212,2213,2214,2215,2216,2217,2218,2219,2220,2221,2222,2223,2224,2225

 

 

79.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 2.

Mother Please see attached 06-11-2018 -06-45

06/11/2018

/ Page Numbers:

2211,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 06/11/2018 06:45:08 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: Hospital-Report-06-11-2018

Attachments: Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

please see attached

2212,

NHS

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

Dorset ward

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey Mental Health Trust

The Chase Building 127

The Ridgeway

Enfield

EN2 8JL

Tel: 020 87024669

Fax: 020 8375 1442

Mental Health Tribunal Report

Date: 01/11/18

Patient details

Mr Simon Cordell (11214451)

Date of birth: 26 Jan 1981

Address: 109 Burncroft Avenue,

Enfield

Post Code: EN3 7JQ

Circumstances of admission and background

Mr Cordell is a 37 years old man with previous diagnosis of F29X - Unspecified nonorganic psychosis. He has been known to CAMHS service in the past and to Adult Mental Health Services since 2014. However he has not been engaging with the services in recent years despite numerous attempts from mental health teams.

Mr Cordell become significantly unwell in mental health in 2014. He deteriorated significantly in mental state, but he refused engage with mental health service and declined to take medication. Consequently he had to be detained under Section 2 of MHA in 2016. He was treated with medication (Olanzapine) during the admission but soon after discharge he stopped taking his medication. He continued to be seen by Early Intervention service following a discharge, but he continued to refuse any treatment for his condition. This led to further deterioration in mental health. When Mr Cordell is unwell, he presents with persecutory delusions about his neighbours, council staff and the police. As a result of paranoid beliefs he becomes more aggressive and threatening especially towards neighbours. From 2016 to January 2018 there were numerous complaints from neighbours reported about Nr Cordell’s acts of harassment and antisocial behaviour. This led to an interim injunction order (harassment order) to be issued against Mr Cordell, at the Edmonton County Court, in January 2018. Mr Cordell breached the order on multiple occasions. It has been reported that his neighbours have been assaulted, harassed, and have received threats from Mr Cordell. In addition, Mr Cordell disengaged with EIS.

In April 2018 further deterioration in mental health was observed when he contacted the police and complained about the neighbours making noise. EIS team was contacted and they offered to review Mr Cordell, but he refused to work with them again.

On the 1st of June he was arrested for harassing his neighbours and breaching the injunction order against him. He threatened his neighbour who was at the time with her two children that he

1

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2213,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

will kill her and her children “ You fucking bitch, I have a bomb for you, I will get in your block, kill you and your children At that point, EIS stated that he has gone beyond EIS three year treatment period and therefore they referred his case to Enfield North Locality Team in June 2018. During the period of next few months (from June 2018 until October 2018 - they were reported numerous accounts of harassment and assaults to his council on his neighbour) Mr Cordell has continued to harass his neighbours and has refused to engage with mental health services. Few neighbours already moved out from their flats due to Mr Cordell’s aggressive behaviour and Enfield Council decided to seek possession of Mr Cordell’s flat via the courts. In a recent court case the judge recommended that Enfield Council re-house Mr Cordell on the proviso that he engages with the MH Team. However he failed to do that.

In October 2018, Mr Cordell was physically aggressive towards another service user who lives in the same building as him. Mr Cordell took him by the throat and left him feeling unable to walk around on the floor or even flush his toilet chain for fear of sparking another altercation (with no basis) about excessive noise.

This triggered a safeguarding process and Enfield Adult North Locality Team decided to organise MHA assessment as Mr Cordell refused to engage with them.

Consequently, he was referred for MHA assessment on the 17th of October 2018. Enfield Adult North Locality Team agreed that he is at risk to others and his behaviour could also put him at risk from others. Application for 135(1) was made however a judge found insufficient evidence presented for a warrant. He was referred to a forensic sector following this event.

On the 25th of October he was arrested as the police were called to his flat regarding him breaking a harassment order and that day, he allegedly assaulted the police who attended by spitting. Consequently, he was taken to Wood Green police station. He was found to be thought disordered with grandiose and persecutory delusions, hypomanic with flight of ideas and pressured speech. Therefore MHA assessment was organised. He was detained under section 2 of MHA and admitted to Dorset ward, Chase Farm Hospital on the 25th of October 2018.

Mr Cordell explained that the police were conspiring with medics and the council to silence him as he had uncovered police corruption. He also said his neighbours two floors above were controlling the neighbour below them and caused them to stamp on the floor and disturb him. It was reported that he appeared to lack insight into his presentation as he did not believe he was mentally unwell and was adamant to see a psychiatrist for treatment.

Mental state examination on admission

Mr Cordell is 37-year-old male, mixed origin, slim build. He was wearing casual and dirty clothes. He engaged in conversation and made eye contact throughout. He was calm and polite during the interview; no aggression was observed but did become mildly restless at points. The conversation was one sided with Mr Cordell keen to talk. He presented with pressured speech and flight of ideas. Mood, subjectively he described as “fine, a bit elated”, objectively he was elated. Thoughts: He presented thought disordered with tangential thinking, grandiose and persecutory delusions. He was oriented to time, place, and person. He presented with poor insight - does not want any medications, he does not believe that has a mental health disorder.

Risk

To self - high

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2214,

NHS

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

Immediate risk to self is low as he denies any thoughts of self-harm or suicide. There are previous reports of suicide attempt as teenager. However he is at high risk of being evicted from his property at present due to deterioration in his mental state and behaviour and his mental and physical health could be significantly affected if he becomes homeless.

To others - high

He denies thoughts or plans to hurt others. He has clearly documented history of aggressive behaviour and currently elated.

From others - high, as he can be aggressive towards others, he is at risk of retaliation from others.

Risk of physical and verbal aggression towards others noted. This in turn, increases risk of others retaliating, therefore harm towards Mr Cordell.

Past psychiatric history:

Mr Cordell reportedly had disrupted childhood spending some adolescence in care. He was under CAMHS due to anxiety as a teenager.

Mr Cordell tried to hang himself at the age of 16 when in a young offender’s institution; he says he lost consciousness and needed to be resuscitated. He was moved to a high security hospital and kept in seclusion on a number of occasions, but he says he would destroy the padded cell with his teeth. He says he was seen regularly by a psychiatrist called Dr Caplin from "the safe project".

Mr Cordell says there was a second occasion where he tried to hang himself when in a cell after he was sentenced.

Mr Cordell denies any contact with Mental Health Services between that point and 2014.

In March 2014 - He was diagnosed with Adjustment reaction “anxiety and suicidal thoughts over the last nine months in the context of having a pending court case (accused of burglary). He was offered Sertraline 50mg OD.

In November 2014 - Mr Cordell was under Home Treatment Team. He was diagnosed with Psychotic episode - not deemed sanctionable under MHA. Following this episode he disengaged with mental health service.

In November 2015 - He was referred via BEH HUB to mental health services. At that time Mr Cordell was not eating, not sleeping, he was paranoid saying people were talking about him or laughing at him, believed the government was advertising things about him, the TV was talking about him and talking directly to him. He was smoking cannabis at that time. He was again found non sanctionable under MHA and disengaged with the service.

In February 2016 it was applied for Warrant 135 (1) - but not sufficient evidence was presented to the judge for a warrant.

In August 2016, he was admitted under Section 2 of the MHA following custody at Wood Green station for threats to kill - section 2 reversed on appeal. He was discharged on Olanzapine 5mg and followed up by EIS. It was reported poor compliance with medication on discharge. Consequently he was discharged from EIS due to disengagement.

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2215,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health ISIHS Trust

NHS

Past medical history:

Simon said he had Crohn's disease as a child. He denied any other physical health problems.

Current medications

Nil.

Personal/family history- information taken from previous assessments/reports

Mr Cordell was born at Chase Farm Hospital. He has a younger brother and sister. Mr Cordell says he knows his maternal grandmother attempted suicide on a number of occasions and had had admissions to mental hospital. Mr Cordell's father worked as a union representative and his mother ran her own computer company. His parents recently divorced.

Mr Cordell says he did not get on well with his father who was a violent man. He was violent towards Mr Cordell, Mr Cordell's mother and siblings. Mr Cordell left home at the age of fifteen and was homeless for a while. He was placed in to care after stealing a pint of milk. He was placed in a series of children's care homes around the UK but says that each time he would steal a car and drive back to London.

Mr Cordell said he was pushed hard to achieve at school by his father and that he was "an A-star student" for most of the time. He says he was intelligent and would do the work at other times and as a result would often just "mess about" in class. He went on to college and studied engine mechanics, completing a city & guilds qualification. After leaving school he went on to get jobs in the construction industry.

Mr Cordell says he has tried to build himself up a business for providing party entertainment. At the moment he says he is not able to earn from this due to the restrictions of his bail.

Mr Cordell has had two long term relationships. First relationship lasted for thirteen years. Mr Cordell thinks they broke up due to the repeated involvement of the police in their lives and the stress this has caused. He is currently in a relationship with Katy and he said that they were expecting a baby.

Mr Cordell says he does not smoke tobacco and does not drink alcohol.

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.

2216,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

Grandmother (? maternal) had BPAD and/or schizophrenia.

Social history:

Mr Cordell works from home currently. He says that he does 9-10-hour shifts building his website. Previously he has had multiple different jobs including working at a market and brick laying. He has a new baby on the way with Katy - due to get married soon. From Rio - “Enfield Council will be seeking possession of Mr Cordell’s flat via the courts. In a recent court case the judge recommended that Enfield Council re-house Mr Cordell on the proviso that he engages with the MH Team. He failed to fulfil the requirement.

Drug and alcohol history- information taken from previous assessments/reports

He reported being “Clean as anything, occasionally have a puff of a cigarette”. He denies drinking any alcohol. However UDS was positive for cannabis on admission.

Note on Rio previous LSD and cannabis use.

Forensic history -information taken from previous assessments/reports

He reported being linked to 500 cases, but he has won every one. He says these are all linked to driving offences.

From Rio - 2015- 5y ASBO for organising illegal raves- not allowed to enter industrial or disused premises between 10pm and 7 am. Young Offender's Institution at the age of 16 after repeated driving offences (driving without a license). Taken into custody for threats to kill.

August 2017 an injunction order was issued though this was discharged by the court in November 2017 due to a procedural error

On the 9th of January 2018 an injunction order was issued against him due to verbal and physical abuse towards his neighbours and council employees and antisocial behaviour. He breached the injunction order on multiple occasions. This was discharged in July 2018, following a forensic psychiatry assessment which deemed him to lack capacity to understand the conditions of the injunction (as a result of a psychotic illness).

Enfield council report was issued recently regarding tenancy concerns and breaches:

The report says the following:

We have received several complaints of anti-social behaviour against you and going back to 2016 for which you have been warned numerous times, verbally and formally in writing. Please see below a list of reports made against you:

1.      On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2.      Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

3.      On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2217,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4.      Sometimes in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109-119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and He was arrested on the 1st of June due to breaching the injunction order.

5.      threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.

6.      On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he was returned to his flat with his family and threatened and swore at him and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noises inside his flat.

7.      On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swearwords at them. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

8.      On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noises, you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

9.      On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard you threatened her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

10.  On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbours’ front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

11.  On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

12.  On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.

13.  On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. You then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

14.  13.On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply, you also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

15.  On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

16.  On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noises.

17.  On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

18.  We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2218,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

19.  On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you have installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

20.  On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through your door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, you ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that you attend our offices to discuss the nuisance reports being received from your neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, you had telephoned him several times. He telephoned you back and you asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through your letterbox and he said yes. You asked why he did not stop when you ran after him and he stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to you. You stated that you will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as you are unable to leave your flat and that the meeting should take place in your flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at your mother's house, but you refused saying that you have done nothing wrong and accused him of taking sides with your neighbours.

21.  On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours by saying that you will ruin his life and that you were going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

22.  On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into your flat to attack you. You later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

23.  On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that you allowed your dog to run freely in the communal area of your block without a lead.

24.  On 28th May 2017, the police issued you with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of your neighbours. 24.) On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbours in the communal hallway of your block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. You also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

25.  On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

26.  On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

27.  On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he brought took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28.  On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

29.  On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.

2219,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30.  On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31.  On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours, but you refused him access. The Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. He then called the police.

32.  On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of your neighbours that you came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. You then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as you saw the neighbour’s wife.

33.  On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that you stood outside your neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. You went away and returned half an hour later, you lifted their letterbox, stuck your mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34.  On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, you telephone Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an anti-social behaviour order against him and you told him that he had made you a prisoner within your home. You also stated that you knew where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from you. You also told him that you would watch him leave the office and you would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. You called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that you knew he has a flat in Edmonton and also knew that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. You also stated that you knew where they live, and they were not safe.

35.  On 9th January 2018 you called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36.  On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that you came to one of your neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. You ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37.  On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that you knocked on one of your neighbours’ door loudly, you started rattling with their letter box and started shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but you left after you’ve heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38.  On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that you swore, shouted, and assaulted one of you neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

39.  On 1st May 2018, you attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that you started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of your neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. You also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40.  On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that you attended one of your neighbours’ property; you took your dog with you and waited by their front door. It is alleged that you tried to intimidate them as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against you.

41.  On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that you made threats to kill to one of your neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. You were arrested and released on bail.

42.  You assaulted one of your neighbours on the 26th August 2018 for flashing his toilet.

43.  You telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla lyavoo) on 12t 

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2220,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. You also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44.  On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, you called one of your neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. You called again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard your voice. You called repeatedly after that.

45.  On 24th September 2018 at about 11,30am, one of your neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as your front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, your dog came out of your flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that your dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

46.  One of your neighbours reported that his cousin was leaving the block at about on 2nd October 2018 at 12.45pm, and as you exited the block, you followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push you off.

47.  There are other reports from one of your neighbours who reported that on 30th September 2018, you attempted to break down his front door by kicking it several times only because he flashed his toilet.

48.  It is reported that you continue to harass and intimidate other residents on a regular basis.

On the 25th of October he was arrested for breaching the injection order and spitting at the police officer on arrest.

Treatment and progress on the ward

On admission to Dorset ward, Mr Cordell presented elated, mildly irritable and thought disordered. On arrival to the room he remained calm and polite. He started the conversation by asking for duty doctor’s name, which he wrote down on a paper. He then stated he has been detained here illegally because they think he is grandiose. He then went onto give the duty doctor a timeline of events which were largely related to the police and his connection with mental health services. In summary, he holds paranoid ideas that the police have charged him 'in illegal ways' for an ASBO for 'organisation of illegal raves. This has led to several on-going issues with the police who have involved mental health services and it is a conspiracy against him.

He states he wasn't assessed properly by doctors today (25/10/18) and that the doctors who saw him today (25/10/18) have previously tried to section him and 'failed' because he has 'video recordings' to prove he is innocent. He referred to multiple acts and dates which apparently are being broken by keeping him here.

He states he has several businesses that the police have tried to stop, including 'owning festivals' and his website called 'horrific corruption' and associated newsroom which he uses to expose police and doctors who are working in illegal ways. He states he has 'been wronged 78 times by the police' and will 'expose all of the doctors and police' involved.

He spoke about being a 'privileged member of the community' and has never tried to hurt anyone. He reports the police have framed him in a 'sex scandal' and caused multiple issues. He described a negative relationship with neighbours and states that they bang from above continuously. He states a previous partner was pregnant and the neighbours banging led to the

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2221,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

baby being lost.

He denies having a mental health illness and states he will get out of here once he has his laptop containing video graphic proof and was requesting a tribunal. During the course of the conversation he refused to acknowledge he has been sectioned and was adamant he would be able to leave but was not forceful or physically attempting to leave.

When he was seen by ward doctor on the 26th of October Mr Cordell feels he is in hospital because the police have “falsified” a report that led to him being kept on a curfew for years.

He proceeded to talk at length about circumstance that led him to be charged for handling of stolen goods and suspicion of burglary in 2013. He believes the case was handled poorly and is sure the police were conspiring against him. “The abuse of process by the civil service was unreasonable”.

Following this he reports being placed on a 2-year injunction and a 5-year curfew. He feels this has led to a breakdown in a 13-year relationship he had. He also reports this affecting his company -a community interest company he started up. At one-point Mr Cordell also mentioned the police targeting him for holding large parties that he was adamant were not hosted by him.

Mr Cordell reports owning a couple of local festivals and talks about engaging with multiple charities helping children. He says he had to stop this as police were harassing him in front of the children. He alleges to own his own company, his own paper and has just bought his own book maker for 70000 pounds. He also reports having 180000 friends on Facebook due to all his free parties.

When asked about his neighbours Mr Cordell said he believes his neighbours have been making up complaints about him. “My neighbours are calling up the police after forging the paperwork.” He feels that his neighbours have been attacking him and reports feeling anxious in his house. Simon says he “kept writing to the police saying please can you protect me”.

He does not think he is unwell and does not think he has a mental health problem. He admits he might be elevated but he believes this is a constructive state.

Mr Cordell reports not being compliant with any of his medication at any point. He is refusing to take any medication during this admission. “I’ve spent thousands of pounds showing you my brain, me being alert saves lives.”

Mr Cordell would like to appeal his section and feels that by keeping him in hospital we are breaching his rights. “Physical or mental suffering amount to torture”

He reports sleeping, eating, and drinking well. Later he suggested this may not be the case stating, “In the night-time when my neighbours are asleep that’s the best time for working”.

Impression was that he presented with paranoid and grandiose delusions with significant mood component. In view of long-term symptoms this is most likely consistent with a Schizoaffective disorder. He does not currently have capacity for treatment or admission.

He settled in over the weekend, personal hygiene remained poor, smell of cannabis on him was noticed.

On the 29th October 2018 when he was seen by a nurse, he was irritable and quite hostile. He was

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2222,

NHS

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

on the phone to his relative, complaining about police and claimed to be falsely accused.

On the 29th of October Formulation meeting was held:

Care coordinator ‘s feedback: This is only the second time meeting Simon. There have been issues with reports he is assaulting other residents in his council accommodation.

Nursing report: He appears paranoid on the ward.

interview with patient:

Mr Cordell appeared very agitated and vocal and was keen to put across his opinion that he had been illegally detained.

Mr Cordell reports issues with police actions in regard to not giving him the ASBO folder properly - this was left outside instead of giving it to him directly. Mr Cordell continued to explain other problems with the police’s treatment of him. This includes the metropolitan police having placed a photo of Mr Cordell in a folder in regard to a party he had no involvement with. He denies being involved in any of the parties mentioned in the ASBO. Mr Cordell spoke at length about the injustices surrounding his placement on curfew and the ASBO order.

He describes how on multiple times doctors have tried to assess him under the MHA and he has explained to them at each time the situation with the police. He was once placed under a section 2 and was able to appeal his section.

Mr Cordell reports the neighbours (?2 floors up) trying to deliberately disturb him by making a lot of noise and flushing the toilet multiple times. He feels they want him to get distressed and go upstairs to address them. They have been doing this over the last 4 years and are doing this throughout the day. From Mr Cordell’s flat you can even hear them talking - there is apparently very poor sound proofing.

Mr Cordell has described a council official as having forged statements and falsely accusing him of threatening his life. Mr Cordell reports that he is being assaulted by his neighbours as is his partner’s small child. He feels the stress from this situation may have been linked to his partner’s miscarriage. Mr Cordell denies any acts of antisocial behaviour, even in retaliation. At every point where he approaches the upstairs neighbours, he states he calls the police to ask then to “protect” him.

In regard to the recent arrest he reports the police attended due to a fraudulent call from the neighbours. The police tried to hand him a breach of harassment order which Mr Cordell ripped and spat on the paper. The police officer then yelled that he had spat on her. He was then arrested for assault to a police officer. This charge was dropped in the police station and he was referred for an MHA.

Mr Cordell is currently on benefits. He reports the expensive hardware he owns (e.g. 70000-pound bookmaker) he buys broken and second hand cheaply and fixes them. Mr Cordell works from home. He built a new model constitution - a community interest company which was a charity farm.

Collateral information:

His mother and uncle would like mental health service to stop referring to Mr Cordell reporting the police as being prejudice against him as delusional - they believe this can be proved (showing

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2223,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

photos of his company truck and hardware).

Mr Cordell ‘s mother is very upset that doctors have submitted reports stating that he is delusional and grandiose. They feel the AMHP report is grossly inaccurate.

Mr Cordell ‘s uncle is also upset that the mental health team would not provide Mr Cordell with a letter to assist with his housing situation.

They explain that the reason Mr Cordell has not be prosecuted for the complaints made by the neighbours is because each time Mr Cordell is able to "prove his innocence" directly to the police.

Mr Cordell ‘s mother believes he is very stressed due to the conditions of the ASBO and his neighbours disturbing him.

His uncle would like us to check the website that Mr Cordell has set up to highlight the injustices against him “horrificcorruption.com”. (other websites mentioned by Simon include the Way back machine and too smooth).

Impression was that Mr Cordell was unstable in mental state and behaviour. He presented with persecutory delusions and possibly auditory hallucinations.

Plan was:

1.      Requires further review of notes

2.      Liaise Enfield council re plans for housing - ask Rosie for input

Following the formulation meeting he presented very grandiose - showing staff and peers his website and that he has '20,000 emails and 500,000 phone contacts'. He seems elated and keen to get his message across.

Dr Timothy Rogers e-mailed Dr Greensides on the 30th of October 2018 as Mr Cordell was referred to a forensic sector prior MHAA and wrote that he has terrorised their patient (who lives above him) including one occasion taking him by the throat and left our patient feeling unable to walk around on the floor or even flush his toilet chain for fear of sparking another altercation (with no basis) about excessive noise.

Mr Cordell was reviewed on the 31st of October 2018 by Dr Greensides (Consultant psychiatrist), Dr Elia and Dr Bruce:

Mr Cordell confirms his problems began in 2013. He moved into his premises in 2013 - there was evidence of CO poisoning in the flat and all the boiler systems and alarms had to be replaced.

Mr Cordell has been held on curfew for a long time for organising a party and? wrongly accused of damaging the premises. Also was accused of burglary and handling of stolen goods - he was found innocent on both accounts.

Mr Cordell reports having had a “relationship” with his current partner Katy for the last ?20 years. She has a son from a previous relationship.

The problems with the neighbours have been going on for 4 years now. Mr Cordell is concerned about his neighbours, in particular to how their behaviour might affect their child. 6 flats in total in his council building - the neighbours that are problematic are 2 floors above Mr Cordell’s. These

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2224,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

NHS

particular neighbours bang on the water pipes, stamps on the floor (this echo through the flat between) - this happens first thing in the morning and goes on through the day.

Mr Cordell believes his neighbours sit in their flat eavesdropping on Mr Cordell’s whereabouts. When he enters the bathroom, they enter their bathroom and flush the toilet a lot. Simon has Video and Audio recordings throughout his flat in order to prove his innocence. There is a husband and wife living there as well as a new-born baby. Mr Cordell reports he can hear this family talking but he can’t make out what they are saying - he denies them saying anything negative about him “they’ve never spoke to me”.

Simon has personal information about his neighbour which he feels is proof of? tax evasion - he reports the family own 50 houses in the UK. The neighbour has changed their surname in order to accommodate some scheme to avoid? tax - Mr Cordell reports he has “100% evidence” that this is true and feels it is relevant to him because of how they are treating him. Mr Cordell believes what the neighbours are doing is a hate crime.

Mr Cordell denies ever having felt like the TV was talking to him or that the council was advertising his information. Mr Cordell does feel his personal information is being advertised somehow - friends have approached him and have information about him he believes can only have come from secure computer systems.

Mr Cordell is not concerned about his tenancy at the moment - he states he has recordings that prove his innocence. Simon is aware the council has told him to stay away from his neighbours - since this time he states he hasn’t approached his neighbours. He wants to publish a book about what has been going on. Simon does not appear to accept that he has become fixated on this issue.

Mr Cordell does not think his problems with his neighbours are in any way due to him having a mental health problem. Mr Cordell wouldn’t like to take medication as he doesn’t feel he needs it and is concerned medication may impact his ability work. He is particularly concerned that the medication will “dope him out”.

Mr Cordell states he has a good family support network. He is happy to see the ward psychologist.

Mr Cordell has been informed that a referral to a forensic psychiatrist who may want to visit him on the ward.

Impression was that he presented with persecutory delusions and poor insight into his condition. Not currently deemed to be a risk to himself or others. He could be at high risk of losing accommodation if continues untreated. Plan was:

1.      For Section 17 leave

2.      No medication at present

3.      Refer to ward Psychologist - Dr Patkas

He has terrorised our patient (who lives above him) including one occasion taking him by the throat and left our patient feeling unable to walk around on the floor or even flush his toilet chain for fear of sparking another altercation (with no basis) about excessive noise.

Simon-Report-06-11-2018.pdf

2225,

NHS

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

Opinion and recommendations

1.      Mr Cordell suffers from a mental disorder, the symptoms of which at present are persecutory delusions, grandiose beliefs, and attitude. In addition, he also presented thought disordered with circumstantial thinking. Probably he has been experiencing auditory hallucinations too. His condition is complicated by poor insight into his mental health illness and substance misuse.

2.      This illness is currently of a nature and degree to warrant detention under section 2 of the mental health act.

3.      Without this there are risks to his health, principally mental health which is likely to continue to deteriorate without intervention. He is also at high risk from being evicted from his current accommodation which could put his mental and physical health at significant risk. His safety is compromised by possible retaliation from others when he is behaving aggressively towards other people. As well as the safety of others as he was aggressive to his neighbours, council employees and police prior to admission.

4.      This cannot be carried out in the community as he has limited insight and refuses intervention, tried for a number of years, and failed.

5.      Should he be discharged then he will be referred to the HTT but is not likely to engage.

6.      Tribunal need no special arrangements to accommodate Mr Cordell.    

Dr Maja Elia

ST6 to Dr Jonathan Greensides Consultant Psychiatrist, Dorset ward

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2.

Mother Here the two you got today 08-11-2018-09-29

08/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2226,2227,2228,2229,2230,2231,2232,2233,2234

 

 80.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

80. 1. 2.

Mother Here the two you got today 08-11-2018-09-29

08/11/2018

/ Page Numbers:

2226,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 08/11/2018 09:29:02 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Re: Reports from today

Attachments: Si-Soobah-Appadoo-08-11-2018.pdf

Si-Bibi-Khodabux-08-11-2018.pdf

here the 2 reports you got today

2227,

Si-Bibi-Khodabux-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

«address of person preparing the report»

Dorset ward

Inpatient Nursing Report on Simon Cordell

Date of birth: 26/01/1981

Home address: 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield

Post Code: EN3 7JQ

Hospital: Chase Farm Hospital-

The Ridgeway Enfield Middlesex EN2 8JL.

MHA status: Section 2

Named Nurse: Bibi Khodabux

Report prepared by Bibi Khodabux

Sources of Information: Rio notes, observations, feedback from the team and 1:1 session’s with patient.

·         I am a staff nurse on Dorset ward, and I have known Simon since his admission to the ward.

1.      Circumstances leading to admission

Simon is a 37-year-old service user admitted on 25/10/18 under section 2 of the MHA. It was reported that he had not been engaging with the services in recent years. He was arrested for spitting at a police officer after they were called about him harassing his neighbours. He also has a number of no molestation orders against him, forbidding him contacting them. He was taken to Wood Green police station and during Mental Health Act assessment he appeared to be thought disordered, had no insight, held several grandiose and delusional beliefs. On admission he was irritable in mood, elated and grandiose.

2.      Current nursing care

Simon is nursed in a safe environment. He has been encouraged to approach staff to discuss his feelings. A therapeutic outlet has been provided for him to ventilate his feelings.

3.      He has been offered 1:1

·         session with staff on each shift to discuss his care plan and also to gain his cooperation and to get him involved in his treatment. He was encouraged to get involved in his care plan and discuss his views. Staff encouraged him to gain insight so that he would engage.

·         Staff initiated establishing rapport with him which has gradually improved.

·         He has politely declined to attend occupational therapy sessions on the ward. He is currently nursed on general observation.

·         Nursing report for inpatient

(Reports for MHA Hearings Policy v5.0 - Appendix H)

2228,

Si-Bibi-Khodabux-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey CTJH

Mental Health NHS Trust

4.      Current medication

He is currently on no regular medication

He is on PRN Lorazepam Maximum 4 mg in 24 hours.

Paracetamol PRN 1g 4-6 hourly.

Ibuprofen 400 mg Maximum TDS in 24 hours

5.      Contact with others

He interacts well with fellow patients and staff on the ward.

He has been leaving the ward to proceed on unescorted section 17 leave and he complied with it.

His mother and uncle visited him on the ward and observed to have interacted well with them.

6.      Progress on the ward-

On admission he presented with challenging behaviour, intermittently agitated, hostile, argumentative, and demanding to leave the ward but did not make any physical attempt to leave. He has now. calmed down but there is limited progress in his mental state.

He has no insight and complains of being wrongfully detained.

He states that there is a conspiracy by the police and mental health services that are all out to get him. He claims to have set up a website with details, videos, and recordings.

7.      During 1:1

with Simon he appears preoccupied with talking about his websites

He states he has several businesses that the police have tried to stop.

He is eating and drinking well.

He has limited insight.

He attends to his personal care which has improved.

He socialises with other patients and staff on the ward.

He engages willingly with staffs.

8.      Incidents

There is no report of any incidents on the ward.

9.      Risk

At present risk to self is low. He did not express any thoughts of self-harm.

He is at risk of further deterioration in his mental state if he does not comply with medication.

Risk to others is low on the ward. He did not present with any aggressive outburst during admission. Has been reported to be at risk to his neighbours in the community due to his aggressive behaviour.

10.  Factors affecting this hearing

11.  Nursing report for inpatient

(Reports for MHA Hearings Policy v5.0 - Appendix H)

2

2229,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Hearth NHS Trust

He should be able to attend this tribunal and also cope with the outcome with the help and support from staffs.

12.  Opinion and recommendations

Is detention in hospital for (S2) or the provision of medical treatment in hospital justified or necessary.

It is important that Simon remains in hospital under section 2 so that his mental state can be fully assessed followed by treatment.

He has no insight and is not willing to cooperate with his treatment.

He does not believe that he needs medication.

There is a high probability that he will not cooperate and disengage from services.

He will be putting himself and his neighbours at risk due to his aggressive and confrontational behaviour.

He will be at risk of losing his accommodation.

Signed

Date: 03/11/2018

(Print Name) Bibi KHODABUX

Nursing report for inpatient

(Reports for MHA Hearings Policy v5.0 - Appendix H)

3

2230,

Si-Soobah-Appadoo-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet Enfield and Haringey

Mental Health Trust

Enfield Adult North Locality Team

58-60 Silver Street EN1 3EP

Social Circumstances Report for S.C Rio no 11214451 on Section 2 of the MHA 1983/2007

Date of birth: 26th January 1981

Home address: 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Date of Admission: 26™ October 2018

Hospital/Ward: Chase Farm Hospital, Dorset Ward

Care Coordinator: Soobah Appadoo- Allocated August 2018

Report prepared by: Soobah Appadoo

Sources of Information: Electronic Documentation on Rio

Nearest Relative: Ms Cordell (mother)

Date of this report: 7th November 2018

Who you are and in what capacity you know the patient, how long you have worked with them: My name is Soobah Appadoo. I am a CPN with the above-named team. I have been asked to compile this social circumstance report in support of above-named patient’s Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) appeal against his detention under Section 2 of the Mental Health Act.

·         Mr Cordell was admitted on section 2 on the 26th October 2018.

·         Mr Cordell was previously under the care of the Early Intervention Team for 3 years. The Early Intervention Team discharged him in June 2018 and at that point he was referred to our team. There is a suggestion on RIO notes that he did not engage well with that team.

·         I was allocated to Mr Cordell in August 2018. We offered him an appointment at his flat on the 31st August. Mr Cordell rang our office the day before and spoke to me. I informed him that I am his new Care Coordinator. He said that he had been seen for "76 days by his CC" and there was "nothing wrong with me". He said that the reason we want to see him is to "cover for missing signatures?". He said he "will ruin anyone who come to my house" and he has "recording cameras and audios" to ruin us. He said if you come to my house "I f...ing will scar you for life". He used foul languages throughout this contact. He said that I "can take the f...ing referral and stick it up my a..e". He said that he does not want to see us. I could not interrupt him: very verbally aggressive with pressure in speech". I did manage to say that we are a different team from Lucas House and we want him to have a fresh start- He said "I don't f...ing care"

·         Further to that the MDT advised that we should assess Mr Cordell in clinic due to the potential risks. We then offered him an appointment on the 28th September which Mr Cordell did not attend.

1

2231,

Si-Soobah-Appadoo-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey CTIH

Mental Health NHS Trust

·         My report is based on the information which I have extracted from RIO and my telephone conversation with Mr Cordell’s mother.

1.      Psychiatric history

·         On the 16th August 2016 Mr Cordell was admitted to CFH under Section 2 of the MHA. He was discharged on the 27th August 2016. According to RIO notes Mr Cordell “was arrested at his home address after his mother raised concerns about his mental state - he was allegedly verbally threatening towards his neighbour and (?) neighbour's children. Simon's mother called police who arrested him. He was seen by the FME at Wood Green police station, was then referred for MHA.”

·         He appealed against his Section. The Mental Health Review Tribunal discharged him from Section 2 on the 26th August 2016.

2.      Leading to current admission

·         As I stated above leading to this admission Mr Cordell did not attend appointments offered to him by our service. Subsequently due to the allegations made against him I was advised to attend a Safeguarding meeting for an alleged victim. In that meeting I was informed by the Council that Mr Cordell has a past and current history of physical and verbal aggression towards residents in the building. I was informed that the council has tried to work with Mr Cordell but to no avail. I had informed me that Mr Cordell was getting easily irritated even by the sound of a flushing toilet; this happened very recently, and he threatened the resident concerned. The Council was of the opinion that these are signs of mental illness and suggested that BEH should proceed with an MHA. The Council argued that this is for the protection of others as well as Mr Cordell’s own safety.

·         Subsequently the council sent us a copy of ‘Anti-Social Behaviour, Tenancy concerns and breaches- pre-action letter’ which contained a chronology of alleged incidents dating from 2016. These alleged incidents were in the meaning of an antisocial behaviour presentation.

·         On the 17th October Mr Cordell was discussed in our MDT meeting. A decision was made to conduct an MHA. An MHA was attempted on the 19th October. Mr Cordell did not cooperate, and the assessment did not take place.

·         On the 23rd October an application for a warrant was made but was declined on the grounds “that there was insufficient recent evidence that he was being "kept under proper control" as he is living alone and “insufficient recent medical evidence that "he is unable to care for himself.

·         According to RIO, on the 25th October Mr Cordell was arrested for breaching a harassment order. It was alleged that he was aggressive towards the police and spat at them. He was assessed at the police station. On interview he had pressure of speech, delusions about his neighbours and the police and housing ganging up against him. He denied drug use. He said that does not have a mental disorder. The

2

2232,

Si-Soobah-Appadoo-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey CTIH

Mental Health NHS Trust

·         doctors who assessed Mr Cordell found him “hypomanic, with flight of speech, grandiose and thought disordered”

3.      Forensic history

·         Nil known.

4.      Risk History

·         According to the Risk Assessment on RIO notes Mr Cordell had expressed suicidal thoughts in the past. This was related to stress from court cases. The date is not stated in the Risk Assessment. Around that time he said that he had researched ways of harming himself (poisoning, OD, hanging). He had said in the past that he tried to hang himself aged 16 when he was in a young offender’s institute. He had said that he needed resuscitation. He tried to hang himself a second time after he was sentenced by a judge aged 20. He had said that he drank Nitrous Oxide in 2014 with intent to die.

·         According to his Risk Assessment he was regularly a victim or witness of his father’s violent behaviour.

·         There are recent reports from the Council regarding alleged aggressive behaviours towards other residents. In June 2018 he was apparently involved in court case with the neighbours who he apparently threatened to harm.

5.      Social circumstances

Personal History

·         Mr Cordell is single. He has a partner. He has no children. He was born in Enfield and did his schooling in Edmonton. Left school aged 16. He studied and worked in mechanics and road works, electrical and computers after he left school (mother’s report)

Accommodation

·         Mr Cordell lives in a 1 bedroom flat on the ground floor. The flat has necessary amenities/facilities to allow independent living.

Employment

·         He is not currently in employment Finances

·         He claims ESA and needs to make an application for PIP

3

2233,

Si-Soobah-Appadoo-08-11-2018.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey CTIH

Mental Health NHS Trust

6.      Views of family

·         I telephoned Ms Cordell on the 7th November 2018. Ms Cordell told me that neighbours have been “terrorising” his son since 2014 in particular a neighbour on the 2nd floor. Ms Cordell told me that whilst her son is in hospital her nephew has been staying in the flat to look after the dog. The nephew has reported that the occupier on the 2nd floor have been “banging” on the floor. She said that the neighbour then realised that her son is not in the flat when they saw the nephew coming out of Mr Cordell’s flat. She told me that since the 26th October the “banging” has stopped. She said that she has complained about the neighbour herself but thinks these situations are misinterpreted by the council and the mental health services and her son is then seen as the perpetrator and or being mentally unwell. Ms Cordell stated that the sound proofing is lacking, and the noise is real. Other neighbours have made allegations that Mr Cordell has been aggressive towards them. She said that there is no evidence of this; police have seen CCTV and found that her son had not left the flat at the time when these incidents were alleged to have happen. Ms Cordell gave another example in 2016 where it was alleged by a neighbour that her son had made threats to kill him. She said that the police initially charged her son with making threats to kill; after seeing video evidence they charged him with a ‘Public Order Offence’. She said that around the time of this alleged incident her son was in his flat with some friends. Her son was not allowed to his flat and was bailed to her flat where he stayed until December 2016. She said that the CPS after seeing evidence dismissed the case a day before the trial. She said that the council has never taken the responsibility to look at evidences; the allegations made against her son (physical assault, letting his dog on the loose) have not been proven. She said that on the 9th August in court the Judge ordered Enfield Council to move her son to a 2-bedroom flat but the Council wants/plans to evict him instead. She said that the Council has no grounds to apply for her son’s eviction.

·         She said that her son has a one bedroom flat. She said that he does not want to live there. She said that he needs a 2 bedroom flat with the plan that his cousin could stay with him to provide emotional support. She said that her son has everything he needs in the flat. She told me that her son is very independent in activities of daily living; his personal care is extremely good; he cooks for himself, maintains the flat and takes responsibility for his bills. She told me that he has no financial difficulties/no debts.

·         She said that her son has a work history. In 2010 he was planning to set up a business in the entertainment industry. He has also built websites in relation to this. At present he is not in employment. He is in receipt of Employment Support Allowance but needs to make an application for Personal Independent Payment.

·         I asked her if she thinks her son has a mental illness; she told me that he suffers from stress and anxiety due to issues with the neighbours but does not think he has a mental illness. She said that the judged looked at evidence and did not grant a warrant in October 2018 for a mental health act to take place at her son’s flat.

·         I asked Ms Cordell if she thinks her son could benefit from support from the community team. She said that he could do with some support but “we should stop labelling him as being delusional as he is not delusional”.

4

2234,

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey KWH

Mental Health WHS Trust

7.      After-Care

·         Potentially Mr Cordell care/treatment would be delivered via the Care Programme Approach. I am the allocated Care Coordinator and he will have a responsible clinician in the community.

·         My role would be first of all to build a relationship with Mr Cordell as I have only met him on 2 occasions. I will try to motivate him to engage with myself and the multidisciplinary team. As his Care Coordinator I will review Mr Cordell regularly independently and with the Community RC.

·         We have a Team Clinical Psychologist and it would be vital for Mr Cordell to have some form of talking therapy. This is on the basis of the stress and anxiety that his mother states he suffers from.

·         We have a Dual Diagnosis Worker in the team who could offer drug counselling if necessary.

·         We have an organisation called ‘Remploy’ which is funded by the Local Authority. Potentially they could support Mr Cordell to find work. They meet regularly with clients whilst they are in work and also liaise with employers.

·         I could support Mr Cordell in making an application for PIP. Alternatively he could get that support from ‘Enfield Well-Being Connect’

·         The Mental Health Enablement Team could provide support in tenancy management as well as support to access education/training and work.

8.      Opinion and recommendations

·         I have met Mr Cordell on two occasions only and I have not had the opportunity to assess him in the community. A rapport needs to be established with him.

·         On the basis of recent events, history of risks to self and alleged risks towards others and taking into account the views of the MDT on the ward I think that he would benefit from a longer stay in hospital. This is in-order for the MDT to assess him comprehensively to determine if he has a severe and enduring mental illness such as schizophrenia/psychosis. If it is determined that he has a severe mental illness, then this should be treated accordingly whilst he is in hospital.

Signed: Soobah Appadoo, CPN

Dated: 07/11/2018

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

81.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1045. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (2)

08/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2235

 

 81.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1045. Lorraine Cordell _Fwd._ LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (2)

08/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2235

--

2235,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 08 November 2018 08:44

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Fwd.: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: image001.jpg

ATT03250.htm

image002.jpg

ATT03253.htm

image003.jpg

ATT03256.htm

image004.jpg

ATT03259.htm

image005.jpg

ATT03262.htm

image006.png

ATT03265.htm

image007.png

ATT03268.htm

LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018.docx

ATT03271.htm

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk>

Date: 13 August 2018 at 15:14:17 BST

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: FW: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Should be 24 Pages

 

 

 

 

 

 

82.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2.

Mother here the ld. cer discharged 10-11-2018-02-59

10/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2236,2237,2238,2239,2240

 

 

82.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 2.

Mother here the ld cer discharged 10-11-2018-02-59

10/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2236,2237,2238,2239,2240

--

2236,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 10/11/2018 02:59:36 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: Old Court Order

Attachments: Emmanuel Simon Cordell.pdf

VLS_20171215_103522.pdf

VLS_20171215_103441.pdf

here the Id court order discharged they did try and get it put back in t place but the Judge would not allow it, they started to try from Dec 2017 and failed in Jan 2018 that's why they done the new order on the 09 Jan 2018

2237,

2238,

2239,

2240,

 

 

 

 

 

 

83.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4738 15-11-2018 00-53

15/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2241,2242

 

 83.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4738 15-11-2018 00-53

15/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2241,2242

--

2241,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 15/11/2018 12:53:18 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your November account summary inside.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

November Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

Did you register a

. co.uk,

. org.uk or

. me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019. Learn more.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

What's in your account:

Domains

Update your domain settings

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

TOOSMOOTH.CO.UK

Manage Your Domains

2242,

cPanel Hosting

Hang your shingle in a global marketplace with a. store web and email address. Shop new. store domains for just

Ł58.10

Ł3.99 right now.

Ł11.70

Ł0.88*

Ł123.86

Ł34.14*

Ł18.10

Ł7.10*

*See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

2000254146

 

 

 

 

 

 

84.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2.

Mother Please see Action 2 Outcome 15-11-2018-07-08

15/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2243,2244,2245,2246,2247,2248,2249

 

 84.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 2.

Mother Please see Action 2 Outcome 15-11-2018-07-08

15/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2243,2244,2245,2246,2247,2248,2249

 

--

2243,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 15/11/2018 07:08:42 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: Appeal-Section-2-outcome

Attachments: Appeal-section-2-Outcome-14-11-2018.pdf

please see attached

2244,

2245,

2246,

2247,

2248,

2249,

 

 

 

 

85.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1062. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ For the attention of District Judge Dias - E00ED049

22/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2250,2251,2252,2253,2254,2255       

 

 85.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1062. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ For the attention of District Judge Dias - E00ED049

22/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2250,2251,2252,2253,2254,2255 

--

2250,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 22 November 2018 15:42

To: 'enquiries@edmonton.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: For the attention of District Judge Dias - E00ED049

Attachments: For the attention of District Judge Dias.pdf

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I have written the attached letter for the attention of District Judge Dias after a call I made to the court and being told to do this, could you kindly forward the attached letter to District Judge Dias

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

2251,

RE: For the attention of District Judge Dias - E00ED049->For the attention of District Judge Dias.pdf

Miss Lorraine Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ

Case Ref: E00ED049

For the attention of District Judge Dias

For and on behalf of Mr Simon Cordell from Miss Lorraine Cordell (Mother) 22/11/2018

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

VS

MR SIMON CORDELL

Dear District Judge Dias

·         It is with concern that I must now bring this matter to your attention regarding the hearing of the 09th August 2018 case reference E00ED049 for which you were the presiding judge

·         Whereby You asked Enfield Council to draft the order and to be submitted to the court for it to be sealed, Enfield Council contacted Mr Cordell’s solicitor regarding amendments that were made, Mr Cordell’s solicitor was away on annual leave, when Mr Cordell solicitor came back from annual leave she made amendments to Enfield Council’s draft order but has never heard back regarding the amendments she made.

·         Enfield Council’s draft order was somehow then sealed by the court a few days after Mr Cordell’s solicitor sent the draft order, she had made to Enfield Council and the

1

2252,

courts. At this time the 22 November 2018 we still have not had a copy of the courts sealed order.

·         I believe there is errors within Enfield Council’s draft order to what was actually said in court, and I do not know how to address this, but Enfield Council is stating things to people that was not even stated in court.

·         At this time I am trying to put in an application to obtain the transcripts of the court hearing, but I am waiting for some information from the court in order to be able to do this.

·         Mr Cordell has not long been released from hospital where he was under section, Enfield Council have still not moved him and he still living in hell regarding what the neighbours are doing to him.

·         It would seem Enfield Council has been relaying incorrect information to the mental health team regarding the court hearings, and I believe they are being able to get away with this due to how they drafted the court order of the 09th August 2018 hearing.

·         It seems Enfield Council is doing everything they can not to move my son, they have even stated they are going for a possession order of his flat, in fact they told the mental health team:

“Enfield Council has decided to seek possession of Mr Cordell’s flat via the courts. In a recent court case the judge recommended that Enfield Council re­house Mr Cordell on the proviso that he engages with the mental health team which is failed to do.”

·         This was not said in court in fact when Enfield Council tried to put this in place you told them no you would not allow this.

·         It seems as if Enfield Council will stop at nothing to not move my son, I have been trying to liaison with Enfield Council and the mental health team regarding moving my son, it would seem shortly after the court hearing my son was moved over to a

2

2253,

new mental health team who I was in contact with asking for help in regards to them writing a letter regarding my son’s housing which they refused to do until they had met him, this in itself was going to cause a problem because as you are aware my son does not feel as if he has a mental health problem, I even emailed Angela Hague as she was the last person to have assessed my son in June 2018 which the court had a report of and was read before the court on the 26 June 2018 at the hearing.

·         The issue seems to be with the like to like property, which I do not believe is appropriate as I believe my son needs family support and someone staying with him in order for us to try and make him understand that he needs support from the mental health team, I know this was spoken about in court on 9 August 2018 where I believe Enfield Council is stating you told them to consider this, but Enfield Council will not consider this unless I get a letter from the mental health team, Enfield Council is also under the assumption I stated my son needed supported accommodation, I did not state this in court, I said I did not want my son in supported accommodation that if my son had a two-bedroom property his family would support him which I believe in the correct things to do for my son.

·         It seems as if Enfield Council is continuously passing information that is incorrect to the mental health team, and the only reason I can see for this is that they are trying to keep him in hospital.

·         From the point my son was hospitalised and taken out of that flat his health started to improve greatly in hospital, even the doctors and nurses noticed this, they tried to put in place a section 3 due to what Enfield Council has said to them, the section 3 was not granted due to laws within section 3 and my son not being detain-able under section 3, my son stated he was willing to stay voluntarily in hospital and he was willing to do this, but due to the doctors not getting the section 3 they wanted, they then discharged my son the following day with no support in place because they needed the beds.

·         Since my son has gone back to the flat his health has started to decline again, due to what the neighbours are doing. When my son was in hospital his cousin was staying at the flat to look after my son’s dog, the first day he stayed there he himself was going

3

2254,

to go up to the neighbours regarding the constant banging, the next day the neighbours saw my son’s cousin from their window, and I believe at that point they knew my son was not there, so the banging stopped.

·         Since my son was getting no help from Enfield Council I took it upon myself to make an appointment to see his MP, his MP is in contact with Enfield Council, but the longer my son is left in that flat the worst his health is going to get due to what the neighbours are doing. I believe the MP has now also caught adult social services involved in at this time we are waiting for a letter from Enfield Council regarding moving my son, but I am scared due to Enfield Council knowing my son has been released from hospital they are going to start court proceedings for a possession order, although the MP has told me not to worry about my son being evicted I cannot help but worry, I have tried to get hold of my sons solicitor who acted for him but due to them being more involved in criminal law I do not believe as was stated in court on 9 August 2018 they understand civil in the way it should be, a belief they feel that the case was concluded on 9 August 2018, and therefore have little involvement thereafter.

·         When I called the court and explained the situation the court bought up the order of 9 August 2018, and stated there is not an order that my son is moved by Enfield Council, I was under the belief that this is what the court did order, therefore I fail to understand why it is not included as part of the court order Enfield Council drafted.

·         Any help would be greatly appreciated as at this point in time I am not sure what to do or where I stand to help my son, it seems Enfield Council can do what they want to leave my son in the flat which is affecting his health due to what the neighbours are doing, mislead the mental health service in what Enfield Council is saying to them, not once since this order was made has Enfield Council bothered to even want to see my son to see how he is coping, I’m sure there should be some duty of care towards my son yet Enfield Council don’t seem to believe they need to follow that.

·         It just like the way throughout all the court hearings Enfield Council was at, where they misled the court regarding to my son’s health, I am asking for help as at this point, I don’t know where to turn and what to do.

4

2255,

·         I look forward to hearing from you with your views and recommendations in regard to this.

Yours Sincerely

Miss Lorraine Cordell (Mother of Simon Cordell

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

86.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1065. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Subject access Request Simon Cordell (2)

25/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2256,2257,2258,2259,2260,2261,2262

 

 86.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1065. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Subject access Request Simon Cordell (2)

25/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2256,2257,2258,2259,2260,2261,2262

--

2256,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 25 November 2018 12:07

To: 'enfield.data.protection.officer@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Subject access Request Simon Cordell

Attachments: Simon-Records-Request-Enfield-Council-25-11-2018.pdf

ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf.

Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Citizencard.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached 4 documents regarding the request for all data that his held about me on Enfield Council systems all departments. If you need a fee or any other information, please reply to this Email as soon as possible.

Regards

2257,

RE: Subject access Request Simon Cordell->Simon-Records-Request-Enfield-Council-25-11-2018.pdf

Mr Simon Paul Cordell

109 Burncroft Ave

Enfield

Middlesex

EN3 7JQ

25/11/2018

Data Protection Officer Enfield Council Civic Offices Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Subject access request

Dear Sir or Madam

I Mr Simon Paul Cordell of

109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7JQ

DOB: 26/01/

Please supply the data about me that I am entitled to under data protection law

1.      Full copy of all records held about me on all Enfield council systems all departments, this would include all departments at Enfield Council and any Rd information that has been shared between any government bodies and 3 parties.

2.      This would include everything that is held on IT systems and held in paper- based files, for all departments, Telephone Calls, Emails, shared information, Audio, and video, this would include all dates and times information was received or sent regarding Mr Cordell.

1

2258,

3.      Community Safety Unit involvement, including all calls and letters and emails relating to Mr Cordell and any shared information this would include emails phone calls and any other related information, this would include all dates and times information was received or sent regarding Mr Cordell.

4.      Anti-Social Behaviour team all reports, including all calls and letters and emails, video audio and shared information this would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell to any government body or 3 party.

5.      Any neighbours reports statements and emails audio and video and Enfield Council reports, relating to Anti-Social Behaviour, to and from Enfield Council and any other 3 party, or government body, this would include police and, mental health services, adult social care MPs and any information shared, this would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

6.      Any information where repairs have needed to be carried out due to Mr Cordell, or a 3-party causing damage to property. This would include any repairs that were needed from any 3rd party or 3rd party landlord and all invoices for such work being carried out for any repairs needed or proof that work has been carried out this would include phone calls and emails, and any information shared, this would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

7.      Everything relating to the work Enfield Council done on Anti-Social Behaviour order for illegal raves with police in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 this would include all emails with any other body and meetings and statements written, to and from Enfield Council and police and any other 3 party, and government bodies, and information shared. This would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

8.      Any court actions taken against Mr Simon Cordell by Enfield Council, with all court documents and any emails regarding court action. This would include any audio and video that was stated in court that had been obtained by Enfield Council, any emails, phone calls, meetings that were done regarding any court

2

2259,

action. This would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

9.      Any information police and Enfield council has shared about Mr Cordell, this would include any emails and any other data used to contract each other. This would include all dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

10.  Any telephone call recording, relating to Mr Cordell from any outside body this would include Enfield Council making such calls. If no recording data is able to be produced any dates and times any calls were made or received relating to Mr Cordell

11.  All emails or Letters sent by Miss Lorraine Cordell to Enfield Council, including all dates and times and if a reply was sent from email Council.

12.  Any investigations done by the Anti-Social Behaviour and Lemmy Nwabuisi or any member of staff of Enfield Council to find out if what was being said by the neighbours was in fact the truth. This would include all information from any government body outside Enfield Council.

13.  Any investigations done by the Anti-Social Behaviour and Lemmy Nwabuisi or any member of staff of Enfield Council to find out if what Mr Cordell was saying the neighbours was doing was correct, this would include via the police. Also when Mr Cordell was not charged with anything was any investigation done to the reason why Mr Cordell has not been charged. This would include all emails and dates and times information was received and sent relating to Mr Cordell.

14.  Any meetings to see Mr Cordell by Enfield Council when Enfield Council knew Mr Cordell did not leave his flat to grain facts to what Mr Cordell was saying the neighbours was doing and look at any evidence Mr Cordell and his mother stated they had which would prove that the neighbours were not telling the truth, this would include any meeting arranged via Enfield Council to attend with police which they were told they could. This would include any dates and times meetings was set up to see Mr Cordell by Enfield Council.

3

2260,

15.  Anything Enfield Council did to support Mr Cordell or put support in place when they were told time and time again that Mr Cordell health was not good and that he was a valuable person. This would include all emails and letters, phone calls and dates and times information were sent or received.

16.  All medical information Enfield Council used in court regarding Mr Cordell regarding his health from 2017 to 2018 were Enfield Council got the said information, all emails, and letters phone calls this would include any dates and times information was sent or received. This would include were Enfield Council got the information Mr Cordell had PTSD but that he had been discharged from the mental health team in 2017 and that his health was fine now and he had nothing wrong with him, that was used in court on the 30/05/2018 before judge Dais.

17.  The names of any people in Enfield Council all departments, the Mental Health Team, the police, and any 3rd party or government body of any person passing information over and receiving information relating to Mr Cordell.

18.  This would include all letters, Emails, Phone calls, meetings, dates, and times information was sent or received relating to Mr Cordell.

19.  All person’s names that have been sharing information to the Mental Health and police from Enfield Council and all said information that has been shared. This would include all letters, Emails, Phone calls, meetings, dates, and times information was sent or received relating to Mr Cordell.

20.  Any consent that Mr Cordell has given that allows the sharing of any information to government bodies or 3 parties, and where information has been shared without consent the law under which this has been done, which would include the information which can be shared under that law.

21.  I know information that is being held about me is incorrect I have tried to deal with this a number of times yet the information that is incorrect is still being used against me and is still on the systems. I have asked for this information before, but I have never got all the information I requested so want this done under the new data protection law 2018 this would include all information that has been given in the past.

4

2261,

If any information is being withheld, I would like to know why and for what reason it is being withheld and to be sent full information as to why it is being withheld.

I have already given authority to Enfield Council that should be on record, for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell to be able to do anything for me on my behalf her details are below which should already be on Enfield Council system. I have included my ID with this application:

1.      Phone Number: 07807 333545 (this is my mother’s phone number)

2.      Email address is lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

3.      Miss Lorraine Cordell, 23 Byron Terrace, Edmonton, London N9 7DG

If the information cannot be emailed to my mother’s emails can it, please be sent to her home address which the information is above for this to be done.

If you need any more data from me, or a fee, please let me know as soon as possible.

It may be helpful for you to know that data protection law requires you to respond to a request for data within one calendar month.

If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer, or relevant staff member. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you. Its website is ico.org.uk or it can be contacted on 0303 123 1113.

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Paul Cordell

5

2262,

RE: Subject access Request Simon Cordell->ESA) Camfiimed"Letter~Q8~Q3~2Q18'pdf

MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL

109 BURNCROFT

AVENUE

ENFIELD

EN3 7JQ

ESA Merthyr Tydfil Post Handling Site B Wolverhampton WV99 2FN

www.gov.uk

Telephone: 0800 169 0310

Text phone: 0800 169 0314

Date: 08/03/2018

If you get in touch with us, tell us this reference number: J

Dear MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL,

Thank you for your request for information.

The details are as follows: -

You were awarded Employment Support Allowance Contributory; Employment Support Allowance Income Related            .

Claim start date 19/09/17

Claim termination date LIVE CLAIM                                  -

At a weekly rate of Ł125.55

Paid up to:

Any other information: IN SUPPORT GROUP ON ESA

For any further enquiries please contact us on the above number.

Benefit Centre Manager

Part of the Department for Work and Pensions

http://dbs02app/BDCentres.nsf/Proof%20of%20Benef!t%20Letter?OpenForm&Seq=4 08/03/2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

87.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

899. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

27/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2263,2264

 

 87.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

899. Ludmilla Lyavoo _RE_ Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

27/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2263,2264

--

2263,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquines.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2018 13:31

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: urgent D02ED073

Thank you for your email of 12th November 2018.

The file was referred to a Judge who has made the following comments.

"The above case was in Court on the following dates, time and before the following Deputy/District Judges.

·         Before Deputy District Judge Harris.

·         Before Deputy District Judge Perry at 10:00 am.

·         was adjourned to 25.9.17.

·         Before Employment Judge Taylor at 10:00 am.

The above information is provided as requested."

Civil Section | HMCTS |

In the Civil and Family Court at Edmonton

59 Fore Street

Upper Edmonton,

London,

N18 2TN |

DX - 136686

Edmonton 3 Phone: 0208 884 6500

'I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means'

The HMCTS website: http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/hmcts

Find your local County Court: https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk

Find the forms you need in Court proceedings: http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCTS/FormFinder.do

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals service/about/personal-information-charter

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 November 2018 15:39

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Subject: FW: urgent D02ED073

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this update email from the email below I believe I will need

Each court date this was in court

What time it was heard in court and for how long.

Which court number was heard in.

The judge that heard the case for each court hearing.

On what dates was it heard ex parte and how long the hearing lasted.

2264,

Regards

Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 November 2018 14:54

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: RE: urgent D02ED073

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in regard to the case number D02ED073 which was discharged on the 06/11/2017, I was wondering if possible, could I get a list of all court dates this case was in court.

Regards

Simon Cordell

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

88.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 2.

Mother Please take what happened. 28-11-2018-11-42

28/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2265,2266,2267,2268,2269,2270.2271,2272,2273,2274

 

 88.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 2.

Mother Please take what happened. 28-11-2018-11-42

28/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2265,2266,2267,2268,2269,2270.2271,2272,2273,2274

--

2265,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 28/11/2018 11:42:41 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: please deal with this

Attachments: Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

Please take each one and tell me what happened on each date do not go into one and just write what happened.

2266,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         Sometimes in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109 - 119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he was returned to his flat with his family and threatened and swore at him and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noises inside his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of

1

2267,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

this.

·         On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noises, you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard you threatened her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbours’ front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. You then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

2

2268,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply, you also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noises.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

3

2269,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you have installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through your door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, you ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that you attend our offices to discuss the nuisance reports being received from your neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, you had telephoned him several times. He telephoned you back and you asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through your letterbox and he said yes. You asked why he did not stop when you ran after him and he stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to you. You stated that you will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as you are unable to leave your flat and that the meeting should take place in your flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at your mother's house, but you refused saying that you have done nothing wrong and accused him of taking sides with your neighbours.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours by saying that you will ruin his life and that you were going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into your flat to attack you. You later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

4

2270,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that you allowed your dog to run freely in the communal area of your block without a lead.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 28th May 2017, the police issued you with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of your neighbours.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbours in the communal hallway of your block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. You also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he brought took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

5

2271,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours, but you refused him access. The Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. He then called the police.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of your neighbours that you came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. You then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as you saw the neighbour’s wife.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

6

2272,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that you stood outside your neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. You went away and returned half an hour later, you lifted their letterbox, stuck your mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, you telephone Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an antisocial behaviour order against him and you told him that he had made you a prisoner within your home. You also stated that you knew where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from you. You also told him that you would watch him leave the office and you would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. You called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that you knew he has a flat in Edmonton and also knew that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. You also stated that you knew where they live and they were not safe.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th January 2018 you called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that you came to one of your neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. You ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that you knocked on one of your neighbours’ door loudly, you started rattling with their letter box and started shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but you left after you’ve heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

7

2273,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that you swore, shouted, and assaulted one of you neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 1st May 2018, you attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that you started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of your neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. You also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that you attended one of your neighbours’ property; you took your dog with you and waited by their front door. It is alleged that you tried to intimidate them as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against you.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 30 May 2018, it is alleged that you made threats to kill to one of your neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. You were arrested and released on bail.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         You assaulted one of your neighbours on the 26th August 2018 for flashing his toilet.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         You telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla Iyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. You also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of

8

2274,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

this.

·         On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, you called one of your neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. You called again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard your voice. You called repeatedly after that.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of your neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as your front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, your dog came out of your flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that your dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         One of your neighbours reported that his cousin was leaving the block at about on 2 October 2018 at 12.45pm, and as you exited the block, you followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push you off.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         There are other reports from one of your neighbours who reported that on 30th September 2018, you attempted to break down his front door by kicking it several times only because he flashed his toilet.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         It is reported that you continue to harass and intimidate other residents on a regular basis.

9

 

 

 

 

 

 

89.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 1

Tracey. Pericles @nhs. n& Confidential Trust Response 28-11-2018 14-05

28/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2275,2276,2277,2278 

 

 89.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 1

Tracey. Pericles @nhs. n& Confidential Trust Response 28-11-2018 14-05

28/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2275,2276,2277,2278       

 

--

2275,

From: PERICLIS, Tracey (BARNET, ENFIELD, AND HARINGEY MENTAL HEALTH NHS TRUST)

<tracey.peridis@nhs.net>

Sent: 28 November 2018 14:05

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Patient. experience (BARNET, ENFIELD, AND HARINGEY MENTAL HEALTH NHS TRUST)

Subject: Private & Confidential: Trust Response

Attachments: 2018 11 28 Signed response.pdf

Sent on behalf of Jinjer Kandola, Chief Executive, Barnet, Enfield & Haringey MH NHS Trust

Dear Mrs Cordell

Please find attached the Trust's response for your attention.

Yours sincerely

Tracy Periclis

Executive Assistant to Chairman, Mark Lam

Executive Assistant to Chief Executive, Jinjer Kandola

Barnet, Enfield & Haringey MH NHS Trust

Trust HQ, Orchard House

St Ann's Hospital

St Ann's Road

London

N15 3TH

Tel: 0208 702 6000

Tracey.periclis@nhs.net

Line Manager: Katia Louka, Trust Secretary

Tel: 020 8 702 3035

Katia.louka@nhs.net

This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the

sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it.

Please do not disclose, copy, or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in relation to its contents. To do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you for your co-operation.

2276,

NHS mail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland. NHS mail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHS mail and other accredited email services.

For more information and to find out how you can switch,

https://portal.nhs.net/help/joiningnhsmail

2277,

Private & Confidential: Trust Response ->2018 11 28 Signed response.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

Private & Confidential

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey Mental Health Trust

Ms Lorraine Cordell Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

VIA EMAIL ONLY

Trust Headquarters Orchard House St Ann’s Hospital

St Ann’s Road London N15 3TH

Tel: 020 8702 3559

Email: beh-tr.chiefexecutive@nhs.net

27th November 2018

Our Ref: ENF/18/Q2/SC/6273

Dear Mrs Cordell

Re: Your complaint regarding the sharing of your son’s information

·         Thank you for passing on your concerns in your conversation and initial email with Angela Hague on 30th July 2018, and subsequently with Rachel Yona on 10th August 2018. You raised some key questions relating to information governance and the sharing of information regarding your son.

·         Please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in our response to your queries, which was due to there being a separate ongoing investigation within the Trust regarding the matters you have raised.

·         Your concerns have been investigated and I am now in a position to respond to your complaint.

·         Your concerns were investigated by Rachel Yona (Enfield Adult Mental Health Community Services Manager) and involved interviews with staff and a review of your son’s clinical records.

·         You stated that a report written by Angela Hague regarding your son, dated 15th June 2018 and 19th June 2018, had been presented in court on 26th June 2018. You stated you had not had prior access to these reports and explained that you had considered the court case and the assessments by Angela Hague were separate processes.

·         Please be assured that we have looked into this matter and I can confirm the report used in court was not a formal report, but rather a response by Angela to a request for information. The Trust I had communicated to the Council Legal Services that we would not be providing a report for the   Court and it was recommended they commission an independent report if this were required.

·         However as part of the investigation, it has been highlighted that this communication was only shared verbally with the Council Legal Services, and the position of the Trust was not clarified in writing.

·         During our communications with the Council Legal Services it was asked whether your son had engaged in his recent assessment, and it was for this reason the information presented in court was given. Our investigation found that the information which was sent was not a limited, direct response to the question posed to the Trust; I sincerely regret therefore that information was overshared and as such this aspect of your complaint is upheld.

·         This is a matter we have taken very seriously; I would like to offer you our sincere apologies that your son’s information was used for anything other than it’s intended use whilst in the hands of the

Chairman: Mark Lam

Chief Executive: Jinjer Kandola

2278,

Trust, and assure you that we fully understand our role in ensuring the security and safekeeping of records relating to all of those in our care. We have completed a full internal incident investigation into this matter, and I would like to assure you that all due processes and actions have been taken in relation to this breach.

·         I understand that you also were concerned about the processing of your son’s information by the Court and the Local Authority. We are aware your son did not give consent for his records to be used in Court, and I can confirm the Trust also did not give consent for the sharing of information by the Local Authority with the Court. Our investigation found that the London Borough of Enfield requested to know if your son had engaged in treatment. As part of the legal proceedings the Court had asked for an assessment of your son’s capacity to litigate and capacity to understand the meaning of the interim injunction from January 2018. Whilst we cannot speak on behalf of the Courts, we believe that this was why they passed on the information.

·         I am very sorry to learn that you feel the trust between yourself, your son, and the Mental Health Services has been broken. I understand that your son is now being seen by the Enfield North Locality Team, and I sincerely hope that they will be able to help rebuild the trust and develop a good working relationship with yourself and your son.

·         I understand that when you discussed your concerns with Rachel Yona (Enfield Community Services Manager) you raised your view that you feel there were inaccuracies within your son’s report. Please be advised that whilst we are unable to retrospectively amend records, we are able to add additional entries to reflect your views and comments, and we would be very happy to add any information as you see fit.

·         Please be assured that the recommendations from this complaint will be shared with the London Borough of Enfield Legal Services and across our Enfield Adult Community Mental Health Teams, to ensure all agencies involved in this situation can learn from this regrettable incident.

·         We appreciate all feedback from service users’ experience of our service as this helps us to assess, reflect on our actions and improve the care we provide. Staff members are committed to providing and delivering a high standard of care to all our service users. We try to ensure that through good support and training opportunities, staff are enabled to deal effectively and sensitively with the needs of all service users and their relatives. When members of our staff fall below the expected levels of performance, we ensure that issues are addressed and dealt with quickly. Our aim is to learn from these experiences and give assurances that any actions as a result of our investigation will be delivered.

·         If you remain unhappy after this further contact, you have the right to take your complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. The contact details are as follows:

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Millbank Tower

Millbank

London SW1P4QP

Helpline: 0345 015 4033

Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention.

Yours sincerely

Jinjer Kandola Chief Executive

Chairman: Mark Lam

Chief Executive: Jinjer Kandola

 

 

 

 

 

90.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1091. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ transcripts for hearing E00ED049

30/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2279,2280,2281,2282,2283,2284,2285

 

 

90.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1091. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ transcripts for hearing E00ED049

30/11/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2279,2280,2281,2282,2283,2284,2285

--

2279,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 30 November 2018 15:27

To: 'enquiries@edmonton.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: transcripts for hearing E00ED049

Attachments: ex105-09-08-2018-hearing.pdf

ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf

Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached application for transcripts for case number E00ED049, also attached in my award letter for ESA and my ID Please let me know if anything else is needed for this application.

Please could the transcripts if granted be collected by my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell or sent to my mother’s email address lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Regards Simon Cordell

2280,

2281,

2282,

2283,

2284,

2285,

 

 

 

 

 

91.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1095. Kailey Plahar_Your request for information (Our ref_ CRM SAR 1085) _ (2)

04/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2286,2287,2288

 

 91.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1095. Kailey Plahar_Your request for information (Our ref_ CRM SAR 1085) _ (2)

04/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2286,2287,2288

--

2286,

From: Kailey Plahar <Kailey.Plahar@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 04 December 2018 12:55

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Attachments: ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf

Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Citizencard.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell

We note that you have raised a request for information which relates to another person. In line with the Data Protection Act 2018, we are unable to correspond with you on these matters. Where a request for information is made on behalf of somebody else, we need to confirm that they are happy for you to access their personal information. Should Simon Cordell want you to act on their behalf and access their personal information, he will need to provide us with their signed written agreement to the complaint issues raised and for you to proceed with these on their behalf.

We note that your request is for ‘all data that is held about me on Enfield Council systems all departments’. As your request does not provide us with much detail, we need you to clarify the specific information you are looking for.

In order for us to retrieve relevant records, we would need to know where your personal information could be located, and it would greatly help our search if you are able to give us more details regarding:

·         Clarifying the type of information that you think the Council may hold about Mr Cordell

·         Clarifying the likely dates or time period when you think the information may have been created

·         Clarifying if you only want information relating to a particular issue or specific time period

We have registered your request under case number CRM SAR 1085, and you may quote this when you get back in touch with us.

We look forward to your response. Once we receive the clarification from you, we will contact you with a further update. Yours sincerely,

Kailey Plahar

Statutory Complaints and Access to Information Officer

Complaints and Access to Information Team

Chief Executive

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Sent: 25 November 2018 12:07

To: Enfield Data Protection Officer (Corporate) <enfield.data.protection.officer@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Subject access Request Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached 4 documents regarding the request for all data that his held about me on Enfield Council systems all departments. If you need a fee or any other information, please reply to this Email as soon as possible.

Regards

2287,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2288,

Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)->ESA-Camfirmed~Letter-08-03-2018.pdf

MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL 109 BURNCROFTAVENUE ENFIELD EN3 7JQ

ESA Merthyr Tydfil Post Handling Site B Wolverhampton WV99 2FN

www.gov.uk

Telephone: 0800 169 0310

Text phone: 0800 169 0314

Date: 08/03/2018

If you get in touch with us, tell us this reference number: JH

Dear MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL,

Thank you for your request for information.

The details are as follows: -

You were awarded Employment Support Allowance Contributory; Employment Support Allowance Income Related

Claim start date 19/09/17

Claim termination date LIVE CLAIM

At a weekly rate of Ł125.55

Paid up to:

Any other information: IN SUPPORT GROUP ON ESA

For any further enquiries please contact us on the above number.

Benefit Centre Manager

Part of the Department for Work and Pensions

http://dbs02app/BDCentres.nsf/Proof%20of%20Benef!t%20Letter?OpenForm&Seq=4 08/03/2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

92.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1098. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

05/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2289,2290,2291

 

 92.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1098. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

05/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2289,2290,2291

--

2289,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 05 December 2018 14:09

To: Ian Davis

Sarah Cary

Jeremy Chambers

James Rolfe

Tony Theodoulou

Alev Cazimoglu

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

Attachments: On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached letter regarding issues I have.

Regards

2290,

RE: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ->On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

·         Complaint 05/12/2018

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

I am writing this email due to issues I have regarding a member of staff who works for Enfield Council by the name off Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator,

Since 2016 when Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator started working for Enfield Council he has been working on investigations relating to my son Mr. Simon Cordell.

In this time not once has Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator, come to see my son’s side to the alleged allegations regarding what the neighbours have put in about my son.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator has taken one side to these said alleged allegations without no investigations,’ Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi it seem has taken one side to everything that has been said and that is the side of the neighbours, Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has been told many times we have information which would proof my son had not done things which have been stated by the neighbours

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator knows my son does not leave the flat he was told this, and also told that if he wanted to attend a meeting with my son he could do so with police there to have a meeting to hear my son’s side, he has never got back to me regarding having a meeting at my son’s home because he never wanted to, which I am sure if someone is a vulnerable person where was the duty of care where has it ever been for my son?

I believe Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator just through to himself that my son is in the wrong he is a vulnerable person I will put pressure on him and get him out without even thinking there is 2 side to anything. And just blamed my son without even talking to him this is how it has been since Mr Lemmy

1

2291,

Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator starting working for Enfield Council.

I also feel Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has taken information and not relayed it back correctly many times regarding my son’s health even to the courts. Information is being passed and obtained relating to my son which should never have been passed to 3 parties or used, how can this be allowed. There are many other points and failings which have been allowed to happen and this needs to stop. I will be drafting up a full complaint of failings and submitting it but this will take a while to draft up as I have got to go back some years.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi also had my son arrested on the 09/01/2018 and even though we asked many times, even my own son’s solicitors could not understand why he was the person still investigating my son. When his case was part of the court actions being taken against my son by Enfield Council this is against the law that someone is investigating something within their own case, and it beaches many other things.

At this point in time I want Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi taken off dealing with anything to do with my son or related to him, I feel he has not done acted correctly and feel he has not investigated anything which would prove my son has done nothing wrong and only wanted to blame him for everything, I have asked this before and heard nothing back regarding this. But it has got to the point in time that this needs to happen.

Could someone please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

93.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

93. 1. 2.

Mother See Attached Document 06-12-2018-02-02

06/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2292,2293,2294,2295

 

 

93.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

93. 1. 2.

Mother See Attached Document 06-12-2018-02-02

06/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2292,2293,2294,2295

--

2292,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 06/12/2018 02:02:17 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: Court Letter dated 03-12-2018

Attachments: Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf

see attached document

2293,

Miss Lorraine Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN37JQ

Edmonton County Court

59 Fore Street Upper Edmonton London N18 2TN

DX 136686 Edmonton 3

Tel: 020 8884 6560

enquiries@edmonton.countvcourt.gsi.gov.uk

Minicom VII 0191 478 1476

(Helpline for the deaf and hard of hearing)

www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk

03 December 2018

Our ref: E00ED049

Your ref:

Dear Madam

Thank you for your email of 22nd November 2018.

The file was referred to a Judge who has made the following comments.

“A copy of the Court Order dated 9th August 2018 is attached. If you consider that the Order is incorrect or should be varied, the Court will consider the issue for this upon appropriate application to the Court at a hearing to be listed. Unfortunately, the Court is not able to give advice or enter into correspondence with you, but you are strongly advised to seek further independent legal advice with regards to this matter.”

Yours faithfully

Customer Services Enc

2294,

Court-Order-09-08- H8-got-on-the-06-12-2.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number          : E00ED049

Date: 6 September 2018

Ref: LS/C/Ll/155584

Ref: TKK/TKK/ SIM041/002

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

Before District Judge Dias sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant's mother, the Defendant's uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 8th July 2018, confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 9th January 2018.

UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.      _ _       - -         -           -           ~

AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.      The interim injunction order dated 9th January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

2.      The Claimants claim and application for an injunction dated 9th January 2018, the Claimants applications for the Defendant's committal dated 5th February and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant's application notice dated 7th August 2018 do stand dismissed.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NIB 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number.

Tel: 020 8884 6500.

Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money. Go to www.moneyelaim.gov.uk to find out more.

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

Produced by: D. Humphreys

2295,

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs. Dated 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

94.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1108. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell update

07/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2296,2297,2298,2299

 

 94.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1108. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Simon Cordell update

07/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2296,2297,2298,2299

--

2296,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 07 December 2018 14:24

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell update

Attachments: Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf

Dear Trishna Kerai

I am writing this email to see if you can help regarding the case that went on at Edmonton Country Court.

There has been a great deal of issues with Enfield Council and not doing what the Judge stated for them to do.

I have had to write to the judge regarding what Enfield Council are doing and I have had a reply back from the court.

The order that Enfield Council drafted does not even mean they have to move my son; he is living in hell and I am working with the MP also regarding issues.

But the order Enfield Council wrote needs to go back into court and get addressed as this can no longer carry on as it is impacting my son's health.

Could you please take a look at the letter and order that the court sent as we have never had a sealed copy of the order until the other day due to the letter I wrote.

It would also seem that Enfield Council when they got our amended order just asked the court to seal their order.

Also the barrister that attended court for my son on the 09/08/2018 did he make any court notes up if he did could you send them to me.

I would be grateful for any help on this matter

Regards

Lorraine

2297,

Miss Lorraine Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN37JQ

Edmonton County Court

59 Fore Street Upper Edmonton London N18 2TN

DX 136686 Edmonton 3

Tel: 020 8884 6560

enquiries@edmonton.countvcourt.gsi.gov.uk

Minicom VII 0191 478 1476

(Helpline for the deaf and hard of hearing)

www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk

03 December 2018

Our ref: E00ED049

Your ref:

Dear Madam

Thank you for your email of 22nd November 2018.

The file was referred to a Judge who has made the following comments.

“A copy of the Court Order dated 9th August 2018 is attached. If you consider that the Order is incorrect or should be varied, the Court will consider the issue for this upon appropriate application to the Court at a hearing to be listed. Unfortunately, the Court is not able to give advice or enter into correspondence with you, but you are strongly advised to seek further independent legal advice with regards to this matter.”

Yours faithfully

Customer Services Enc

2298,

Court-Order-09-08- H8-got-on-the-06-12-2.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number          : E00ED049

Date: 6 September 2018

Ref: LS/C/Ll/155584

Ref: TKK/TKK/ SIM041/002

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

Before District Judge Dias sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant's mother, the Defendant's uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 8th July 2018, confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 9th January 2018.

UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.      _ _       - -         -           -           ~

AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.      The interim injunction order dated 9th January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

2.      The Claimants claim and application for an injunction dated 9th January 2018, the Claimants applications for the Defendant's committal dated 5th February and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant's application notice dated 7th August 2018 do stand dismissed.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NIB 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number.

Tel: 020 8884 6500.

Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money. Go to www.moneyelaim.gov.uk to find out more.

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

Produced by: D. Humphreys

2299,

3.      The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

4.      There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs. Dated 09 August 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

95.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

95. 1. 2.

Mother I am trying to1-2018-002.doc13-12-2018-03-56

13/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2300,2301,2302,2303,2304,2305,2306,2307,2308,2309

 

 95.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

95. 1. 2.

Mother I am trying to1-2018-002.doc13-12-2018-03-56

13/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2300,2301,2302,2303,2304,2305,2306,2307,2308,2309

--

2300,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 13/12/2018 03:56:07 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Please Read and deal with it.

Attachments: Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

Simon

I am trying to deal with this; letters are going in and complaints. I need Lemmy taken off case then I can get where we need to be but I also got to wait for things like the SAR and until I got them it’s hard as I need to see what is on Enfield Councils systems, I also need other SRA to come back I have asked for.

·         We need to see what is down for you we need to see what has been shared there is a lot to deal with and it just can’t be done overnight like you think it can.

·         I am doing 4 major write-ups, and this is just for Enfield Council and these need to be done we need to get complaints upheld which in turn shows they are in the wrong right now we don’t have that.

·         I have asked for a list to be completed by you in regard to all the dates I sent over in a letter.

·         I am also doing write-ups for the ASBO one for the IPCC, one for human rights and police misconduct solicitors in the hope we get some help, and one for the courts, which outlays everything that went on in court and what the police done.

·         Yes one write-up can help with the next, I also writing a next write-up for the IPCC for what the lack of what the police have done regarding Enfield Council.

·         These are not small write-up they are large but have to be kept on point.

·         It would help me greatly if you can complete the dates, I outlined in the document I sent you. But to me it seems that is too much for you to do. I will send it again with this, but I don’t think you will do but see attached.

·         I think once you see everything, I am doing you will see I am not just sitting on my backside and doing nothing. We cannot bring a case into court without there being order and the paperwork correctly done. As that will just be all over the place and will go nowhere. Yes something’s will take ages to complete but that does not mean other parts are not getting dealt with.

·         I want the ASBO back in court as early as I can get it there, but the paperwork needs to be in order, and we have to have a clear outline of what went on.

·         Enfield Council are just digging themselves deeper into this, but you got to let it run its cause.

·         Things cannot be done overnight like you think they can be, and if you want this done correctly you will let me get on with it without keep abusing me.

2301,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         Sometimes in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109 - 119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he was returned to his flat with his family and threatened and swore at him and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noises inside his flat.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of

1

2302,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

this.

·         On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noises, you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard you threatened her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbours’ front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. You then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

2

2303,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply, you also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noises.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

3

2304,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you have installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through your door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, you ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that you attend our offices to discuss the nuisance reports being received from your neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, you had telephoned him several times. He telephoned you back and you asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through your letterbox and he said yes. You asked why he did not stop when you ran after him and he stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to you. You stated that you will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as you are unable to leave your flat and that the meeting should take place in your flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at your mother's house, but you refused saying that you have done nothing wrong and accused him of taking sides with your neighbours.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours by saying that you will ruin his life and that you were going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into your flat to attack you. You later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

4

2305,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that you allowed your dog to run freely in the communal area of your block without a lead.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 28th May 2017, the police issued you with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of your neighbours.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbours in the communal hallway of your block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. You also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he brought took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

5

2306,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours, but you refused him access. The Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. He then called the police.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of your neighbours that you came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. You then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as you saw the neighbour’s wife.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

6

2307,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that you stood outside your neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. You went away and returned half an hour later, you lifted their letterbox, stuck your mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, you telephone Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an antisocial behaviour order against him and you told him that he had made you a prisoner within your home. You also stated that you knew where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from you. You also told him that you would watch him leave the office and you would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. You called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that you knew he has a flat in Edmonton and also knew that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. You also stated that you knew where they live, and they were not safe.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 9th January 2018 you called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that you came to one of your neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. You ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that you knocked on one of your neighbours’ door loudly, you started rattling with their letter box and started shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but you left after you’ve heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

7

2308,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

·         On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that you swore, shouted, and assaulted one of you neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 1st May 2018, you attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that you started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of your neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. You also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that you attended one of your neighbours’ property; you took your dog with you and waited by their front door. It is alleged that you tried to intimidate them as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against you.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 30 May 2018, it is alleged that you made threats to kill to one of your neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. You were arrested and released on bail.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         You assaulted one of your neighbours on the 26th August 2018 for flashing his toilet.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         You telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla Iyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. You also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of

8

2309,

Reports-neighbours-Council-23-11-2018-002.doc

this.

·         On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, you called one of your neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. You called again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard your voice. You called repeatedly after that.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of your neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as your front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, your dog came out of your flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that your dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         One of your neighbours reported that his cousin was leaving the block at about on 2 October 2018 at 12.45pm, and as you exited the block, you followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push you off.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         There are other reports from one of your neighbours who reported that on 30th September 2018, you attempted to break down his front door by kicking it several times only because he flashed his toilet.

Please write here what happened with this alleged allegation, write if you got any evidence of this.

·         It is reported that you continue to harass and intimidate other residents on a regular basis.

9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

96.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

96. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4740 15-12-2018 23-34

15/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2310,2311

 

 96.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

96. 1. 2.

GoDaddy -1-4740 15-12-2018 23-34

15/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2310,2311

--

2310,

From: GoDaddy <AccountStatus@GoDaddy.com>

Sent time: 15/12/2018 11:33:41 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your December account summary inside.

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810

Simon Cordell — Customer Number: 37

December Account Summary for Simon.

View Your Account

. co.uk,

. org.uk or

. me.uk

domain before 10 June 2014?

The corresponding .UK domain name may have been reserved for you. Act fast to secure it before 10 June 2019. Learn more.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

What's in your account:

Domains

Update your domain settings

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

T-S-ENTERPRISES.CO.UK

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

TOOSMOOTHENTERTAINMENT.COM

T-S-ENTERPRISES.COM

TOOSMOOTH.CO.UK

Manage Your Domains

2311,

cPanel Hosting

Keep your store open 24/7 with a .shop web address. Register new .shop domains today for just Ł35.84 Ł8.04.

Ł16.10

Ł9.99*

Ł26.99

Ł4.99*

Ł12.10

Ł0.99*

*See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2018 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

2090513407

 

 

 

 

 

 

97.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1127. Kaunchita Maudhub _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell

28/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2312,2313,2314,2315,2316,2317

 

 

97.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1127. Kaunchita Maudhub _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell

28/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2312,2313,2314,2315,2316,2317

--

2312,

From: Kaunchita Maudhub <Kaunchita.Maudhub@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 28 December 2018 13:14

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18.pdf

Importance:   High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a letter in response to your emails dated 12th and 20th December 18 sent to Ms Andrea Clemons.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379-4182

kaunchita.maudhub@enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 December 2018 13:55

To:

Andrea Clemons

Andrea.Clemons@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremy.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

I was wondering if you was going to reply to the below email as it has been a few days since I sent it and I feel this is very important due to the action going to be taken from Enfield Council, and I did not have a reply to my last email to you.

I would like the incorrect information corrected that is being used, and without a reply I cannot do this, I have attached a copy of your letter sent to the MP dated 12/12/2018.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 December 2018 17:12

To: 'Andrea Clemons'; 'alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk'

2313,

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

Today the MP's aid for Joan Ryan, Alev Cazimoglu sent me a copy of your letter dated the 12/12/2018, I am shocked to see what is written within it and the misleading information being passed over to the MP Joan Ryan.

It was not agreed on the condition that Mr Cordell should engage with mental health services and provide medical evidence to support the housing management transfer application. The court did not state this, so I do not know where this is coming from.

I also do not understand where it is coming from that Mr Cordell had to provided supporting letter from the mental health services to support his management transfer application, and he has not done this, he was never meant to have done this and the management transfer application was completed by Enfield Council to go to the panel on the 17/08/2018 and it was ready to go to the panel on this date, but this was deferred to be considered at the next panel meeting which would have taken place on 28/09/2018, which never happened.

The reason for it being deferred was so that I Miss Lorraine Cordell could try and get a letter from the mental health team, which I could not so it therefore should have gone ahead to the panel on the 28/09/2018, which I do have the emails to prove this. I also do not understand why Enfield Council is stating supported accommodation was being asked for as this was never asked for. I did however state in court that a 2 bedroom would be better as my son could have family live with him so he could get support from his family; I have never said I am his carer I have never said a lot of things that Enfield Council is stating I have said.

It was stated in the court order.

·         UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

·         UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

·         AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

The order was to be agreed with my son’s solicitor upon being drafted by Enfield Council, but my son’s solicitor was on annual leave and therefore did not reply to Enfield Council order until she came back of leave, But when you emailed her it came back that she was on annual leave so Enfield Council was well aware of this.

Upon her return from annual leave her amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, which my son’s solicitor never had a reply back from Ludmilla Iyavoo regarding her amended order, but some days after the amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, it seems an order was sealed at Edmonton Country Court which was not agreed on which was Enfield Council drafted order, which we never agreed to and feel it is misleading as to what was said in court.

I believe a lot of what was said in court is not being told and misleading information is being said, maybe someone should ask Ludmilla Iyavoo what the judge said when Ludmilla Iyavoo said she would go for a possession order to the judge because she did not get what she wanted.

There is also the fact that my son was willing to stay in Hospital when he was sectioned on the 25/10/2018, it was the hospital that discharged him on the 15/11/2018 due to not getting the section 3 on my son they wanted, that was heard on the 14/11/2018, my son said as soon as he knew they was not allowing the section 3 on the 14/11/2018 that they would kick him out of the hospital, as

2314,

this is what they did in 2016, and the next day the 15/11/2018 that is what the doctors did kicked him out the hospital, yet my son was willing to stay and build trust up with the doctors and the mental health team, which had broken down due to what has been ongoing for some time.

Which in fact would have been a lot better as if he had been allowed to stay in hospital like he wanted maybe by now they would have been trust built up with the doctors and teams, this is what Soohah Appadoo wanted to do as he saw that there was a real problem with trust and stated this at the appeal on the section 2 at the hearing. On the 16/11/2018 I myself spoke to Soohah Appadoo on the phone, but since that we have heard nothing from him is this what is being called support put in place when my son was discharged from hospital?

This misleading information needs to stop as it is a beach of the data protection act.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this, please can you reply as I did not get a reply from you to my last email, I sent to you.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2315,

2316,

2317,

 

 

 

 

98.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1129. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell_ (4)     

28/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2318,2319,2320,2321,2322,2323,2324,2325,2326    

 

98.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1129. Lorraine Cordell _Re_ Mr Simon Cordell_ (4)           

28/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2318,2319,2320,2321,2322,2323,2324,2325,2326          

--

2318,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 28 December 2018 22:16

To: Kaunchita Maudhub

Andrea Clemons

Alev Cazimoglu

chief.executive@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Enfield-Counci-Reply-28-12-2018.pdf

Dear Kaunchita Maudhub and Andrea Clemons

Please see attached reply to your letter dated the 28/12/2018.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Kaunchita Maudhub [mailto: Kaunchita.Maudhub@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 28 December 2018 13:14

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a letter in response to your emails dated 12th and 20th December 18 sent to Ms Andrea Clemons.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379-4182

kaunchita.maudhub@enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 December 2018 13:55

To:

Andrea Clemons

Andrea.Clemons@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremv.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

I was wondering if you was going to reply to the below email as it has been a few days since I sent it and I feel this is very important due to the action going to be taken from Enfield Council, and I did not have a reply to my last email to you.

2319,

I would like the incorrect information corrected that is being used, and without a reply I cannot do this, I have attached a copy of your letter sent to the MP dated 12/12/2018.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 December 2018 17:12

To: 'Andrea Clemons'; 'alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk'

2313,

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

Today the MP's aid for Joan Ryan, Alev Cazimoglu sent me a copy of your letter dated the 12/12/2018, I am shocked to see what is written within it and the misleading information being passed over to the MP Joan Ryan.

It was not agreed on the condition that Mr Cordell should engage with mental health services and provide medical evidence to support the housing management transfer application. The court did not state this, so I do not know where this is coming from.

I also do not understand where it is coming from that Mr Cordell had to provided supporting letter from the mental health services to support his management transfer application, and he has not done this, he was never meant to have done this and the management transfer application was completed by Enfield Council to go to the panel on the 17/08/2018 and it was ready to go to the panel on this date, but this was deferred to be considered at the next panel meeting which would have taken place on 28/09/2018, which never happened.

The reason for it being deferred was so that I Miss Lorraine Cordell could try and get a letter from the mental health team, which I could not so it therefore should have gone ahead to the panel on the 28/09/2018, which I do have the emails to prove this. I also do not understand why Enfield Council is stating supported accommodation was being asked for as this was never asked for. I did however state in court that a 2 bedroom would be better as my son could have family live with him so he could get support from his family; I have never said I am his carer I have never said a lot of things that Enfield Council is stating I have said.

It was stated in the court order.

·         UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

·         UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

·         AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

The order was to be agreed with my son’s solicitor upon being drafted by Enfield Council, but my son’s solicitor was on annual leave and therefore did not reply to Enfield Council order until she came back of leave, But when you emailed her it came back

2320,

that she was on annual leave so Enfield Council was well aware of this.

Upon her return from annual leave her amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, which my son’s solicitor never had a reply back from Ludmilla Iyavoo regarding her amended order, but some days after the amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, it seems an order was sealed at Edmonton Country Court which was not agreed on which was Enfield Council drafted order, which we never agreed to and feel it is misleading as to what was said in court.

I believe a lot of what was said in court is not being told and misleading information is being said, maybe someone should ask Ludmilla Iyavoo what the judge said when Ludmilla Iyavoo said she would go for a possession order to the judge because she did not get what she wanted.

There is also the fact that my son was willing to stay in Hospital when he was sectioned on the 25/10/2018, it was the hospital that discharged him on the 15/11/2018 due to not getting the section 3 on my son they wanted, that was heard on the 14/11/2018, my son said as soon as he knew they was not allowing the section 3 on the 14/11/2018 that they would kick him out of the hospital, as this is what they did in 2016, and the next day the 15/11/2018 that is what the doctors did kicked him out the hospital, yet my son was willing to stay and build trust up with the doctors and the mental health team, which had broken down due to what has been ongoing for some time.

Which in fact would have been a lot better as if he had been allowed to stay in hospital like he wanted maybe by now they would have been trust built up with the doctors and teams, this is what Soohah Appadoo wanted to do as he saw that there was a real problem with trust and stated this at the appeal on the section 2 at the hearing. On the 16/11/2018 I myself spoke to Soohah Appadoo on the phone, but since that we have heard nothing from him is this what is being called support put in place when my son was discharged from hospital?

This misleading information needs to stop as it is a beach of the data protection act.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this, please can you reply as I did not get a reply from you to my last email, I sent to you.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfieldgov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email

2321,

and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

2322,2323,2324,2325,2326,

 

 

 

 

 

 

99.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

99. 1. 2.

Google New device 31-12-2018 -01-04

31/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2327

 

 99.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

99. 1. 2.

Google New device 31-12-2018 -01-04

31/12/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2327

--

2327,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 31/12/2018 01:04:58 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

 

Your account re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for longgoneone1@gmail.com. Don't recognize this account? Click here

longgoneone1@gmail.com

Your Google Account was just signed in to from a new Windows device. You're getting this email to make sure it was you.

Check activity

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2018 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

100.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

100. 1. 2.

Dropbox 12-01-2019 -01-07

12/01/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2328

 

100.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

100. 1. 2.

Dropbox 12-01-2019 -01-07

12/01/2018

/ Page Numbers: 2328

--

2328,

From: Dropbox <no-reply@dropbox.com>

Sent time: 12/01/2018 01:07:21 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Hi Rewired,

Your Dropbox account password was recently reset.

While we've updated your password, any computers, or phones that you previously linked to your Dropbox account are still connected. You can disconnect a lost or stolen device from your account settings.

If you changed your password for security reasons, we strongly recommend that you unlink any devices, web sessions, or apps that look unfamiliar or that you're concerned about. See this Help Centre article for more information.

If you didn't make this change, please let us know.

Thanks!

The Dropbox Team

2018 Dropbox

 

 

 

 

 

Headers 2019

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 1

Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk_01.07.2019_RE Simon Cordell-E00ED049 11:13:00

07/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

 

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 1

Trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk_01.07.2019_RE Simon Cordell-E00ED049 11:13:00

07/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

--

1,

From: Trishna Kerai <Trishna@stuartmillersolidtors.co.uk>

Sent: 07 January 2019 11:13

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049

Attachments: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049

Order 09082018 (686 KB)

LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049

Order 09082018 (680 KB)

LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (667 KB)

Hi Lorraine,

Thank you for your emails.

Please see emails attached sent to Ludmilla in relation to the below.

Emails had been sent to her and she did not respond confirming whether the amendments were accepted or not.

The only time we were waiting for your instructions were when we were waiting for an amendment in the Order.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a

VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto:  lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 28 December 2018 14:14

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049

Dear Trishna Kerai

2,

I have sent some emails to you and I have had no replies regarding issues I am having regarding the court order that was made on the 09/08/2018.

Today I got a letter from Enfield Council which stated that you agreed with Enfield Council draft order on the 13/08/2018 but was waiting instructions from me.

Please see below

6.      "In relation to the allegations made in regard to the draft Order submitted to the Court. Ms lyavoo explains that she contacted Ms Trishna Kerai, of Stuart Miller Solicitors; the caseworker instructed on behalf of Simon Cordell on 10th August 2018 and emailed her a draft order. Ms lyavoo did not hear from Ms Kerai, so she emailed her again on 13th August 2018 and asked that she provides her agreement as soon as possible and if no response was made by 4pm on the same day she will have to email the draft to the Judge. Ms lyavoo states that she received a response from Ms Kerai on the same day stating that she agreed with the order, but she was waiting for your instructions. As no response was forthcoming, Ms lyavoo had to email the order to the Court on 15th. August 2018 and she also copied Simon's caseworker to the email. Ms Kerai has never indicated that she was on annual leave during the time of the correspondence but confirmed that the delay was due to the receipt of your instructions."

I am very upset as you was well aware when you sent me the draft order on the 13th August 2018 to me, I did not agree to it and you said you was going to try and rewrite it that day, which was not done until after you came back from leave. So how is Enfield Council blaming that on me saying you stated the delay was due to me not getting back to you with instructions?

I am having a great deal of issues with Enfield Council they are not moving Simon and are going to take him back to court to try and get his flat. They have not put the management transfer application in front of the panel and are saying they will not do this.

It seems due to the way the court order was worded this is being put down to me, due to this section in the order please see below.

7.      AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

 know you feel that this was dealt with and you should not need to do any other work regarding this, but this is a mess and I need some help as my son is suffering due to the on goings of Enfield Council.

I await your reply

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

3,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (686 KB).msg

From: Trishna Kerai [Trishna@stuartmiUersolicitors.co.uk]

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo1

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:58:42

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Attachments: image001.jpg (570 KB)

image002.jpg (1 KB)

image003.jpg (1 KB)

image004.jpg (1 KB)

image005.jpg (2 KB)

image006.png (0 KB)

image007.png (48 KB)

LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.docx (17 KB)

Dear Ludmilla,

Please find our final draft of the Order. You will see the amendments we have made.

Please provide us with your views.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Stuart Miller Solicitors

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 15 August 2018 15:49

To: Dias, DJ Allison

Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Judge,

Further to the hearing which took place on 9th

August 2018, I attach a draft order for the Court's approval. I apologise for the

4,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (686 KB).msg

delay in sending this draft order to you, I have been waiting for the Defendant's solicitor’s approval which has not been received as yet.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

 am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

5,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (686 KB).msg

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

6,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (686 KB). mgs->LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Amended Order.doc

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON    Claim No: E00ED049

Before District Judge Dias

BETWEEN

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFTELD

Claimant

and

MR STMON CORDELL

Defendant

ORDER

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant’s mother, the Defendant’s uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 08 July 2018 confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 09 January 2018.

UPON Mr Cordell’s mother, Miss Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist Mr Cordell neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

7,

And UPON the Claimant taking into account when dealing with the housing management transfer the need for a suitable two-bedroom property so Mr Cordell can have a spare room for carers and for his family so he can get the support that he requires.

IT IS ORDERED:

· The interim injunction order dated 09 January 2018 is dismissed forthwith.

· The Claimant’s claim and application for an injunction dated 09 January 2018, the Claimant’s applications for the Defendant’s committal dated 05 February 2018 and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant’s application notice dated 07 August 2018 do stand dismissed.

· The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the police to confirm the injection orders dated 9 August 2017 and the 09 January 2018 has been dismissed.

· There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant’s publicly funded costs.

· Dated 09 August 2018

8,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (680 KB).msg

From: Trishna Kerai [Trishna@stuartmiUersolicitors.co.uk]

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo1

Sent: 17 September 2018 09:58:36

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Attachments: image001.jpg (570 KB)

image002.jpg (1 KB)

image003.jpg (1 KB)

image004.jpg (1 KB)

image005.jpg (2 KB); image006.png (0 KB)

image007.png (48 KB)

Hi Ludmilla,

Further to my email below, could I please have a response with your views in relation to our proposed amended Order. Many thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Stuart Miller Solicitors

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Trishna Kerai

Sent: 04 September 2018 15:59

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo'

Cc: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High Dear Ludmilla,

Please find our final draft of the Order. You will see the amendments we have made.

Please provide us with your views.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

9,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (680 KB).msg

Stuart Miller Solicitors

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email.

Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No.

07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 15 August 2018 15:49

To: Dias, DJ Allison

Cc: Trishna Kerai

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Judge,

Further to the hearing which took place on 9th August 2018, I attach a draft order for the Court's approval. I apologise for the delay in sending this draft order to you, I have been waiting for the Defendant's solicitor’s approval which has not been received as yet.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo

Solicitor

Corporate Team

Legal Services

Enfield Council

Silver Street

Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High Dear Trishna,

 write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

I am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they

10,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 Order 09082018 (680 KB).msg

can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo

Solicitor

Corporate Team

Legal Services

Enfield Council

Silver Street

Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Be the first to receive the latest

Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

11,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (667 KB).msg

From: Trishna Kerai [Trishna@stuartmiUersolicitors.co.uk]

To: 'Ludmilla Iyavoo1

Sent: 13 August 2018 14:52:12

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Attachments: image001.jpg (570 KB)

image002.jpg (1 KB).

 image003.jpg (1 KB)

image004.jpg (1 KB)

image005.jpg (2 KB)

image006.png (0 KB)

image007.png (48 KB

Dear Ludmilla,

Please note that we have no issues with the Order, but I have been waiting for a response from my client's mum in relation to the Order. I have just text her and will let you know once she gets back to me.

Please also note that we will not be dealing with the Housing Management Transfer Application as we are only instructed to deal with the breach of Injunction Order.

Thanks.

Kind regards,

Trishna Kerai | Caseworker | Magistrates Court Department

T: 0208 888 5225

M: 07790 993 860

E: trishna@stuartminersolicitors.co.uk

W: www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Stuart Miller Solicitors

The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of Stuart Miller Solicitors. If you are not the intended recipient; any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance of this email or attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the express permission of the sender. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email or attachments are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter or contract and terms of business. If you have received this email in error please notify Stuart Miller Solicitors by telephone on 020 8888 5225, by fax on 020 8889 5871 or by email at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept service of documents by email. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. It is your responsibility to take all necessary steps to ensure this email and any attachments or transmissions are free from viruses. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept any responsibility for damage incurred as a result of internet transmissions and viruses. Only the Directors are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of Stuart Miller Solicitors by email. Stuart Miller Solicitors do not accept responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. Stuart Miller Solicitors may use your personal data for marketing purposes. If you do not want us to use your personal data and contact you by electronic means and / or by post, please opt-out by emailing us at info@stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (ID No. 533277). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a trading name for Stuart Miller Solicitors Limited. Incorporated in England & Wales (Company No. 07161343). Stuart Miller Solicitors is a VAT registered company (VAT No. 990 0197 14).

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [mailto:Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 13 August 2018 14:48

To: Trishna Kerai

Subject: RE: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Dear Trishna,

12,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (667 KB).msg

I refer to my email sent to you on Friday 10/08 with a draft order and I am concerned that no response has been made since. Can you please advise me whether your client is in agreement? If I do not hear from you by 4pm today, I will have to email the Court and advise them that your lack of response is delaying the approval of the order.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Sent: 10 August 2018 14:42

To: 'Trishna Kerai'

Subject: LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018

Importance: High

Dear Trishna,

I write further to my email to you and Mrs Lorraine Cordell. Our allocation manager has advised us that as Mr Cordell is an existing council tenant, he is entitled to apply for a transfer of tenancy and cannot make a rehousing application.

 am advised that the application needs to be done via Mr Cordell's neighbourhood officer. I have emailed the officer and asked him to contact Mrs Cordell as soon as possible. Mrs Cordell is also encouraged to contact the Mental Health Team so they can support him with his MH issues and rehousing. I have amended the order to reflect the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

13,

RE: Simon Cordell-E00ED049-> LBE v Simon Cordell-E00ED049 amended Order 09082018 (667 KB).msg

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UPONL NENOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

Wix 09-01-2019 -03-13

09/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 14,15

 

2.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

Wix 09-01-2019 -03-13

09/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 14,15

--

14,

From: Sent time: To:

Subject:

Wix.com <wix-team@emails.wix.com> 09/01/2019 03:13:51 PM re_wired@ymail.com

Here are the trends you need to know in 2019

WlX.com

Stay Ahead of the Trends in 2019

Get the latest on web design, SEO and online marketing sent directly to your inbox.

Web Design: What to Know for 2019

SEO: The Definitive List to Get Found on Google

Social Media: Tips You Can’t Afford to Miss

Marketing: The Top 10 Trends of 2019

15,

Stay up to date with our latest news & features.

Please do not reply to this email.

If you wish to unsubscribe

500 Terry A Francois Blvd San Francisco, CA 94158 Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Inc. www.wix.com View our privacy policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2019_RE Your request for information (Our ref CRM SAR 13:54:00

21/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18

19,20        

 

3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.21.2019_RE Your request for information (Our ref CRM SAR 13:54:00

21/01/2019

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18,19,20      

--

16,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 21 January 2019 13:54

To: 'Kailey Plahar'

Subject: RE: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Attachments: Simon-Cordell-authority-Letter-21-01-2019.pdf

Dear Kailey Plahar

Please see attached document of authority for ref: CRM SAR 1085 regarding request for data for Mr Simon Cordell.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Kailey Plahar

mailto: Kailey.Plahar@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 15 January 2019 10:04

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Dear Ms Cordell

I have noted an error in my email below. We already identification for your son, so we just require clarification of the request and your son's express permission to share his personal data with you. I apologise for any inconvenience.

Kind regards

Kailey Plahar

Statutory Complaints and Access to Information Officer

Complaints and Access to Information Team

Chief Executive

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

From: Kailey Plahar

Sent: 15 January 2019 10:02

To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Dear Ms Cordell Thank you for your email.

To clarify, the process for dealing with subject access requests is independent of any other interactions you have had with any other Council service. We will need express permission from your son that he is happy for us to share his personal data from you. Once this is provided, we will also require two forms of identification from your son to confirm his own identity.

As per my email below, we are still unclear of what information you/your son requires. Please could you clarify what information is required and in which departments it is likely to be held.

17,

When we receive your reply, we shall provide you with a further update. Should you have any queries in the meantime Kind regards

Kailey Plahar

Statutory Complaints and Access to Information Officer

Complaints and Access to Information Team

Chief Executive

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 08 January 2019 13:55

To: Kailey Plahar <Kailey.Plahar@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Dear Kailey Plahar

I am writing regarding the below email case number CRM SAR 1085; I am sorry about the time that it has taken me to reply but I have been very busy. You state you do not have an authority Letter on your systems for me to act on behalf of my son Simon Cordell, but there is in place letters of authority across Enfield Council for me to dealt with everything for my son. So I cannot understand why you cannot find them as many have been sent over can you please look into this and see why you feel I do not already have authority as it has never been removed.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Kailey Plahar mailto: Kailey.Plahar@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 04 December 2018 12:55

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)

Dear Ms Cordell

We note that you have raised a request for information which relates to another person. In line with the Data Protection Act 2018, we are unable to correspond with you on these matters. Where a request for information is made on behalf of somebody else, we need to confirm that they are happy for you to access their personal information. Should Simon Cordell want you to act on their behalf and access their personal information, he will need to provide us with their signed written agreement to the complaint issues raised and for you to proceed with these on their behalf.

We note that your request is for ‘all data that is held about me on Enfield Council systems all departments’. As your request does not provide us with much detail, we need you to clarify the specific information you are looking for.

In order for us to retrieve relevant records, we would need to know where your personal information could be located, and it would greatly help our search if you are able to give us more details regarding:

· Clarifying the type of information that you think the Council may hold about Mr Cordell

· Clarifying the likely dates or time period when you think the information may have been created

· Clarifying if you only want information relating to a particular issue or specific time period

18,

We have registered your request under case number CRM SAR 1085, and you may quote this when you get back in touch with us.

We look forward to your response. Once we receive the clarification from you, we will contact you with a further update. Yours sincerely,

Kailey Plahar

Statutory Complaints and Access to Information Officer

Complaints and Access to Information Team

Chief Executive

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 25 November 2018 12:07

To: Enfield Data Protection Officer (Corporate) <enfield.data.protection.officer@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Subject access Request Simon Cordell

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached 4 documents regarding the request for all data that his held about me on Enfield Council systems all departments. If you need a fee or any other information, please reply to this Email as soon as possible.

Regards

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

19,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

20,

RE: Your request for information (Our ref: CRM SAR 1085)->Simon_Cordell_authority_Letter_21-01-2019.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 21/01/2019

• Subject Access Requests for my data authority Letter: 21/01/2019

To whom it may concern:

I am writing this letter to confirm I do give my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell my authority to obtain my data under the SAR that was submitted to Enfield Council on the 25 November 2018.

I agree and give authority that my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell may receive replies to any emails that is written from her email address lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk to Enfield Council regarding the SAR on my behalf.

My mother Miss Lorraine Cordell can also speak to anyone that is needed at Enfield Council to deal with the SAR request that has been submitted on my behalf.

And I allow Enfield Council to send any data gathered to my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell regarding the SAR.

Full details of my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell are below.

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

23 Byron Terrace Edmonton London N9 7DG

07807 333545

Regards

Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 1

Gis.group@btinternet.com_01.25.2019_SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

25/01/2019 10:43:00

/ Page Numbers: 21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33,34,35

 

 

4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 1

Gis.group@btinternet.com_01.25.2019_SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

25/01/2019 10:43:00

/ Page Numbers: 21,22,23,24

25,26,27,28,29,30

31,32,33,34,35

--

21,

From: A PHILIPPOU <gis.group@btinternet.com>

Sent: 25 January 2019 10:43

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING  POSSESSION

Attachments: LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19.AP.pdf

Hi Lorraine

I have been instructed by the London Borough of Enfield to effect service of the attached Notice of Seeking Possession relating to your son Simon Cordell for the address supplied of 106 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JH. Please be mindful of its content copies of which have been posted through the letterbox of your son's address as well as attaching two further copies on and adjacent to the front door of said property.

Many thanks

Andy

Global Investigation Services Incorporating the G.I.S. Group

(UK)

Earnscliff House London N9 9AB

Tel: 020 8884 6299 Mobile: 07918 104488

22,

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

(Cyprus)

No 6, Ground Floor Offices

6, Freedom Road Drousheia Village Paphos District Cyprus 8700

Tel:(00357) 99136710 Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

Andy Philippou

·         Full Member/Association of British Investigators 1508 (p)

·         Full Member Institute of Professional Investigators

·         Full Member/World Association of Professional Investigators

23,

SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION->LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19 AP.pdf

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

Housing Department P.O. Box No. 60, Civic Centre, Enfield

NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

HOUSING ACT 1985 - SECTION 83

THIS NOTICE IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS REQUIRING YOU TO GIVE UP POSSESSION OF YOUR DWELLING. YOU SHOULD READ IT AND ALL THE NOTES VERY CAREFULLY.

1.      To: Mr Simon Cordell

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 1

If you need advice about this Notice, and what you should do about it, take it as quickly as possible to a Citizens’ Advice Bureau, a Housing Aid Centre, or a Law Centre, or to a Solicitor. You may be able to receive Legal Aid, but this will depend on your personal circumstances.

2.      The Landlord, the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield intends to apply to the Court for an order requiring you to give up possession of:

109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7JQ

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 2

If you are a secure tenant under the Housing Act 1985, you can only be required to leave your dwelling if your landlord obtains an order for possession from the Court. The order must be based on one of the Grounds, which are set out in the 1985 Act (see paragraphs 3 and 4 below).

If you are willing to give up possession without a Court order, you should notify the person who signed this Notice as soon as possible and say when you would leave.

3.      Possession will be sought on Grounds 1 & 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985, which read:

Ground 1

l

24,

Rent lawfully due from the tenant has not been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has been broken or not performed.

Ground 2

a)      The tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house -

has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting, or otherwise engaging in a lawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

b)     has been convicted of—

        i.            using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

      ii.            an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 3

Whatever Grounds for possession are set out in paragraph 3 of this Notice, the Court may allow any of the other Grounds to be added at a later stage. If this is done, you will be told about it so you can argue at the hearing in Court about the new Ground, as well as the Grounds set out in paragraph 3 if you want to.

4. The reasons for taking this action are>

You have failed to comply with the following obligations of your tenancy agreement which commenced on 14th August 2006.

The relevant conditions of the tenancy agreement are as follows:

As to Ground 2

Condition 9

2

25,

“You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in, or visiting your home. This means that you must ensure that they do not act in breach of any of these conditions. Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in the property, in communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or anywhere within Enfield borough.”

Condition 10

“You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely to cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of our officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

As to Ground 1

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order.”

Condition 34

“You must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items inappropriately).”

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

3

26,

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliances that we are responsible for maintaining.”

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply.”

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

Condition 79

“You must always keep your dog(s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

Particulars of Breaches

1.      On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2.      Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box, resulting in no electricity to his flat.        ,

3.      On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4.      Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109-119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.

4

27,

5.      On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to his flat with his family, threatened, swore at him, and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat.

6.      On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

7.      On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noise, you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

8.      On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard you threaten her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

9.      On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise. .

10.  On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

11.  On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.         ,

12.  On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. You then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

5

28,

13.  On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him, his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply. You also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

14.  On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

15.  On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

16.  On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

17.  We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

18.  On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you had installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up by industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

19.  On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through your door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, you ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that you attend our offices to

6

29,

discuss the nuisance reports being received from your neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, you had telephoned him several times. He telephoned you back and you asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through your letterbox and he said yes. You asked why he did not stop when you ran after him and he stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to you. You stated that you will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as you are unable to leave your flat and that the meeting should take place in your flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at your mother's house, but you refused saying that you have done nothing wrong and accused him of taking sides with your neighbours.

20.  On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours by saying that you will ruin his life and that you were going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

21.  On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into your flat to attack you. You later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

22.  On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that you allowed your dog to run freely in the communal area of your block without a lead.

23.  On 28th May 2017, the police issued you with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of your neighbours.

24.  On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbours in the communal hallway of your block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. You also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video­record the incident.

25.  On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

7

30,

26.  On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

27.  On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28.  On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

29.  On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30.  On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31.  On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours, but you refused him access. The Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. He then called the police.

8

31,

32.  On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of your neighbours that you came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. You then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as you saw the neighbour’s wife.

33.  On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that you stood outside your neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. You went away and returned half an hour later, you lifted their letterbox, stuck your mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34.  On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, you telephone Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an Anti-Social Behaviour order against you and you told him that he had made you a prisoner within your home. You also stated that you knew where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from you. You also told him that you would watch him leave the office and you would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. You called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that you knew he has a flat in Edmonton and also knew that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. You also stated that you knew where they live, and they were not safe.

35.  On 9th January 2018 you called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36.  On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that you came to one of your neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. You ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37.  On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that you knocked on one of your neighbours’ door loudly, you started rattling with their letter box and started shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but you left after you’ve heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38.  On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that you swore, shouted, and assaulted one of you neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

9

32,

39.  On 1st May 2018, you attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that you started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of your neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. You also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40.  On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that you attended one of your neighbours’ property; you took your dog with you and waited by their front door. It is alleged that you tried to intimidate as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against you.

41.  On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that you made threats to kill to one of your neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. You were arrested and released on bail.

42.  On 29th August 2018, it is alleged that you assaulted one of your neighbours for flushing his toilet.

43.  You telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla lyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. You also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44.  On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, you called one of your neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. You called again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard your voice. You called repeatedly after that.

45.  On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of your neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as your front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, your dog came out of your flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that your dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

10

33,

46.  On 30th September 2018, it is alleged that you attempted to break down one of your neighbour’s front door by kicking it several times and accused him flushing his toilet.

47.  On 2nd October 2018 at about 12:45pm, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbour’s cousins as he was leaving the block. It is alleged that as he exited the block, you followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push you off.

48.  On 18th October 2018, you telephoned one of the Enfield Council solicitors, Miss Ludmilla lyavoo almost ten times, making threats and intimidating her. You suggested that she stops working on the case or you will try to get her struck off from the ‘register’.

49.  On 19th October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo at least five times and left two voice messages making threats and trying to intimidate the solicitor working on the case.

50.  On 22nd October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left one threatening and intimidating voice message.

51.  51.On 23rd October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left an intimidating voice message.

52.  On 24th October 2018, you telephoned Ludmilla lyavoo twice but did not leave any messages.

53.  On 16th December 2018 at around 6pm, it is alleged that you repeatedly banged on one of your neighbour’s door and peeped through his letterbox.

54.  On 17th January 2019, you were videotaped when you confronted one of your neighbours outside your block of flats (109-119 Burncroft Avenue) as he was taking his three-year-old daughter to school and started shouting abuse and threats at him thereby preventing him from taking his daughter to school. You then followed him and his daughter up the stairs to their second floor flat and was videotaped by a member of the neighbour’s family as you attempted to attack them causing them to run into their flat for safety with you forcing the door to try and gain entry. Your neighbour and his family have since fled their property as a result of your constant threats and intimidation.

11

34,

55.  On 18th January 2019, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and started making threats and the solicitor ended the call. You called again three times and left a voice message making threats and intimidation.

56.  On 23rd January 2019, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo eight times within a ten-minute period.

57.  It is reported that you continue to harass and intimidate other residents on a regular basis.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 4.

Before the Court will grant an order on any of the Grounds 1 to 8 or 12 to 16, it must be satisfied that it is reasonable to require you to leave. This means that, if one of these Grounds is set out in paragraph 3 to this Notice, you will be able to argue at the hearing in Court that it is not reasonable that you should have to leave, even if you accept that the Ground applies.

Before the court grants an order on any of the Grounds 9 to 16, it must be satisfied that there will be suitable alternative accommodation for you when you have to leave. This means that the Court will have to decide that, in its opinion, there will be other accommodation which is reasonably suitable for the needs of you and your family, taking into particular account various factors such as the nearness of your place of work, and the sort of housing that other people with similar needs are offered. Your new home will have to be let to you on another secure tenancy or a private tenancy under the Rent Act of a kind that will give you similar security.

There is no requirement for suitable alternative accommodation where Grounds 1 to 8 apply.

If your landlord is not a local authority, and the local authority gives a certificate that it will provide you with suitable accommodation, the Court has to accept the certificate.

One of the requirements of Ground 10A is that the landlord must have approval for the redevelopment scheme from the Secretary of State (or, in the case of a housing association landlord, the Housing Corporation). The landlord must have consulted all secure tenants affected by the proposed redevelopment scheme.

12

35,

5. Court proceedings for possession of the dwelling-house can be begun immediately. The date by which the tenant is to give up possession of the dwelling-house is Monday the 25 February 2019.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 5

Court proceedings may be begun at once or at any time during the following twelve months. Once the twelve months are up this Notice will lapse, and a new Notice must be served before possession can be sought.

Possession of your dwelling-house cannot be obtained until after this date, which cannot be earlier than the date when your tenancy or license could have been brought to an end. This means that if you have a weekly or fortnightly tenancy, there should be at least 4 weeks between the date this Notice is given, and the date possession is ordered.

Signed

Anti-Social Behaviour Team Leader

On behalf of Enfield Council Housing

Address: The Edmonton Centre,

36-44 South Mall London N9 OTN

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

Blank Space

 

 

 

 

 

           

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order 06-02-2019-04-49

06/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51

 

 

6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order 06-02-2019-04-49

06/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 36

37,38,39,40,41,42

43,44,45,46,47,48

49,50,51

--

36,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 06/02/2019 04:49:19 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: New Docs

Attachments: Untitled(1).pdf

37,

38,

39,

Blank Page!

40,

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1.      The Claimant is the Landlord and the freehold owner of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (hereinafter referred to as the premises).

2.      The premises are a one-bedroom flat located in a block of flats, granted to the Defendant, Simon Cordell on 14 August 2006. The current weekly gross rent is Ł98.24. The Defendant lives in the Property alone and is in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance as well as Housing Benefits.

3.      The Claimant is seeking possession of the premises from the Defendant because on numerous occasions and times since the commencement of the tenancy, the Defendant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of her tenancy agreement.

PARTICULARS OF TENANCY CONDITIONS

Condition 9

“You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in, or visiting your home. This means that you must ensure that they do not act in breach of any of these conditions. Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in. the property, in

41,

communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or anywhere within Enfield borough.”

Condition 10

"You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely to cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of ours. Officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order.”

Condition 34

"You. Must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items inappropriately).”

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliances that we are responsible for maintaining.”

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply."

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

2

42,

Condition 79

“You must always keep your dog(s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

4.      The Claimant claims that the Defendant has acted in contravention of the above tenancy conditions.

5.      Detail of the nuisance acts that the Defendant has engaged in which constitute a breach of these conditions are particularised in the attached Schedule of Nuisance.

6.      The Claimant alleges that there have been reports of nuisance and anti-social behaviour from the Defendant since July 2016.

7.      The Defendant has been given verbal and written warnings of the anti-social behaviour and has been invited to attend meetings with his mother to see the Claimant's officers to discuss his conduct and behaviour, but he declined to attend.

PARTICULARS OF WARNING LETTERS AND REQUEST FOR MEETINGS

1.      On 29 December 2016 a letter was sent to the Defendant to attend a meeting on 6 December 2016, but the Defendant cancelled the meeting.

2.      On 31 January 2017 to attend a meeting for 9 February 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

3.      On 16 February 2017 for a meeting on 22 February 2017 that again was cancelled by the Defendant

4.      On 16 March 2017 for a meeting on 23 March 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

5.      On 15 October 2018 a pre-action letter was sent to the Defendant informing of legal action as a consequence of his antisocial behaviour conduct.

3

43,

8.      The Claimant is seeking to rely on Grounds 1 and 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 195 in the claim for possession of the premises.

Ground 1 of Schedule 2 states " Rent lawfully due from the tenant has not been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has not been broken or not performed”.

Ground 2 Schedule 2 states” the tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house:

Has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting, or otherwise engaging in unlawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

b)     has been convicted of—

       I.            using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

    II.            an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

9.      In accordance with the requirements of Section 83 of the Housing Act 1985, a Notice of Seeking Possession was served on the Defendant on 25 January 2019.

The Claimant claims that it is reasonable to grant possession of the premises on account of the Defendant’s conduct.

4

44,

11.  The Claimant has informed the Defendant of the impact of his conduct and behaviour on other residents and sent him warning letters. The Notice of Seeking Possession clearly sets out the details of the complaints.

12.  The Claimant was assessed by a consultant psychiatrist on 6th July 2018 and she confirmed that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. Possession of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.

2. Mesne profit at the rate of Ł13.99 per day from the day possession is granted.

3. Costs

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Particulars of Claim are true.

I am duly authorised by the Claimant to sign this statement.

Signed

Dated: 29th January 2019

(Claimant’s Solicitor)

5

45,

IN THIE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON   CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

SCHEDULE OF NUISANCE ACTIVITIES

1.      On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2.      Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

3.      On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4.      Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant confronted an elderly neighbour outside his block of flats, 109 - 119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.     .

5.      On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to his flat with his family, threatened, swore at him, and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat.

6.      On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that the Defendant aggressively demanded money from him.

7.      On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his ceiling and accused one of his neighbours of making noise, then went to his neighbour's flat and started kicking and banging on his front door

6

46,

aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor, swore and shouted abuse at him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later went downstairs, dragged his neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

8.      On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between the Defendant, Mrs Cordell the Defendant mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard the Defendant threaten her by saying 'I’m goanna do her over’ and then Tm goanna take her job just for fun'.

9.      On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

10.  10.On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that the Defendant shouted abuse and threats at them.

11.  11.On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant was verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of his neighbours as she knocked on his neighbour's door.

12.  On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. The Defendant then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

13.  On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of his neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with his water supply. The Defendant also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

14.  On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

15.  On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour's door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

16.  On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

7

47,

17.  We received a report that on 7th February 2017 that the Defendant approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. The Defendant said to the leaseholder that there were problems between him and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to the Defendant that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and the Defendant said to him ’you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on the Defendant door and asked whether he would increase the water pressure and the Defendant stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

18.  On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended the Defendant property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from fiats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside the Defendant flat, they observed that the Defendant had installed an iron security gate inside his front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between the Defendant kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up with industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in the Defendant’s back garden.

19.  19.On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through the Defendant door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, the Defendant ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that the Defendant attend the Council office to discuss the nuisance reports being received from his neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, the Defendant had telephoned him several times. Lemmy Nwabuisi telephoned the Defendant back and the Defendant asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through his letterbox and Lemmy Nwabuisi said yes. The Defendant asked why he did not stop when he ran after him and Lemmy Nwabuisi stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to him. The Defendant stated that he will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as he is unable to leave his flat and that the meeting should take place in his flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at his mother's house, but the Defendant refused saying that he have done nothing wrong and accused Lemmy Nwabuisi of taking sides with his neighbours.

20.  On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours by saying that he will ruin his life and that the Defendant was going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

8

48,

21.  On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into his flat to attack him. The Defendant later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

22.  On 14th. May 2017 it is alleged that the Defendant allowed his dog to run freely in the communal area of his block without a lead.

23.  On 28th May 2017, the police issued the Defendant with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of the Defendant neighbours.

24.  On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbours in the communal hallway of his block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. The Defendant also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

25.  25.On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that he wanted her and her husband to pay the Defendant some money.

26.  On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that the Defendant would like to speak to him.

27.  On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that the Defendant came out of his flat with his dog without a lead and attacked one of his neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. The Defendant tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28.  On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block. The Defendant swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. The Defendant told her that he knows all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. The Defendant demanded that they pay him some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see him.

29.  On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming

9

49,

the door. She denied slamming the door and the Defendant called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30.  On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as he was going out with his family with his dog barking and without a lead. The Defendant asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, the Defendant ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at his neighbour and demanding that he must pay him some money if he wants the Defendant to leave him alone. The Defendant also said to him that he has all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31.  On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended the Defendant flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above his, but he refused him access. The Surveyor attended the Defendant flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and the Defendant refused him access. The Defendant then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. The Surveyor then called the police.

32.  On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of his neighbours that the Defendant came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. The Defendant then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as he saw the neighbour’s wife.

33.  On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that the Defendant stood outside his neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. The Defendant went away and returned half an hour later, lifted their letterbox, stuck his mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his neighbour’s family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34.  On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, the Defendant telephoned Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an anti-social behaviour order against him. The Defendant further told him that he had made him a prisoner within his home. The Defendant stated that he knows where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from him. The Defendant told Lemmy Nwabuisi that he would watch him leave the office and he would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. The Defendant called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that he knows he has a flat in Edmonton and also know that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. The Defendant also stated that he knows where they live and they were not safe.

10

50,

35.  On 9th January 2018 the Defendant called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36.  On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that the Defendant came to one of his neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. The Defendant ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37.  On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant knocked on one of his neighbours’ door loudly, he started rattling with their letter box and shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but the Defendant left after he heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38.  On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant swore, shouted, and assaulted one of his neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

39.  On 1st May 2018, the Defendant attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that the Defendant started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of his neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. The Defendant also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40.  On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attended one of his neighbours’ property; he took his dog with him and waited by their front door. It is alleged that the Defendant tried to intimidate as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against the Defendant.

41.  On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant made threats to kill to one of his neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. The Defendant was arrested and released on bail.

42.  On 29th August 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant assaulted one of his neighbours for flushing his toilet.

43.  The Defendant telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla Lyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. The Defendant also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44.  On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, the Defendant called one of his neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. The Defendant called

11

51,

again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard his voice. The Defendant called repeatedly after that.

45.  On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of the Defendant neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as the Defendant front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, the Defendant dog came out of the Defendant flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that the Defendant dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

46.  On 30th September 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attempted to break down one of his neighbour’s front door by kicking it several times and accused him flushing his toilet.

47.  On 2nd October 2018 at about 12:45pm, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbour’s cousins as he was leaving the block. It is alleged that as he exited the block, the Defendant followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push the Defendant off.

48.  On 18th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned one of the Enfield Council solicitors, Miss Ludmilla lyavoo almost ten times, making threats and intimidating her. The Defendant suggested that she stops working on the case or you will try to get her struck off from the 'register'.

49.  On 19th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo at least five times and left two voice messages making threats and trying to intimidate the solicitor working on the case.

50.  On 22nd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left one threatening and intimidating voice message.

51.  On 23rd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left an intimidating voice message.

52.  On 24th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Ludmilla lyavoo twice but did not leave any messages.

53.  On 16th December 2018 at around 6pm, it is alleged that the Defendant repeatedly banged on one of his neighbour’s door and peeped through his letterbox.

54.  On 17th January2019, the Defendant was videotaped when he confronted one of his neighbours outside his block of flats (109-119 Burncroft Avenue) as he was taking his three-year-old daughter to school and started shouting

12

Extra Page

abuse and threats at him thereby preventing him from taking his daughter to school. The Defendant then followed him and his daughter up the stairs to their second floor flat and was videotaped by a member of the neighbour's family as he attempted to attack them causing them to run into their flat for safety with the Defendant forcing the door to try and gain entry. The neighbour and his family have since fled their property as a result of the Defendant constant threats and intimidation.

55.  On 18th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla Lyavoo from a private number and started making threats and the solicitor ended the call. The Defendant called again three times and left a voice message making threats and intimidation.

56.  On 23rd January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo eight times within a ten-minute period.

57.  On 25th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo on two occasions acknowledged receipt of the Notice of Seeking Possession, threaten to have her struck off the register and accused her of falsifying evidence against him.

13

 

 

 

 

 

7.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order 06-02-2019-05-00 1

06/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 52

 

 

7.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order 06-02-2019-05-00 1

06/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 52

--

52

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 06/02/2019 05:00:16 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Attachments: UTF-8bVW50aXRsZWQoMSkgRnJlc2ggUG9zc2Vzc3Rpb24gT3J

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 5. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order

06-02-2019 -04-59

/ Page Numbers: 53,54

55,56,57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69

 

 

8.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 5. 1. 2.

2nd Possession Order

06-02-2019 -04-59

/ Page Numbers: 53,54

55,56,57,58,59,60

61,62,63,64,65,66

67,68,69

--

53,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time:06/02/2019 04:59:13 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Fwd.: New Docs

Attachments: Untitled(1).pdf

— Forwarded message —

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2019, 16:49:23 GMT

Subject: New Docs

54,

55,

56,

Blank Page!

57,

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1.      The Claimant is the Landlord and the freehold owner of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (hereinafter referred to as the premises).

2.      The premises are a one-bedroom flat located in a block of flats, granted to the Defendant, Simon Cordell on 14 August 2006. The current weekly gross rent is Ł98.24. The Defendant lives in the Property alone and is in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance as well as Housing Benefits.

3.      The Claimant is seeking possession of the premises from the Defendant because on numerous occasions and times since the commencement of the tenancy, the Defendant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of her tenancy agreement.

PARTICULARS OF TENANCY CONDITIONS

Condition 9

“You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in, or visiting your home. This means that you must ensure that they do not act in breach of any of these conditions. Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in. the property, in

58,

communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or anywhere within Enfield borough.”

Condition 10

"You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely to cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of ours. Officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order.”

Condition 34

"You. Must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items inappropriately).”

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliances that we are responsible for maintaining.”

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply."

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

2

59,

Condition 79

“You must always keep your dog(s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

4.      The Claimant claims that the Defendant has acted in contravention of the above tenancy conditions.

5.      Detail of the nuisance acts that the Defendant has engaged in which constitute a breach of these conditions are particularised in the attached Schedule of Nuisance.

6.      The Claimant alleges that there have been reports of nuisance and anti-social behaviour from the Defendant since July 2016.

7.      The Defendant has been given verbal and written warnings of the anti-social behaviour and has been invited to attend meetings with his mother to see the Claimant's officers to discuss his conduct and behaviour, but he declined to attend.

PARTICULARS OF WARNING LETTERS AND REQUEST FOR MEETINGS

1.      On 29 December 2016 a letter was sent to the Defendant to attend a meeting on 6 December 2016, but the Defendant cancelled the meeting.

2.      On 31 January 2017 to attend a meeting for 9 February 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

3.      On 16 February 2017 for a meeting on 22 February 2017 that again was cancelled by the Defendant

4.      On 16 March 2017 for a meeting on 23 March 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

5.      On 15 October 2018 a pre-action letter was sent to the Defendant informing of legal action as a consequence of his antisocial behaviour conduct.

3

60,

8.      The Claimant is seeking to rely on Grounds 1 and 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 195 in the claim for possession of the premises.

Ground 1 of Schedule 2 states " Rent lawfully due from the tenant has not been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has not been broken or not performed”.

Ground 2 Schedule 2 states” the tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house:

Has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting, or otherwise engaging in unlawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

c)      has been convicted of—

       I.            using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

    II.            an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

9.      In accordance with the requirements of Section 83 of the Housing Act 1985, a Notice of Seeking Possession was served on the Defendant on 25 January 2019.

The Claimant claims that it is reasonable to grant possession of the premises on account of the Defendant’s conduct.

4

61,

11.  The Claimant has informed the Defendant of the impact of his conduct and behaviour on other residents and sent him warning letters. The Notice of Seeking Possession clearly sets out the details of the complaints.

12.  The Claimant was assessed by a consultant psychiatrist on 6th July 2018 and she confirmed that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. Possession of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.

2. Mesne profit at the rate of Ł13.99 per day from the day possession is granted.

3. Costs

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Particulars of Claim are true.

I am duly authorised by the Claimant to sign this statement.

Signed

Dated: 29th January 2019

(Claimant’s Solicitor)

5

62,

IN THIE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON   CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and

Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

SCHEDULE OF NUISANCE ACTIVITIES

1.      On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2.      Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

3.      On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4.      Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant confronted an elderly neighbour outside his block of flats, 109 - 119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.     .

5.      On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to his flat with his family, threatened, swore at him, and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat.

6.      On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that the Defendant aggressively demanded money from him.

7.      On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his ceiling and accused one of his neighbours of making noise, then went to his neighbour's flat and started kicking and banging on his front door

6

63,

aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor, swore and shouted abuse at him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later went downstairs, dragged his neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

8.      On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between the Defendant, Mrs Cordell the Defendant mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard the Defendant threaten her by saying 'I’m goanna do her over’ and then Tm goanna take her job just for fun'.

9.      On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

10.  10.On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that the Defendant shouted abuse and threats at them.

11.  11.On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant was verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of his neighbours as she knocked on his neighbour's door.

12.  On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. The Defendant then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

13.  On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of his neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with his water supply. The Defendant also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

14.  On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

15.  On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour's door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

16.  On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

7

64,

17.  We received a report that on 7th February 2017 that the Defendant approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. The Defendant said to the leaseholder that there were problems between him and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to the Defendant that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and the Defendant said to him ’you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on the Defendant door and asked whether he would increase the water pressure and the Defendant stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

18.  On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended the Defendant property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from fiats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside the Defendant flat, they observed that the Defendant had installed an iron security gate inside his front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between the Defendant kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up with industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in the Defendant’s back garden.

19.  19.On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through the Defendant door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, the Defendant ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that the Defendant attend the Council office to discuss the nuisance reports being received from his neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, the Defendant had telephoned him several times. Lemmy Nwabuisi telephoned the Defendant back and the Defendant asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through his letterbox and Lemmy Nwabuisi said yes. The Defendant asked why he did not stop when he ran after him and Lemmy Nwabuisi stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to him. The Defendant stated that he will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as he is unable to leave his flat and that the meeting should take place in his flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at his mother's house, but the Defendant refused saying that he have done nothing wrong and accused Lemmy Nwabuisi of taking sides with his neighbours.

20.  On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours by saying that he will ruin his life and that the Defendant was going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

8

65,

21.  On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into his flat to attack him. The Defendant later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

22.  On 14th. May 2017 it is alleged that the Defendant allowed his dog to run freely in the communal area of his block without a lead.

23.  On 28th May 2017, the police issued the Defendant with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of the Defendant neighbours.

24.  On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbours in the communal hallway of his block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. The Defendant also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

25.  25.On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that he wanted her and her husband to pay the Defendant some money.

26.  On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that the Defendant would like to speak to him.

27.  On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that the Defendant came out of his flat with his dog without a lead and attacked one of his neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. The Defendant tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28.  On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block. The Defendant swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. The Defendant told her that he knows all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. The Defendant demanded that they pay him some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see him.

29.  On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming

9

66,

the door. She denied slamming the door and the Defendant called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30.  On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as he was going out with his family with his dog barking and without a lead. The Defendant asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, the Defendant ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at his neighbour and demanding that he must pay him some money if he wants the Defendant to leave him alone. The Defendant also said to him that he has all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31.  On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended the Defendant flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above his, but he refused him access. The Surveyor attended the Defendant flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and the Defendant refused him access. The Defendant then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. The Surveyor then called the police.

32.  On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of his neighbours that the Defendant came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. The Defendant then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as he saw the neighbour’s wife.

33.  On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that the Defendant stood outside his neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. The Defendant went away and returned half an hour later, lifted their letterbox, stuck his mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his neighbour’s family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34.  On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, the Defendant telephoned Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an anti-social behaviour order against him. The Defendant further told him that he had made him a prisoner within his home. The Defendant stated that he knows where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from him. The Defendant told Lemmy Nwabuisi that he would watch him leave the office and he would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. The Defendant called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that he knows he has a flat in Edmonton and also know that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. The Defendant also stated that he knows where they live and they were not safe.

10

67,

35.  On 9th January 2018 the Defendant called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36.  On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that the Defendant came to one of his neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. The Defendant ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37.  On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant knocked on one of his neighbours’ door loudly, he started rattling with their letter box and shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but the Defendant left after he heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38.  On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant swore, shouted, and assaulted one of his neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

39.  On 1st May 2018, the Defendant attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that the Defendant started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of his neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. The Defendant also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40.  On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attended one of his neighbours’ property; he took his dog with him and waited by their front door. It is alleged that the Defendant tried to intimidate as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against the Defendant.

41.  On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant made threats to kill to one of his neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. The Defendant was arrested and released on bail.

42.  On 29th August 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant assaulted one of his neighbours for flushing his toilet.

43.  The Defendant telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla Lyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. The Defendant also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44.  On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, the Defendant called one of his neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. The Defendant called

11

68,

again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard his voice. The Defendant called repeatedly after that.

45.  On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of the Defendant neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as the Defendant front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, the Defendant dog came out of the Defendant flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that the Defendant dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

46.  On 30th September 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attempted to break down one of his neighbour’s front door by kicking it several times and accused him flushing his toilet.

47.  On 2nd October 2018 at about 12:45pm, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbour’s cousins as he was leaving the block. It is alleged that as he exited the block, the Defendant followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push the Defendant off.

48.  On 18th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned one of the Enfield Council solicitors, Miss Ludmilla lyavoo almost ten times, making threats and intimidating her. The Defendant suggested that she stops working on the case or you will try to get her struck off from the 'register'.

49.  On 19th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo at least five times and left two voice messages making threats and trying to intimidate the solicitor working on the case.

50.  On 22nd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left one threatening and intimidating voice message.

51.  On 23rd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left an intimidating voice message.

52.  On 24th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Ludmilla lyavoo twice but did not leave any messages.

53.  On 16th December 2018 at around 6pm, it is alleged that the Defendant repeatedly banged on one of his neighbour’s door and peeped through his letterbox.

54.  On 17th January2019, the Defendant was videotaped when he confronted one of his neighbours outside his block of flats (109-119 Burncroft Avenue) as he was taking his three-year-old daughter to school and started shouting

12

69.

abuse and threats at him thereby preventing him from taking his daughter to school. The Defendant then followed him and his daughter up the stairs to their second floor flat and was videotaped by a member of the neighbour's family as he attempted to attack them causing them to run into their flat for safety with the Defendant forcing the door to try and gain entry. The neighbour and his family have since fled their property as a result of the Defendant constant threats and intimidation.

55.  On 18th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla Lyavoo from a private number and started making threats and the solicitor ended the call. The Defendant called again three times and left a voice message making threats and intimidation.

56.  On 23rd January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo eight times within a ten-minute period.

57.  On 25th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo on two occasions acknowledged receipt of the Notice of Seeking Possession, threaten to have her struck off the register and accused her of falsifying evidence against him.

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

             

9.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.11.2019_RE Legal Aid Agency Requirements

11/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82,83,84

85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176

 

 

9.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.11.2019_RE Legal Aid Agency Requirements

11/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 70,71,72

73,74,75,76,77,78

79,80,81,82,83,84

85,86,87,88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119,120

121,122,123,124,125,126

127,128,129,130,131,132

133,134,135,136,137,138

139,140,141,142,143,144

145,146,147,148,149,150

151,152,153,154,155,156

157,158,159,160,161,162

163,164,165,166,167,168

169,170,171,172,173,174

175,176

--

70,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 11 February 2019 18:17

To: 'Liselle Archer'

Subject: RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Attachments:

Ř  ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf.

Ř  Fresh Possession Order-06-02-2019-Full.pdf; Simon-Licence-

Ř  Front-Back.pdf.

Ř  Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf.

Ř  VLS-20171215-103522.pdf.

Ř  VLS-20171215-103441.pdf.

Ř  Citizencard.pdf.

Ř  Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018-001 (2).pdf.

Ř  2018 11 28 Signed response.pdf.

Ř  A PHILIPPOU-Re-SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION-25-01-2019-001.pdf.

Ř  A PHILIPPOU-SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION- 25--01-2019.pdf.

Ř  alev.cazimoglu@parliament.pdf;

Ř  alev.cazimoglu@parliament-03-01-2019.pdf;

Ř  alev.cazimoglu@parliament-17-12-2018.pdf;

Ř  alev.cazimoglu@parliament-21-12-2018.pdf;

Ř  alev.cazimoglu@parliament-23-11-2018.pdf;

Ř  Chief Executive- Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL] -06-12-2018.pdf.

Ř  Enfield-Counci-Reply-28-12-2018.pdf.

Ř  Joan Ryan-Re- Simon Cordell (Case Ref_ JR14051) -10-12-2018.pdf.

Ř  Kaunchita Maudhub-Re-Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf.

Ř  Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10 7 2018.pdf.

Ř  Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18 (2).pdf; Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18.pdf.

Ř  LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19 AP (2).pdf.

Ř  Lorraine Cordell-RE-Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf.

Ř  Ludmilla Iyavoo-RE-Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018.pdf.

Ř  Ludmilla Iyavoo- RE-Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018-001.pdf.

Ř  MEQ 13653 (4).pdf; MEQ 13653-001.pdf.

Ř  On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ (2).pdf.

Ř  On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ-05-12-2018.pdf.

Ř  Paul Buckridge-RE-Simon Cordell-30-11-2018.pdf.

Ř  Paul Buckridge-RE-Simon Cordell-30-11-2018-001.pdf

Dear Liselle Archer

I am writing this letter regarding the case that Enfield Council has laid before the court for a Possession Order for my son’s flat.

The court hearing is for the 08/03/2019 at 10:00 hours. I have tried to attach the most up to date information as there is a long history to this with Enfield Council and my son. I have ordered my son's bank statements but am waiting for them to come in the post so have included the other documents asked for in the email, and if a date can be set for him to see someone maybe by the time we see someone we will have the bank statement, but my son has had legal aid in the below cases, Please see attached documents.

I am writing this to give you some form of information relating to this case as it has in some ways been ongoing for some time.

Enfield Council has had 2 other court cases regarding these matters which were for injunction orders please see below information they were for the same cases as in this new Possession Order.

E00ED049: Edmonton Country Court

8.      Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 09th January 2018 at Edmonton Country Court, to replace the one that was struck out by the court on the 06/11/2017 as the Judge would not put it back in place.

9.      This case went on until the 09/08/2018, please see attached court order which was made, which Enfield Council was meant to have moved my son, which has never happened I have been trying to get this done since this date and Enfield Council have not done anything.

D02ED073: Edmonton Country Court

(1      Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 9th August 2017 at Edmonton Country Court.

71,

(2      This case ended up being struck out on the 06/11/2017, the reason for this was due to Enfield Council not doing what the court asked them to do.

Even through there is a court order in place for Enfield Council to move my son, Enfield Council has done nothing only kept my son in a flat that is causing his health to be impacted and lied to multiple bodies regarding the order that was made on the 09/08/2018. The judge warned Enfield Council regarding a Possession Order on my son on the 09/08/2018, there is a lot of paperwork regarding all of this which will need to be gone over.

There are so many Emails and Documents regarding everything that has gone on it will be too much to send via email. So I have only put a few of the last emails and Letters including the new order, the other information will need to be done at a meeting as there is just so much information.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Liselle Archer [mailto: liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 07 February 2019 15:51

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Madam

Following our telephone conversation today, please see below the requirements for the application for public funding (Legal Aid).

Please bring the following documents in order for us to open a case:

1. Most recent award letter confirming that your son receives ESA

2. Bank statements of all adults over the age 18 living in the household.

(Please note that the bank statements must be:

Covering the last 3 months with no gaps, this includes 07 February 2019 -07 November 2018)

 For all bank statements including savings accounts and dormant accounts)

3. Passport or Driving Licence (proof of ID)

4. Tenancy Agreement and letters from your landlord

5. Anything else you consider relevant.

Please note we are unable to open a case until we have received all of the above documents.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

72,

Email liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319 fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office www.tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

73,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements '->ESA-Camfirmed~Letter-08-03-2018.pdf

MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL 109 BURNCROFTAVENUE ENFIELD EN3 7JQ

ESA Merthyr Tydfil Post Handling Site B Wolverhampton WV99 2FN

www.gov.uk

Telephone: 0800 169 0310

Text phone: 0800 169 0314

Date: 08/03/2018

If you get in touch with us, tell us this reference number: JH65

Dear MR SIMON PAUL CORDELL,

Thank you for your request for information.

The details are as follows: -

You were awarded Employment Support Allowance Contributory; Employment Support Allowance Income Related            .

Claim start date 19/09/17

Claim termination date LIVE CLAIM                                  -

At a weekly rate of Ł125.55

Paid up to:

Any other information: IN SUPPORT GROUP ON ESA

For any further enquiries please contact us on the above number.

Benefit Centre Manager

Part of the Department for Work and Pensions

http://dbs02app/BDCentres.nsf/Proof%20of%20Benef!t%20Letter?OpenForm&Seq=4 08/03/2018

74,

75,

*

Notice of Hearing      

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: f00ED222

Date: 4 February 2019

Ref: LS/C/PB/159272

Ref:

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

Claimant

SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

TAKE NOTICE that the Hearing will take place on 8 March 2019 at 10:00 AM

at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN

When you should attend

30 minutes has been allowed for the Hearing

Please Note: This case may be released to another Judge, possibly at a different Court

Cases are listed in accordance with local hearing arrangements determined by the Judiciary and implemented by court staff. Every effort is made to ensure that hearings start either at the time specified or as soon as possible thereafter. However, listing practices or other factors may mean that delays are unavoidable. Furthermore, in some instances a case may be released to another judge, possibly at a different court or adjourned to another date. Please contact the court for further information on the listing arrangements that may apply to your hearing.

Your case has been listed at the same time as several other cases, but you are required to attend Court at the time - given in your notice, or earlier if you need to speak to your legal representative. When you arrive at Court you should report to an Usher who will tell you if the other party are in attendance. You may wish to consult with them before going into Court to attempt to clarify/resolve any outstanding issues.

The Judge will decide the order in which cases are called based on who is in attendance, the time estimate and other factors. Please ensure that the Usher is aware of your whereabouts at all times. If you are not in the court at the required time and your case is called it will be heard in your absence.

If your case does settle prior to the hearing date, please notify the court in writing.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NIB 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number.

Tel: 020 8884 6500.

Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneydaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by: Ms. M. E. Lazarou

N24 Notice of PTR/Added/Restored/Hrg/Management Conference CJR024

76,

Claim form for: F00ed222

In the County Court at Edmonton

possession of property Claim no,

Fee Account no. PBA0079006

You may be able to Issue your claim online and it may save you time and money. Go to www.possessiondaim.gov.uk to find out more. Claimant

(name(s) and address(es))

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN13XA

Defendant(s)

(name(s) and address(es))

Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN37JQ

The claimant is claiming possession of:

109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

which (includes) (does not include) residential property. Full particulars of the claim are attached. (The claimant is also making a claim for money).

This claim will be heard on at 20 at am/pm

At the hearing

The court will consider whether or not you must leave the property and, if so, when.

It will take into account information the claimant provides and any you provide.

What you should do

Get help and advice immediately from a solicitor or an advice agency.

Help yourself and the court by filling in the defence form and coming to the hearing to make sure the court knows all the facts.

Name: Simon Cordell

Address: 109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield Council Service

EN37JQ

Court fee: Ł355.00

Legal representative's costs TBA

Total amount:

Issue date 31 JAN 2019

Find out how HM Courts and Tribunals Service uses personal information you give them when you fill in a form: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/aboutypersonal-informatiQn-charter

NS Claim form for possession of property (07.18)    © Crown copyright 2018

77,

78,

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

Claimant

and

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1. The Claimant is the Landlord and the freehold owner of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (hereinafter referred to as the premises).

2. The premises are a one-bedroom flat located in a block of flats, granted to the Defendant, Simon Cordell on 14 August 2006. The current weekly gross rent is Ł98.24. The Defendant lives in the Property alone and is in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance as well as Housing Benefits.

3. The Claimant is seeking possession of the premises from the Defendant because on numerous occasions and times since the commencement of the tenancy, the Defendant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of her tenancy agreement.

PARTICULARS OF TENANCY CONDITIONS

Condition 9

"You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in, or visiting your home. This means that you must ensure that they do not act in breach of any of these conditions. Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in -the property, in

79,

communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or anywhere within Enfield borough.”

Condition 10

"You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely to cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social."

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of ours. officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

Condition 33

"You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order.”

Condition 34

“You. Must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items inappropriately).”

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval."

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliances that we are responsible for maintaining.”

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply.”

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

2

80,

Condition 79

"You must always keep your dog(s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

4. The Claimant claims that the Defendant has acted in contravention of the above tenancy conditions.

5. Detail of the nuisance acts that the Defendant has engaged in which constitute a breach of these conditions are particularised in the attached Schedule of Nuisance.

6. The Claimant alleges that there have been reports of nuisance and anti-social behaviour from the Defendant since July 2016.

7. The Defendant has been given verbal and written warnings of the anti-social behaviour and has been invited to attend meetings with his mother to see the Claimant’s officers to discuss his conduct and behaviour, but he declined to attend.

PARTICULARS OF WARNING LETTERS AND REQUEST FOR MEETINGS

1. On 29 December 2016 a letter was sent to the Defendant to attend a meeting on 6 December 2016, but the Defendant cancelled the meeting.

2. On 31 January 2017 to attend a meeting for 9 February 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

3. On 16 February 2017 for a meeting on 22 February 2017 that again was cancelled by the Defendant

4. On 16 March 2017 for a meeting on 23 March 2017 that was cancelled by the Defendant.

5. On 15 October 2018 a pre-action letter was sent to the Defendant informing of legal action as a consequence of his antisocial behaviour conduct.

3

81,

8. The Claimant is seeking to rely on Grounds 1 and 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 195 in the claim for possession of the premises.

Ground 1 of Schedule 2 states " Rent lawfully due from the tenant has not been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has not been broken or not performed

Ground 2 Schedule 2 states” the tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house:

a)      Has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting, or otherwise engaging in unlawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

b)     has been convicted of—

       I.            using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

    II.            an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

9.      In accordance with the requirements of Section 83 of the Housing Act 1985, a Notice of Seeking Possession was served on the Defendant on 25 January 2019.

10.  The Claimant claims that it is reasonable to grant possession of the premises on account of the Defendant’s conduct.

4

82,

11.  The Claimant has informed the Defendant of the impact of his conduct and behaviour on other residents and sent him warning letters. The Notice of Seeking Possession clearly sets out the details of the complaints,

12.  The Claimant was assessed by a consultant psychiatrist on 6th July 2018 and she confirmed that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. Possession of the premises known as 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.

2. Mesne profit at the rate of Ł13.99 per day from the day possession is granted.

3. Costs

Statement of T ruth

I believe that the facts stated in this Particulars of Claim are true.

I am duly authorised by the Claimant to sign this statement.

(Claimant’s Solicitor)

Dated: 29 January 2019

5

83,

IN THIE COUNTY COURT AT EDMONTON

CLAIM NO

BETWEEN

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

and      Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

Defendant

SCHEDULE OF NUISANCE ACTIVITIES

1. On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2. Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

3. On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4. Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that the Defendant confronted an elderly neighbour outside his block of flats, 109-119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.

5. ,5. On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to his flat with his family, threatened, swore at him, and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat.

6. On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on a neighbour's door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that the Defendant aggressively demanded money from him.

7. On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his ceiling and accused one of his neighbours of making noise, then went to his neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door

6

84,

aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor, swore and shouted abuse at him. It is also alleged that the Defendant later went downstairs, dragged his neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

8. On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between the Defendant, Mrs Cordell the Defendant mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard the Defendant threaten her by saying 'I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

9. On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

10. 10.On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that the Defendant shouted abuse and threats at them.

11. On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant was verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of his neighbours as she knocked on his neighbour’s door.

12. On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. The Defendant then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

13. On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that the Defendant ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of his neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with his water supply. The Defendant also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

14. On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

15. On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

16. On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on his neighbour's door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

7

85,

17. We received a report that on 7th February 2017 that the Defendant approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. The Defendant said to the leaseholder that there were problems between him and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to the Defendant that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and the Defendant said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on the Defendant door and asked whether he would increase the water pressure and the Defendant stated '! cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

18. On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended the Defendant property at fiat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside the Defendant flat, they observed that the Defendant had installed an iron security gate inside his front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between the Defendant kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up with industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in the Defendant’s back garden.

19. On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through the Defendant door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, the Defendant ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that the Defendant attend the Council office to discuss the nuisance reports being received from his neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, the Defendant had telephoned him several times. Lemmy Nwabuisi telephoned the Defendant back and the Defendant asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through his letterbox and Lemmy Nwabuisi said yes. The Defendant asked why he did not stop when he ran after him and Lemmy Nwabuisi stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to him. The Defendant stated that he will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as he is unable to leave his flat and that the meeting should take place in his flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at his mother's house, but the Defendant refused saying that he have done nothing wrong and accused Lemmy Nwabuisi of taking sides with his neighbours.

20. On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant threatened one of his neighbours by saying that he will ruin his life and that the Defendant was going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

8

86,

21. On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant aggressively banged on one of his neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into his flat to attack him. The Defendant later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

22. On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that the Defendant allowed his dog to run freely in the communal area of his block without a lead.

23. On 28th May 2017, the police issued the Defendant with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of the Defendant neighbours.

24. On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbours in the communal hallway of his block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. The Defendant also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video-record the incident.

25. On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that he wanted her and her husband to pay the Defendant some money.

26. On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted one of his neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to his building and said to her that he knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that the Defendant would like to speak to him.

27. On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that the Defendant came out of his flat with his dog without a lead and attacked one of his neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. The Defendant tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28. On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block. The Defendant swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. The Defendant told her that he knows all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. The Defendant demanded that they pay him some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see him.

29. On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming

9

87,

the door. She denied slamming the door and the Defendant called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30. On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that the Defendant confronted his neighbour as he was going out with his family with his dog barking and without a lead. The Defendant asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, the Defendant ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at his neighbour and demanding that he must pay him some money if he wants the Defendant to leave him alone. The Defendant also said to him that he has all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31. On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended the Defendant flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above his, but he refused him access. The Surveyor attended the Defendant flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and the Defendant refused him access. The Defendant then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. The Surveyor then called the police.

32. On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of his neighbours that the Defendant came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. The Defendant then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as he saw the neighbour’s wife.

33. On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that the Defendant stood outside his neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. The Defendant went away and returned half an hour later, lifted their letterbox, stuck his mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his neighbour’s family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34. On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, the Defendant telephoned Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an anti-social behaviour order against him. The Defendant further told him that he had made him a prisoner within his home. The Defendant stated that he knows where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from him. The Defendant told Lemmy Nwabuisi that he would watch him leave the office and he would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. The Defendant called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that he knows he has a flat in Edmonton and also know that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. The Defendant also stated that he knows where they live, and they were not safe.

10

88,

35. On 9th January 2018 the Defendant called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36. On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that the Defendant came to one of his neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. The Defendant ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37. On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant knocked on one of his neighbours’ door loudly, he started rattling with their letter box and shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but the Defendant left after he heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38. On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that the Defendant swore, shouted, and assaulted one of his neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

39. On 1sl May 2018, the Defendant attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that the Defendant started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of his neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. The Defendant also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40. On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attended one of his neighbours’ property; he took his dog with him and waited by their front door. It is alleged that the Defendant tried to intimidate as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against the Defendant.

41. On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant made threats to kill to one of his neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. The Defendant was arrested and released on bail.

42. On 29th August 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant assaulted one of his neighbours for flushing his toilet.

43. The Defendant telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla lyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. The Defendant also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44. On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, the Defendant called one of his neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. The Defendant called

11

89,

again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard his voice. The Defendant called repeatedly after that.

45. On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of the Defendant neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as the Defendant front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, the Defendant dog came out of the Defendant flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that the Defendant dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

46. On 30th September 2018, it is alleged that the Defendant attempted to break down one of his neighbour’s front door by kicking it several times and accused him flushing his toilet.

47. On 2nd October 2018 at about 12:45pm, it is alleged that the Defendant attacked one of his neighbour’s cousins as he was leaving the block. It is alleged that as he exited the block, the Defendant followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push the Defendant off.

48. On 18th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned one of the Enfield Council solicitors, Miss Ludmilla lyavoo almost ten times, making threats and intimidating her. The Defendant suggested that she stops working on the case or you will try to get her struck off from the 'register'.

49. On 19th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo at least five times and left two voice messages making threats and trying to intimidate the solicitor working on the case.

50. On 22nd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left one threatening and intimidating voice message.

51. On 23rd October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left an intimidating voice message.

52. On 24th October 2018, the Defendant telephoned Ludmilla lyavoo twice but did not leave any messages.

53. On 16th December 2018 at around 6pm, it is alleged that the Defendant repeatedly banged on one of his neighbour’s door and peeped through his letterbox.

54. On 17th January2019, the Defendant was videotaped when he confronted one of his neighbours outside his block of flats (109-119 Burncroft Avenue) as he was taking his three-year-old daughter to school and started shouting

12

90,

abuse and threats at him thereby preventing him from taking his daughter to school. The Defendant then followed him and his daughter up the stairs to their second floor flat and was videotaped by a member of the neighbour's family as he attempted to attack them causing them to run into their flat for safety with the Defendant forcing the door to try and gain entry. The neighbour and his family have since fled their property as a result of the Defendant constant threats and intimidation.

55. 55.On 18th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and started making threats and the solicitor ended the call. The Defendant called again three times and left a voice message making threats and intimidation.

56. 56.On 23rd January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo eight times within a ten-minute period.

57. On 25th January 2019, the Defendant telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo on two occasions acknowledged receipt of the Notice of Seeking Possession, threaten to have her struck off the register and accused her of falsifying evidence against him.

13

91,

Copy of my Driving Licence!

92,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: E00ED049

Date: 6 September 2018

Ref: LS/C/Ll/155584

Ref: TKK/TKK/ [SIM041/002          

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

Before District Judge Dias sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant's mother, the Defendant's uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 8th July 2018, confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 9th January 2018.

UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The interim injunction order dated 9th January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

2. The Claimants claim and application for an injunction dated 9th January 2018, the Claimants applications for the Defendant's committal dated 5th February and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant's application notice dated 7th August 2018 do stand dismissed.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NIB 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyelaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by: D. Humphreys

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order CJR0h5C

93,

3. The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

4. There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

94,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->VLS_20171215_103522.pdf

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

Vis Solicitors

Gibson House

800 High Road

Tottenham

 London

N17 0DH

36209 EDMONTON EXCHANGE

HM Courts & Tribunals Service the County Court at Edmonton

59 Fore Street London N18 2TN

DX 136686 EDMONTON

T 020 8884 6500       

www.gov.uk

Your ref: VLS/EO/H/CORDELL/17

Dear Sir

13 December 2017

Re: Case Number: D02ED073 London Borough of Enfield v Mr Simon Cordell

Enclosed please find copy of courts letter to the claimant's as directed by the District Judge.

Yours faithfully,

Ourvasse Cundapen Back Office Section Ext

95,

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

London Borough of Enfield

P O Box 50

Civic Centre

Silver Street

Enfield

EN1 3XA

90615 ENFIELD 1

HM Courts & Tribunals Service the County Court at Edmonton

59 Fore Street London N18 2TN

DX 136686 EDMONTON 3

T 020 8884 6500       

www.gov.uk

Your ref: LS/C/LI/157255

Dear Sir/Madam

13 December 2017

Re: Case Number: D02ED073 London Borough of Enfield v Mr Simon Cordell

The file was referred to the District Judge and his comments are:

"Your Directions Questionnaire was received by the court on 20/11/17. Therefore the sanction on the order of 6/11/17 applies."

Yours sincerely,

Ourvasse Cundapen Back Office Section Ext

cc: defendants

96,

 

 

97

My ID Card!

98,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: E00ED049

Date: 6 September 2018

Ref: LS/C/Ll/155584

Ref: TKK/TKK/ [SIM041/002          

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

MR SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

Before District Judge Dias sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

UPON hearing Solicitor for the Claimant and Defendant, the Defendant's mother, the Defendant's uncle, and the Defendant not attending.

UPON the Court reviewing the psychiatrist report of Dr Dhinakaran dated 8th July 2018, confirming that the Defendant lacks capacity to litigate and/or capacity to understand the terms of the injunction order made on 9th January 2018.

UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The interim injunction order dated 9th January 2018 be discharged forthwith.

2. The Claimants claim and application for an injunction dated 9th January 2018, the Claimants applications for the Defendant's committal dated 5th February and 20 April 2018 and the Claimant's application notice dated 7th August 2018 do stand dismissed.

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NIB 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyelaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by: D. Humphreys

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order CJR0h5C

99,

3. The Claimant should serve a copy of this order upon the Wood Green Police station.

4. There be no order as to costs save for detailed assessment of the Defendant's publicly funded costs.

Dated: 09 August 2018

100,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->2018 11 28 Signed response.pdf

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey

Mental Health NHS Trust

A University Teaching Trust

Private & Confidential

Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey Mental Health Trust

Ms Lorraine Cordell

Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk VIA EMAIL ONLY

Trust Headquarters Orchard House St Ann’s Hospital

St Ann’s Road London N15 3TH

Tel: 020 8702 3559

Email: beh-tr.chiefexecutive@nhs.net

27th November 2018

Our Ref: ENF/18/Q2/SC/6273

Dear Mrs Cordell

Re: Your complaint regarding the sharing of your son’s information

Thank you for passing on your concerns in your conversation and initial email with Angela Hague on 30th July 2018, and subsequently with Rachel Yona on 10th August 2018. You raised some key questions relating to information governance and the sharing of information regarding your son. Please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in our response to your queries, which was due to there being a separate ongoing investigation within the Trust regarding the matters you have raised.

Your concerns have been investigated and I am now in a position to respond to your complaint. Your concerns were investigated by Rachel Yona (Enfield Adult Mental Health Community Services Manager) and involved interviews with staff and a review of your son’s clinical records.

You stated that a report written by Angela Hague regarding your son, dated 15th June 2018 and 19th June 2018, had been presented in court on 26th June 2018. You stated you had not had prior access to these reports and explained that you had considered the court case and the assessments by Angela Hague were separate processes.

Please be assured that we have looked into this matter and I can confirm the report used in court was not a formal report, but rather a response by Angela to a request for information. The Trust had communicated to the Council Legal Services that we would not be providing a report for the Court and it was recommended they commission an independent report if this were required. However as part of the investigation, it has been highlighted that this communication was only shared verbally with the Council Legal Services, and the position of the Trust was not clarified in writing.

During our communications with the Council Legal Services it was asked whether your son had engaged in his recent assessment, and it was for this reason the information presented in court was given. Our investigation found that the information which was sent was not a limited, direct response to the question posed to the Trust; I sincerely regret therefore that information was overshared and as such this aspect of your complaint is upheld.

This is a matter we have taken very seriously; I would like to offer you our sincere apologies that your son’s information was used for anything other than it’s intended use whilst in the hands of the

Chairman: Mark Lam

Chief Executive: Jinjer Kandola

101,

Trust, and assure you that we fully understand our role in ensuring the security and safekeeping of records relating to all of those in our care. We have completed a full internal incident investigation into this matter, and I would like to assure you that all due processes and actions have been taken in relation to this breach.

I understand that you also were concerned about the processing of your son’s information by the Court and the Local Authority. We are aware your son did not give consent for his records to be used in Court, and I can confirm the Trust also did not give consent for the sharing of information by the Local Authority with the Court. Our investigation found that the London Borough of Enfield requested to know if your son had engaged in treatment. As part of the legal proceedings the Court had asked for an assessment of your son’s capacity to litigate and capacity to understand the meaning of the interim injunction from January 2018. Whilst we cannot speak on behalf of the Courts, we believe that this was why they passed on the information.

I am very sorry to learn that you feel the trust between yourself, your son, and the Mental Health Services has been broken. I understand that your son is now being seen by the Enfield North Locality Team, and I sincerely hope that they will be able to help rebuild the trust and develop a good working relationship with yourself and your son.

I understand that when you discussed your concerns with Rachel Yona (Enfield Community Services Manager) you raised your view that you feel there were inaccuracies within your son’s report. Please be advised that whilst we are unable to retrospectively amend records, we are able to add additional entries to reflect your views and comments, and we would be very happy to add any information as you see fit.

Please be assured that the recommendations from this complaint will be shared with the London Borough of Enfield Legal Services and across our Enfield Adult Community Mental Health Teams, to ensure all agencies involved in this situation can learn from this regrettable incident.

We appreciate all feedback from service users’ experience of our service as this helps us to assess, reflect on our actions and improve the care we provide. Staff members are committed to providing and delivering a high standard of care to all our service users. We try to ensure that through good support and training opportunities, staff are enabled to deal effectively and sensitively with the needs of all service users and their relatives. When members of our staff fall below the expected levels of performance, we ensure that issues are addressed and dealt with quickly. Our aim is to learn from these experiences and give assurances that any actions as a result of our investigation will be delivered.

If you remain unhappy after this further contact, you have the right to take your complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. The contact details are as follows:

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Millbank Tower

Millbank

London SW1P4QP Helpline: 0345 015 4033

Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention.

Yours sincerely

Jinjer Kandola Chief Executive

Chairman: Mark Lam

Chief Executive:        Jinjer Kandola

102,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->A PHILIPPOU_ Re_ SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION-25-01-2019-001.pdf

From: A PHILIPPOU [gis.group@btmtemet.com]

Sent: 25 January 2019 10:51

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

Hi Lorraine

my apologies this should have read 109 of Burncroft

Many thanks

Andy

Global Investigation Services Incorporating the G.I.S. Group

(UK)

Earnscliff House London N9 9AB

Tel: 020 8884 6299

Mobile: 07918 104488

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

(Cyprus)

No 6, Ground Floor Offices

103,

·         Freedom Road Drousheia Village Paphos District Cyprus 8700

Tel:(00357) 99136710

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

Andy Philippou

Full Member/Association of British Investigators 1508 (p)

Full Member Institute of Professional Investigators

Full Member/World Association of Professional Investigators

On Friday, 25 January 2019 10:42:49 GMT, A PHILIPPOU <gis.group@btinternet.com> wrote:

Hi Lorraine

I have been instructed by the London Borough of Enfield to effect service of the attached Notice of Seeking Possession relating to your son Simon Cordell for the address supplied of 106 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JH. Please be mindful of its content copies of which have been posted through the letterbox of your son's address as well as attaching two further copies on and adjacent to the front door of said property.

Many thanks

Andy

Global Investigation Services Incorporating the G.I.S. Group

(UK)

Earnscliff House

104,

London

N9 9AB

Tel: 020 8884 6299

Mobile: 07918 104488

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

(Cyprus)

No 6, Ground Floor Offices

6, Freedom Road Drousheia Village Paphos District Cyprus 8700

Tel:(00357) 99136710

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

Andy Philippou

Full Member/Association of British Investigators 1508 (p)

Full Member Institute of Professional Investigators

Full Member/World Association of Professional Investigators

105,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->A PHILIPPOU_SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION-25--01-2019.pdf

From: A PHILIPPOU [gis.group@btmtemet.com]

Sent: 25 January 2019 10:43

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

Attachments: LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19 AP.pdf

Hi Lorraine

I have been instructed by the London Borough of Enfield to effect service of the attached Notice of Seeking Possession relating to your son Simon Cordell for the address supplied of 106 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7JH. Please be mindful of its content copies of which have been posted through the letterbox of your son's address as well as attaching two further copies on and adjacent to the front door of said property.

Many thanks

Andy

Global Investigation Services Incorporating the G.I.S. Group

(UK)

Earnscliff House London N9 9AB

Tel: 020 8884 6299

Mobile: 07918 104488

Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

106,

(Cyprus)

No 6, Ground Floor Offices

6, Freedom Road Drousheia Village Paphos District Cyprus 8700

Tel:(00357) 99136710 Email: gis.group@btinternet.com

Andy Philippou

Full Member/Association of British Investigators 1508 (p)

Full Member Institute of Professional Investigators

Full Member/World Association of Professional Investigators

107,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->alev.cazimoglu@parliament.pdf

From: alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Sent: 03 January 2019 09:59

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: CRM MEQ 13856 - Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (Case Ref: JR5802) [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: ~WRD106.jpg

image002.png

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

image001.png

Dear Lorraine

Please see the latest response from Enfield Council in relation to your complaint. We will contact you as soon as we receive any further responses.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST

T: 0208 804 4543

Sent: 21 December 2018 16:00

To: RYAN, Joan

Subject: FW: CRM MEQ 13856 - Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (Case Ref: JR5802) [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Joan Ryan MP,

I am writing in response to the letter of complaint that has been submitted by Lorraine Cordell concerning the handling of her son’s case (letter attached) We have received a number of communications from Ms Cordell about various matters relating to the court proceedings that were taken against Simon Cordell and issues to do with his mental health. We have therefore sought legal clarification on some of those points and we intend to respond to all these matters (including the attached letter) once we have received the appropriate advice.

Please be advised we will provide you will a full response in the new year.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

108,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->alev.cazimoglu@parliament-03-01-2019.pdf

From: alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Sent: 03 January 2019 09:59

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: CRM MEQ 13856 - Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (Case Ref: JR5802) [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: ~WRD106.jpg

image002.png

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf

image001.png

Dear Lorraine

Please see the latest response from Enfield Council in relation to your complaint. We will contact you as soon as we receive any further responses.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST

T: 0208 804 4543

Sent: 21 December 2018 16:00

To: RYAN, Joan

Subject: FW: CRM MEQ 13856 - Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ (Case Ref: JR5802) [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Joan Ryan MP,

I am writing in response to the letter of complaint that has been submitted by Lorraine Cordell concerning the handling of her son’s case (letter attached) We have received a number of communications from Ms Cordell about various matters relating to the court proceedings that were taken against Simon Cordell and issues to do with his mental health. We have therefore sought legal clarification on some of those points and we intend to respond to all these matters (including the attached letter) once we have received the appropriate advice.

Please be advised we will provide you will a full response in the new year.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

109,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->alev.cazimoglu@parliament-17-12-2018.pdf

From: alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Sent: 17 December 2018 11:16

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: MEQ 13653 - Simon Cordell (Case Ref: JR5802) - Due Date 12/12/18 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: MEQ 13653.pdf

WRD000.jpg

Dear Lorraine

Please see the response in relation to your complaint. I know you will be upset with the contents of the letter, but I think Simon needs to cooperate with the Mental Health Teams.

Joan is happy to write to the Mental Health Trust if Simon needs support from them.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST

T: 0208 804 4543

Sent: 14 December 2018 14:51 To: RYAN, Joan

Subject: Re: MEQ 13653 - Simon Cordell (Case Ref: JR5802) - Due Date 12/12/18 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Joan Ryan MP,

Please find attached a response to your enquiry from Lorraine Cordell on behalf of her son Simon Cordell of Burncroft Avenue.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

110,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->alev.cazimoglu@parliament-21-12-2018.pdf

From: alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Sent: 21 December 2018 11:41 To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: (Case Ref: JR5802)

Attachments: image003.jpg

image002.jpg

image001.png

Dear Lorraine

Please see latest response from the Mental Health Trust following Joan's request for an appointment for Simon.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST

T: 0208 804 4543

Sent: 18 December 2018 16:56

To: CAZIMOGLU, Alev

Subject: RE: (Case Ref: JR5802)

Dear Alev,

Thank you for your email.

I can confirm that the team is trying to work with Mr Cordell, and that appointments have been offered. Best Wishes Rachel Yona

Enfield Adult Mental Health Community Services Manager Barnet, Enfield & Haringey Mental Health Trust

111,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->alev.cazimoglu@parliament-23-11-2018.pdf

From: alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Sent: 23 November 2018 16:20

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Fwd.: SC [SEC=OFFICIAL] (Case Ref: JR5802)

Attachments: image002.png

WRD000.jpg.

image001.jpg.

image003.png.

 image004.jpg

Dear Lorraine

Please see the latest response below.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST T: 0208 804 4543

From: Cllr Alev Cazimoglu

Sent: 19 November 2018 15:34

To: CAZIMOGLU, Alev

Subject: Fwd.: SC [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: Denise Cook-Smith

Date: 19 November 2018 at 15:32:12 GMT

To: Cllr Alev Cazimoglu

Subject: FW: SC [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Hi Alev

Further to your enquiry regarding Simon Cordell. Please see the update below from Debbie Morgan.

SC was discharged from hospital on 15/11/18 having been detained under the Mental Health Act for the purpose of assessment of his mental health. SC did not believe he required to be in hospital or wish to accept the proposed treatment that was offered. As there is insufficient grounds or risk for further detention or to take any further intrusive measures against his will, he has been discharged.

SC does not believe he has a mental illness that requires him to take treatment or to maintain on-going engagement with mental health services. He appears disappointed with services in which he perceives to have received from both housing and metropolitan police believing he is being targeted for things he has not done. His assessment has not elicited he has care needs warranting supported accommodation or a package of care to sustain independent living as he can be adequately supported through universal services. He presents with adequate daily living skills and can live in general needs housing. He appears to be young man who has particular beliefs, which may lead to him having differences in opinion with others, which may impact on relationships with others; particularly those in positions of authority. His mental health/psychological state therefore remains fragile; however the risk is not such that he can be forced to engage with services.

112,

He was offered follow-up by mental health services in the community to which he declined, although agreed the he can be contacted by nurses from the ward to check on progress following discharge. He has been allocated a care coordinator (Soohah Appadoo, North Locality Team - 0208 379 4142) who will continue to try to engage him to build a relationship. SC describes his main presenting need to be that of his relationship with particular neighbours within his block, whom he believes to be intentionally causing him a nuisance by way of making noise, and reports feeling disbelieved and unfairly treated by the housing department and police. He therefore wants to be moved from his current accommodation.

His mother approached the ward Consultant for a supporting letter to provide to housing for a 2-bedroom property citing she is his main carer. As there is no evidence to suggest SC requires to be looked after due to having care needs requiring a live-in carer her request was declined, she was advised to suggest housing put their request in writing should this be housing’s request. Mental Health would support relocation to alternative accommodation to reduce further tensions between the residents within the block.

Hi mother advised that SC has/or is in the possess of eviction, and that he was discharged from hospital with no support which does not seem to be the case. Support has been offered which has been declined and will continue to be offered to assist in managing the current situation or avoid and/or mitigation a situation of eviction.

113,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Chief Executive_ FW_ Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL] -06-12-2018.pdf

From: Chief Executive [Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 06 December 2018 11:53

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

complaints and information

Subject: FW: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ.pdf Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell

Thank you for your email address to the Chief Executive. I am writing in acknowledgement and to advise you that a copy of your correspondence has been passed to the Complaints and Access to Information Team. A response will be sent to you direct on the issues raised.

Regards

Heather Littler

Senior Admin Officer

Chief Executive's Unit

London Borough of Enfield

Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XY

Tel: 020 8379 4037

Email: heather.littler@enfield.gov.uk

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities"

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 05 December 2018 14:09

To: Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Sarah Cary

Sarah.Cary@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremy.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

James Rolfe

James.Rolfe@enfield.gov.uk

Tony Theodoulou

Tony.Theodoulou@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached letter regarding issues I have.

Regards

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UPONL NENOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

114,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

115,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Enfield-Counci-Reply-28-12-2018.pdf

·         Simon Cordell - 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ - 28/12/2018

Dear Kaunchita Maudhub and Andrea Clemons

Thank you for the reply letter to my emails dated the 28/12/18, I have today contracted by email Mr Cordell's solicitors who were acting for my son Trishna Kerai, but she is away until the 2nd January 2019, Trishna Kerai was well aware I did not agree with Enfield Council's draft order, which was sent to me by her on the 13th August 2018 at 15:14, I made a reply to her with the points I did not agree to right away, and she was due to rewrite them points I did not agree with. Then she went on leave and did not do the rewrite until she came back of leave. This was when her amended order was sent back to Ludmilla Iyavoo and she got no reply and a few days after this Enfield Council draft order was sealed by the court.

I did not agree to submit a housing management transfer to be considered by the exceptions panel on 17/08/2018, As Ms lyavoo is well aware it is Enfield Council neighbourhood officer that has to complete this application, In fact I have nothing to do with the making of this application I was not even allowed to see it after it was completed by the neighbourhood officer even when I asked to see it I was not allowed to be sent it as it is only used internally.

I did not only email Ludmilla Iyavoo I had calls with her and we spoke, I also left voice messages for her, when the management transfer application was deferred on the 16/08/2018 it was only due to be deferred until the next panel meeting on 29/09/2018 when it should have gone before the panel even if it was a like to like move but this did not happen. When I emailed Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo on the 28/09/2018 I asked for an update as I had not heard anything, I did not know I was meant to have given her an update regarding the appointment; and I am sure I said to her on a phone call when the management transfer application was deferred if I got any medical information I would email it to her as soon as I got it, so by not sending anything to her I sure she would have known I had not got anything, in fact the mental health team was not replying to me at all, looking back now I believe that was due to them looking into the complaint I had sent. But the medical evidence was not necessary for it to have gone to the housing panel.

1

116,

I did not get any updates from Ludmilla Iyavoo at this stage or any reasons it was not put forward to the panel on that date. I again emailed Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo on the 01/10/2018 and after talking to Lemmy Nwabuisi on the 02/10/2018 via a phone call I sent a next email to Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo asking for an update on the 02/10/2018, I did get a reply on the 02/10/2018 from Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo stating she had been in meetings and was unable to attend to my voice messages calls or emails, and that she was taking instructions from her office and would get back to me in due cause. I again emailed Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo on the 07/10/2018 as I still had not had any updates, I did not get a reply so again sent an email on the 09/10/2018 to Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo, on the 12/10/2018 I did get a reply to that email, but from my emailed it would have been very clear I wanted it to go to the panel, at that point I was very busy and did not have time to reply to that email, I then got an next email on the 15/10/2018 from Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo stating court action was going to start. At this point I knew in my heart Enfield Council was never going to put this to the panel and only wanted one thing and this was the real reason it took Ms Ludmilla Iyavoo so long to reply to my emails and calls, so it was around this time I made arrangements to see my son’s MP as I felt I was not getting anywhere and through maybe it was better coming from the MP.

The issue with appointments being made they are for my son to go to the clinic; I have told them many times my son does not leave the flat and a home appointment should be made which they are still falling to do. I spoke to Soohah Appadoo, North Locality Team more than once saying this is an issue and been told he will get back to me regarding it after he has a meeting with his team about it but he has not done this yet.

If you are now agreeing that the court did not actually record that my son submits a housing transfer application on the condition that he engages with mental health team, why has Enfield Council been stating this to everyone as this is incorrect is it not? I believe this should be corrected should it not?

Yes, I agreed to talk with the mental health team which I have done, and it is clear I have done this as it stated in your letters and replies to the MP, so I am doing what I

2

117,

was asked to do by Enfield Council at court, so why is Enfield Council not doing what they were meant to do?

This section in the court order “AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.” is also something I did not agree to, and it was this point I asked to be rewritten or removed along with other sections. The reason I did not agree to it being written in the court order was due to the fact I knew I was limited in what I could do with the mental health team, and really the way the draft court order is worded by Enfield Council was not said in court that way and was I believe only written this way for Enfield Council to get out of moving my son.

There is only so much I can do as my son has rights even under the mental health act, so when I agreed I knew I would be limited in what I could do. It seems Enfield Council are just passing the buck over to anyone they can and not doing anything to help my son and passing incorrect information over all the time to people.

There is a duty of care and so far, Enfield Council has beached that in every way possible regarding my son, also the beaches in data protection is beyond anything I have ever seen when is this going to stop? By now you would have the complaint outcome letter that was submitted to the mental health team which was upheld, which should have been learned from, but it seems the sharing of information regarding my son is even worse now than when it was when I submitted the complaint to the mental health team. There has never been no consent from my son for Enfield Council to share data the way they have with the mental health team the way it has been shared.

When is Enfield Council going to help my son? not leave him to suffer the way Enfield Council has done since the end of 2014 when I started making calls about what was going on with the neighbours, from the start of 2015 I had to start sending emails to Enfield Council regarding what was going on with the neighbours because Enfield Council was just not getting back to me regarding the phone calls and still no one got back to me until 21/09/2015, it seems Enfield Council only acts when it is against my son, as I was putting in reports and complaints regarding what the

3

118,

neighbours were doing well before any report or complaint went in regarding my son,

I was told so many times by Lemmy Nwabuisi to forget all about the emails I sent, and it seems Enfield Council don’t seem to have many of the emails I sent begging for help with what was ongoing.

To me this is one sided only and not once has Lemmy Nwabuisi ever asked to see anything this is a beach and discrimination against my son, not even the police take one side to everything at least they do an investigation, which I believe the council also have a duty to do.

Why is Enfield Council also allowed to try and pressure neighbours into doing statements against their will, against my son and don’t think I don’t know about this as I do, why am I being told by neighbours Enfield Council is out to get my son really badly and are not going to stop until they do get him out, why are neighbours even being talked to about my son? It seems Enfield Council will stop at nothing regarding my son.

Why has Lemmy Nwabuisi or any other Enfield Council worker ever taken any report from my son regarding anything when they have been told time and time again, we have proof my son has not done the things that is being said he has done? Why does Enfield Council see fit to wait months and months and months to tell us about any reports? The list can go on and on, but we know already Enfield Council will do nothing for my son but disregard him.

Please could you clarify for me whether or not you are seeking possession order for my son flat? Because you have now admitted in your letter to me dated the 28/12/2018 that the information used in your letter dated the 12/12/2018 was incorrect as it was not stated in the court order my son had to engage with mental health team to be able to get a housing management transfer, and that my son did not need to provide medical evidence to support the housing management transfer application, and you did in fact have enough information to put this to the panel as the application was completed by the 16/08/2018. As it really seems to me that Enfield Council has not done what was within the court order or taken anything the Judge said in court on the 09/08/2018 into account, and the basic for the seeking possession order on my son's

4

119,

flat was based on facts that was clearly not in the court order, if Enfield Council had put this before the panel then this would not even be an issue and we would not need to address this now.

Also I would like to say at this point Trishna Kerai from Stuart miller solicitors is no longer acting solicitors for my son, so there is no need for the legal team or any other team within Enfield Council to forward any documents to her regarding my son.

I apologise for the sternness of this letter, but it seems where my son and I are concerned we seem to take one step forward then two back and I am sure you can sympathise with how frustrating this must be.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

5

120,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Joan Ryan_ Re_ Simon Cordell (Case Ref_ JR14051) -10-12-2018.pdf

From: Joan Ryan [alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk]

Sent: 10 December 2018 14:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell (Case Ref: JR14051)

Hi Lorraine

We have sent your most recent letter to the council in addition to all the other information you have provided. We will contact you as soon as we receive a reply.

Kind regards,

Alev, on behalf of Joan Ryan MP

Labour Member of Parliament for Enfield North

t: 0208 804 4543 (Enfield North)

t: 0207 219 2442 (Westminster)

e: joan.ryan.mp@parliament.uk

w: www.joanryan.org.uk

Westminster Office:

House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

T: 0207 219 2442

Constituency Office:

542 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 5ST

T: 0208 804 4543

From: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 7 December 2018 13:39

To: CAZIMOGLU, Alev

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Alev Cazimoglu

I know you said to me today on the phone that you would get back to me if you heard anything from Enfield Council.

But this cannot be allowed to carry on, this is making my son's health worse with what is going on and him being in that flat, the banging does not stop even people I am I getting to stay with my son don't want to be there due to how bad it is it does not stop.

Enfield Council is now making my son stay in a flat living in hell, they know the issues why have they not just moved him out of there?

How long is it going to take with letters going backwards and forwards with no end to it? All awhile my son is suffering badly, and it is impacting on his health how far is Enfield Council going to let this go?

Enfield Council has not once asked my son's side to this they only go with what is being said about my son is this right? This are always 2 sides to anything so why is Enfield Council only taking one side to all of this and not once hearing our side?

Enfield Council has had long enough to move my son why have they not.

I need help to deal with this and I can’t wait months for anything to be done, and that is not saying you are not doing your best as I know you are it seems Enfield Council are the ones holding this up and really for what reason, is it so they can make my son suffer more?

Regards

Lorraine

UK Parliament Disclaimer: this e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any

121,

virus transmitted by this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.

122,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Kaunchita Maudhub_ Re_ Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf

From: Kaunchita Maudhub [Kaunchita.Maudhub@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 28 December 2018 13:14

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Attachments: Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a letter in response to your emails dated 12th and 20th December 18 sent to Ms Andrea Clemons.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379-4182 kaunchita.maudhub@enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 December 2018 13:55

To:

Andrea Clemons

Andrea.Clemons@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremy.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

I was wondering if you was going to reply to the below email as it has been a few days since I sent it and I feel this is very important due to the action going to be taken from Enfield Council, and I did not have a reply to my last email to you.

I would like the incorrect information corrected that is being used, and without a reply I cannot do this, I have attached a copy of your letter sent to the MP dated 12/12/2018.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 December 2018 17:12

To: 'Andrea Clemons

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

123,

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

Today the MP's aid for Joan Ryan, Alev Cazimoglu sent me a copy of your letter dated the 12/12/2018, I am shocked to see what is written within it and the misleading information being passed over to the MP Joan Ryan.

It was not agreed on the condition that Mr Cordell should engage with mental health services and provide medical evidence to support the housing management transfer application. The court did not state this, so I do not know where this is coming from.

I also do not understand where it is coming from that Mr Cordell had to provided supporting letter from the mental health services to support his management transfer application, and he has not done this, he was never meant to have done this and the management transfer application was completed by Enfield Council to go to the panel on the 17/08/2018 and it was ready to go to the panel on this date, but this was deferred to be considered at the next panel meeting which would have taken place on 28/09/2018, which never happened.

The reason for it being deferred was so that I Miss Lorraine Cordell could try and get a letter from the mental health team, which I could not so it therefore should have gone ahead to the panel on the 28/09/2018, which I do have the emails to prove this. I also do not understand why Enfield Council is stating supported accommodation was being asked for as this was never asked for. I did however state in court that a 2 bedroom would be better as my son could have family live with him so he could get support from his family; I have never said I am his carer I have never said a lot of things that Enfield Council is stating I have said.

It was stated in the court order.

·         UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

·         UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

·         AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

The order was to be agreed with my son’s solicitor upon being drafted by Enfield Council, but my son’s solicitor was on annual leave and therefore did not reply to Enfield Council order until she came back of leave, But when you emailed her it came back that she was on annual leave so Enfield Council was well aware of this.

Upon her return from annual leave her amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, which my son’s solicitor never had a reply back from Ludmilla Iyavoo regarding her amended order, but some days after the amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, it seems an order was sealed at Edmonton Country Court which was not agreed on which was Enfield Council drafted order, which we never agreed to and feel it is misleading as to what was said in court.

I believe a lot of what was said in court is not being told and misleading information is being said, maybe someone should ask Ludmilla Iyavoo what the judge said when Ludmilla Iyavoo said she would go for a possession order to the judge because she did not get what she wanted.

124,

There is also the fact that my son was willing to stay in Hospital when he was sectioned on the 25/10/2018, it was the hospital that discharged him on the 15/11/2018 due to not getting the section 3 on my son they wanted, that was heard on the 14/11/2018, my son said as soon as he knew they was not allowing the section 3 on the 14/11/2018 that they would kick him out of the hospital, as this is what they did in 2016, and the next day the 15/11/2018 that is what the doctors did kicked him out the hospital, yet my son was willing to stay and build trust up with the doctors and the mental health team, which had broken down due to what has been ongoing for some time.

Which in fact would have been a lot better as if he had been allowed to stay in hospital like he wanted maybe by now they would have been trust built up with the doctors and teams, this is what Soohah Appadoo wanted to do as he saw that there was a real problem with trust and stated this at the appeal on the section 2 at the hearing. On the 16/11/2018 I myself spoke to Soohah Appadoo on the phone, but since that we have heard nothing from him is this what is being called support put in place when my son was discharged from hospital?

This misleading information needs to stop as it is a beach of the data protection act.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this, please can you reply as I did not get a reply from you to my last email, I sent to you.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UPONL NENOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

125,

126,

127,

Psychiatric Report on Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

1. Introduction

This report is prepared at the request of London Borough of Enfield, Antisocial Behaviour Team following directions from the Edmonton County Court to undertake an assessment on Mr Cordell. My instructions were received in a letter dated 5 July 2018 and outlined as below:

1. Whether the defendant has the mental capacity to litigate and give instructions in his defence.

2. Whether the defendant understands the terms of the injunction order dated 9 January 2018.

2.      Details of current proceedings

The current proceedings relate to an interim injunction order issued against Mr Cordell, at the Edmonton County Court on 9 January 2018. This followed numerous complaints from neighbours about Mr Cordell’s acts of harassment and antisocial behaviour. However it has been reported that Mr Cordell has continued to breach the order. It has been reported that a neighbour has been assaulted, harassed, and has received threats from Mr Cordell. He has also made threats towards certain council employees. The local authority issued applications for committal due to Mr Cordell’s breach of the injunction, however the applications could not be considered due to concerns about his mental capacity.

3.      Sources of information

3.1  I was provided with the following information to aid in the assessment:

3.2  Claim form for an injunction with supporting documents

3.3  Order for an injunction dated 9.1.2018

3.4  Report of Angela Hague from the Enfield Assessment Team

3.5  Court order made by DJ Dias, Edmonton County Court at the hearing on 30.05.2018 and 26.6.2018.

1

128,

3.6  I assessed Mr Cordell on 6 July 2018, at his flat 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ, accompanied by two officers from the Enfield Housing Team. I can confirm that prior to my assessment; I explained to Mr Cordell my role and the purpose of my visit. I also explained to him that I was acting on the instructions of the Enfield Council at the directions of the Court.

4.      Assessment of Mr Cordell

4.1  Mr Cordell spoke to us for a few minutes outside his flat and upon explaining the purpose of the visit, he allowed us into his flat. He agreed to tie the dog outside in the garden. The flat although disorganised with papers and folders scattered around, did not appear overly cluttered. Mr Cordell presented as a young, slim built, mixed race male with reasonable hygiene. We explained our roles and the purpose of our visit. Mr Cordell informed us that he was recording our conversation.

4.2  Mr Cordell seemed very keen and enthusiastic to talk and we had to explain the reason of our visit several times to maintain some structure and focus. He maintained appropriate eye contact and we managed to establish a rapport after a while. His demeanour was polite and appropriate. There was evidence of psychomotor agitation as he appeared generally restless and overactive. Mr Cordell described his appetite and sleep pattern as fine. Objectively I would regard his mood as labile, rapidly fluctuating between euthymia (normal mood) and irritability.

4.3  Mr Cordell’s comprehension of information presented to him appeared adequate. He was able to understand the queries presented to him. His responses however were very elaborate and circumstantial. His speech was very pressured, difficult to interrupt and at times frankly rambling. There was clear evidence of thought disorder with flight of ideas (rapid shift of ideas with some superficial apparent connection). Mr Cordell struggled to sustain his goal of thinking as he often derailed to themes of relevance to him, digressing away from the topic of discussion. It was very difficult to obtain a direct response to the queries posed to him and follow his thread of conversation.

4.4  Mr Cordell’s thought content was replete with various delusional beliefs of persecutory and grandiose nature. He spoke of an elaborate conspiracy which involves the Enfield local authority and the metropolitan police, dating back since 2013, when he claimed that he was arrested for putting up a gazebo in his garden which led to him being barred from visiting

2

129,

places in central London and placed on a curfew from 10 pm. Mr Cordell informed that he followed these restrictions imposed on him for about a year and returned to Court and won the case. Mr Cordell then went on to talk about Sally Gilcrest, the legal executive for the metropolitan police who he alleged set him up for a million pounds and brought on an ASBO against him, which ended with him being imposed on a nine-year curfew. Mr Cordell stated that Sally Gilcrest in conjunction with the borough commander Jane Johnson and the community officer started spreading rumours that he was “suffering from herpes and has hurt a woman” which the neighbours in his block became aware of and started sending him messages addressing him as “you black boy”. Mr Cordell implied that Sally Gilcrest colluded with the neighbours as she had a vested interest in getting him out of this country. He stated that the neighbours above him deliberately bang on his ceiling and have also subject him to other forms of harassment since 2014. Mr Cordell implied that the neighbours were responsible for the miscarriage suffered by his then girlfriend and also held them responsible for the separation from his previous girlfriends. He further stated that between 2014 and 2016, his mother has made numerous complaints to the council regarding the harassment he has been subject to and he has won a criminal case against his neighbours

4.5  Mr Cordell then went on to elaborate his grievance against Lemmy, the officer who works for the Enfield local authority. He claimed that he received an email from Lemmy threatening that he would obtain a possession order against him and asking him to attend a meeting. He then stated that the ASBO that was served against him was not valid due to lack of signature. Therefore Lemmy built a false case against him by using “lower grade cases" to pursue a possession order and subsequently an injunction order, by falsifying statements and using “statements from dead cases”. According to Mr Cordell this was declared as invalid by a Judge, however Lemmy has continued to produce false orders against him in the way of a second injunction, which he claimed has never been served on him. Mr Cordell described this as “targeted malice" by Lemmy as he has used the injunction as a smoke screen to cover up the ASBO by providing false statements and witnesses.

4.6  In addition, Mr Cordell also described a number of grandiose beliefs, stating that he was building a constitution on CIC, which he explained to be Community Interest Company. He also spoke of a number of other businesses. He was keen to show us the various documents, emails, and recordings he has accrued as evidence to support his case.

3

130,

5        Opinion and Recommendations

Mr Cordell is a resident at the Enfield borough, who was served an injunction on 9 January 2018, following numerous complaints by his neighbours of antisocial behaviour and harassment. Despite this, Mr Cordell has continued to breach the order with further incidents of harassment, threats, and assault against the neighbours. In addition, it has been reported that some council employees have also received threats from Mr Cordell. According to available information, Mr Cordell has had sporadic contact with the mental health services and has been recently assessed by the Enfield Mental Health Assessment Service. During my assessment, Mr Cordell was preoccupied with a number of persecutory and grandiose delusional beliefs. In addition, he also presented with other symptoms such as labile mood, pressured speech, overactivity, and flight of ideas. In my view, Mr Cordell’s current presentation is consistent with Schizoaffective Disorder, which is recognised as an enduring mental illness.

I have received specific instructions to address the following issues:

1. Whether Mr Cordell has the mental capacity to litigate and give instructions to his defence?

As highlighted above, Mr Cordell’s mental state is replete with complex persecutory delusional belief system. During my assessment, Mr Cordell was convinced that the local authority and the police have been colluding alongside his neighbours to pursue false claims and allegations against him. In his view, the possession order and the injunction order were based on false statements, created against him and this did not stand up in Court and therefore an injunction was not issued against him. In my view, although there are no significant deficits in Mr Cordell’s comprehension or retention of information, his ability to process information relevant to the current proceedings is likely to be influenced by his underlying delusional beliefs. During my interaction, it was evident that his interpretation of events and actions of others are influenced by his abnormal beliefs. Mr Cordell perceives himself as a victim and is aggrieved by the injustice carried out against him. In my view,

Mr Cordell’s ability to weigh the information relevant to the current proceedings is impaired due to his tendency to misinterpret any information presented to him to fit into his entrenched persecutory delusional beliefs. Moreover Mr Cordell presents with significant thought disorder and it is unlikely that he will be able to give coherent instructions to the defence.

It is therefore my opinion that Mr Cordell lacks capacity to litigate and give appropriate instructions to the defence.

4

131,

2. Whether Mr Cordell understands the terms of the injunction order dated 9 January 2018?

Mr Cordell is currently suffering from symptoms of Schizoaffective Disorder and presents with florid psychotic symptoms. His thinking and behaviour are influenced by his underlying persecutory beliefs. Mr Cordell is convinced that the injunction order is a cover up by the local authority for the errors and mistakes of the ASBO and therefore did not stand up in Court. Mr Cordell is convinced that the injunction order has been falsified by certain individuals (particularly Lemmy possibly in conjunction with others). He therefore does not value the order, or the contents contained within it. In my opinion Mr Cordell’s capacity to process the information relevant to the order is again impacted by his delusional beliefs.

Dr Dhara Dinakaran, MBBS,

MSc, MR C Psych

Consultant Psychiatrist

Approved under Section 12 (2) of MHA

08/07/2018

5

132,

133,

134,

135,

Blank Page!

136,

137,

138,

139,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19 AP (2).pdf

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

Housing Department P.O. Box No. 60, Civic Centre, Enfield

NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION HOUSING ACT 1985 - SECTION 83

THIS NOTICE IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS REQUIRING YOU TO GIVE UP POSSESSION OF YOUR DWELLING. YOU SHOULD READ IT AND ALL THE NOTES VERY CAREFULLY.

1. To: Mr Simon Cordell

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 1

If you need advice about this Notice, and what you should do about it, take it as quickly as possible to a Citizens’ Advice Bureau, a Housing Aid Centre, or a Law Centre, or to a Solicitor. You may be able to receive Legal Aid, but this will depend on your personal circumstances.

2. The Landlord, the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield intends to apply to the Court for an order requiring you to give up possession of:

109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7JQ

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 2

If you are a secure tenant under the Housing Act 1985, you can only be required to leave your dwelling if your landlord obtains an order for possession from the Court. The order must be based on one of the Grounds, which are set out in the 1985 Act (see paragraphs 3 and 4 below).

If you are willing to give up possession without a Court order, you should notify the person who signed this Notice as soon as possible and say when you would leave.

3. Possession will be sought on Grounds 1 & 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985, which read:

Ground 1

l

140,

Rent lawfully due from the tenant has not been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has been broken or not performed.

Ground 2

a)      The tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house –

has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting, or otherwise engaging in a lawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

b)     has been convicted of—

       I.            using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

    II.            an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 3

Whatever Grounds for possession are set out in paragraph 3 of this Notice, the Court may allow any of the other Grounds to be added at a later stage. If this is done, you will be told about it so you can argue at the hearing in Court about the new Ground, as well as the Grounds set out in paragraph 3 if you want to.

4.      The reasons for taking this action are>

You have failed to comply with the following obligations of your tenancy agreement which commenced on 14th August 2006.

The relevant conditions of the tenancy agreement are as follows:

As to Ground 2

Condition 9

2

141,

“You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in, or visiting your home. This means that you must ensure that they do not act in breach of any of these conditions. Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in the property, in communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or anywhere within Enfield borough.”

Condition 10

“You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely to cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of our officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

As to Ground 1

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order.”

Condition 34

“You must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items inappropriately).”

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

3

142,

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliances that we are responsible for maintaining.”

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply.”

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

Condition 79

“You must always keep your dog(s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

Particulars of Breaches

1.      On 6th July 2016, it is alleged that you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

2.      Sometime in July 2016 it is alleged that you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box, resulting in no electricity to his flat.        ,

3.      On 6th August 2016, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

4.      Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109-119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.

4

143,

5.      On 27th September 2016, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to his flat with his family, threatened, swore at him, and demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse, and swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat.

6.      On 28th September 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse and swear words at them. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

7.      On 4th October 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noise, you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood.

8.      On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms Fletcher reported that she overheard you threaten her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

9.      On 8th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise. .

10.  On 11th December 2016, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

11.  On 14th December 2016, it is alleged that you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.         ,

12.  On 23rd December 2016, it is alleged that you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. You then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply.

5

144,

13.  On 26th December 2016, it is alleged that you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him, his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply. You also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

14.  On 3rd January 2017, it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

15.  On 21st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore, and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

16.  On 31st January 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

17.  We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated, ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

18.  On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you had installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up by industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

19.  On 17th March 2017 Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB Coordinator visited 109 Burncroft Avenue to post a letter through your door and as he got into his car to drive off after posting the letter, you ran after him shouting and screaming abuse. The letter requested that you attend our offices to

6

145,

discuss the nuisance reports being received from your neighbours. By the time he returned to the office, you had telephoned him several times. He telephoned you back and you asked whether he was the person that posted a letter through your letterbox and he said yes. You asked why he did not stop when you ran after him and he stated that he had another visit and did not have the time to stop and talk to you. You stated that you will not attend the meeting at the Civic Centre or any of the council offices as you are unable to leave your flat and that the meeting should take place in your flat. Mr Nwabuisi offered to have the meeting at a neutral venue and suggested the local library or at your mother's house, but you refused saying that you have done nothing wrong and accused him of taking sides with your neighbours.

20.  On 5th May 2017, it is alleged that you threatened one of your neighbours by saying that you will ruin his life and that you were going to the police to present evidence about his illegal activities.

21.  On 14th May 2017, it is alleged that you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse, and threats at her and falsely accused her of making noise and coming into your flat to attack you. You later followed her to her car shouting abuse and wanting to know where she was going.

22.  On 14th May 2017 it is alleged that you allowed your dog to run freely in the communal area of your block without a lead.

23.  On 28th May 2017, the police issued you with a first instance Harassment letter following reports of harassment and threatening behaviour made to the police by one of your neighbours.

24.  On 9th June 2017, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbours in the communal hallway of your block as he returned from work late at night by grabbing him on the arm and neck thereby causing bruising to his arm and neck. You also snatched his phone from him as he tried to video­record the incident.

25.  On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

7

146,

26.  On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is alleged that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

27.  On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is alleged that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

28.  On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

29.  On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

30.  On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is alleged that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

31.  On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours, but you refused him access. The Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to the affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from entering his car. He then called the police.

8

147,

32.  On 11th November 2017 at 11.30am, it is alleged by one of your neighbours that you came to their front door, opened the letterbox, and peeped through it to see who was inside the flat. You then started swearing and shouting abuse and banging on their front door as soon as you saw the neighbour’s wife.

33.  On 2nd January 2018 at 6.30pm, it is alleged that you stood outside your neighbour’s property for more than twenty minutes swearing and shouting abuse. You went away and returned half an hour later, you lifted their letterbox, stuck your mobile phone through the letterbox and started to record his family while swearing and shouting abuse. This went on for about fifteen minutes.

34.  On 9th January 2018 at about 12.18pm, you telephone Lemmy Nwabuisi (ASB Behaviour officer) and accused him of forging documents to get an Anti-Social Behaviour order against you and you told him that he had made you a prisoner within your home. You also stated that you knew where he lives in Enfield and that he and his family were not safe from you. You also told him that you would watch him leave the office and you would have followed him home and he needed to watch his back. You called the ASB officer again 30 minutes later and told him that you knew he has a flat in Edmonton and also knew that one of his colleagues lives in Edmonton. You also stated that you knew where they live, and they were not safe.

35.  On 9th January 2018 you called Kaunchita Maudhub (ASB Behaviour officer) and left a long voicemail on her work telephone number and made threats.

36.  On 26th February 2018, at around 11.45pm it is alleged that you came to one of your neighbour’s front door and started making loud banging noises and rattling with their letter box. You ran away after the neighbour opened her front door.

37.  On 1st March 2018 it is alleged that you knocked on one of your neighbours’ door loudly, you started rattling with their letter box and started shouting. This went on for 5 to 10 minutes, but you left after you’ve heard that the neighbour was calling the police.

38.  On 15th March 2018 it is alleged that you swore, shouted, and assaulted one of you neighbours in front of his wife and his 3 years old child.

9

148,

39.  On 1st May 2018, you attended the Edmonton County Court as there was a hearing listed in relation to an injunction. It is alleged that you started shouting abuse, swore and make threats to two of the Claimant’s employees (Lemmy Nwabuisi, ASB officer and Balbinder Kaur Geddes, lawyer) and to one of your neighbours who attended Court to give evidence. You also swore at a judge. These incidents were witnessed by members of staff working at the Court.

40.  On 29th May 2018, it is alleged that you attended one of your neighbours’ property; you took your dog with you and waited by their front door. It is alleged that you tried to intimidate as they were due to attend a hearing in the Edmonton County Court to give evidence in support of a claim for an injunction issued against you.

41.  On 30th May 2018, it is alleged that you made threats to kill to one of your neighbours. The matter was reported to the police. You were arrested and released on bail.

42.  On 29th August 2018, it is alleged that you assaulted one of your neighbours for flushing his toilet.

43.  You telephoned two council officers (Lemmy Nwabuisi and Ludmilla lyavoo) on 12th September 2018 and made threats to them over the telephone. You also accused them of fraud and of fabricating evidence to support the Council’s claim for an injunction

44.  On 12th September 2018 at about 3.50pm, you called one of your neighbours on his mobile phone using a private number. It is not known how you obtained his number, but he terminated the call. You called again using the same private number, but he terminated the call as soon as he heard your voice. You called repeatedly after that.

45.  On 24th September 2018 at about 11.30am, one of your neighbours returned home from dropping her daughter at school and as she entered their block of flat, she noticed that the middle door on the ground floor was open as well as your front door. As she went up the stairs to their second floor flat, your dog came out of your flat and started barking at her. The neighbour had to run up the stairs to her flat to escape from the dog. It was reported that your dog is always barking whenever they go out or return to the block and the neighbour and 4 years old daughter are terrified.

10

149,

46.  On 30th September 2018, it is alleged that you attempted to break down one of your neighbour’s front door by kicking it several times and accused him flushing his toilet.

47.  On 2nd October 2018 at about 12:45pm, it is alleged that you attacked one of your neighbour’s cousins as he was leaving the block. It is alleged that as he exited the block, you followed him and suddenly grabbed his jacket from behind and tried to pull him to the ground. The cousin started shouting to attract neighbours and managed to push you off.

48.  On 18th October 2018, you telephoned one of the Enfield Council solicitors, Miss Ludmilla lyavoo almost ten times, making threats and intimidating her. You suggested that she stops working on the case or you will try to get her struck off from the ‘register’.

49.  On 19th October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo at least five times and left two voice messages making threats and trying to intimidate the solicitor working on the case.

50.  On 22nd October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left one threatening and intimidating voice message.

51.  On 23rd October 2018, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and left an intimidating voice message.

52.  On 24th October 2018, you telephoned Ludmilla lyavoo twice but did not leave any messages.

53.  On 16th December 2018 at around 6pm, it is alleged that you repeatedly banged on one of your neighbour’s door and peeped through his letterbox.

54.  On 17th January 2019, you were videotaped when you confronted one of your neighbours outside your block of flats (109-119 Burncroft Avenue) as he was taking his three-year-old daughter to school and started shouting abuse and threats at him thereby preventing him from taking his daughter to school. You then followed him and his daughter up the stairs to their second floor flat and was videotaped by a member of the neighbour’s family as you attempted to attack them causing them to run into their flat for safety with you forcing the door to try and gain entry. Your neighbour and his family have since fled their property as a result of your constant threats and intimidation.

11

150,

55.  On 18th January 2019, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo from a private number and started making threats and the solicitor ended the call. You called again three times and left a voice message making threats and intimidation.

56.  On 23rd January 2019, you telephoned Miss Ludmilla lyavoo eight times within a ten-minute period.

57.  It is reported that you continue to harass and intimidate other residents on a regular basis.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 4.

Before the Court will grant an order on any of the Grounds 1 to 8 or 12 to 16, it must be satisfied that it is reasonable to require you to leave. This means that, if one of these Grounds is set out in paragraph 3 to this Notice, you will be able to argue at the hearing in Court that it is not reasonable that you should have to leave, even if you accept that the Ground applies.

Before the court grants an order on any of the Grounds 9 to 16, it must be satisfied that there will be suitable alternative accommodation for you when you have to leave. This means that the Court will have to decide that, in its opinion, there will be other accommodation which is reasonably suitable for the needs of you and your family, taking into particular account various factors such as the nearness of your place of work, and the sort of housing that other people with similar needs are offered. Your new home will have to be let to you on another secure tenancy or a private tenancy under the Rent Act of a kind that will give you similar security.

There is no requirement for suitable alternative accommodation where Grounds 1 to 8 apply.

If your landlord is not a local authority, and the local authority gives a certificate that it will provide you with suitable accommodation, the Court has to accept the certificate.

One of the requirements of Ground 10A is that the landlord must have approval for the redevelopment scheme from the Secretary of State (or, in the case of a housing association landlord, the Housing Corporation). The landlord must have consulted all secure tenants affected by the proposed redevelopment scheme.

12

152,

5.      Court proceedings for possession of the dwelling-house can be begun immediately. The date by which the tenant is to give up possession of the dwelling-house is Monday the 25 February 2019.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 5

Court proceedings may be begun at once or at any time during the following twelve months. Once the twelve months are up this Notice will lapse, and a new Notice must be served before possession can be sought.

Possession of your dwelling-house cannot be obtained until after this date, which cannot be earlier than the date when your tenancy or license could have been brought to an end. This means that if you have a weekly or fortnightly tenancy, there should be at least 4 weeks between the date this Notice is given, and the date possession is ordered.

Signed

Anti-Social Behaviour Team Leader

On behalf of Enfield Council Housing Address: The Edmonton Centre,

36-44 South Mall London N9 OTN

Dated: 24/01/2019

13

151,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Lorraine Cordell_ RE_ Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf

From: Lorraine Cordell [lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 28 December 2018 22:16

To: 'Kaunchita Maudhub

Andrea Clemons

Alev Cazimoglu

chief.executive@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Enfield-Counci-Reply-28-12-2018.pdf

Dear Kaunchita Maudhub and Andrea Clemons

Please see attached reply to your letter dated the 28/12/2018.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Kaunchita Maudhub

mailto: Kaunchita.Maudhub@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 28 December 2018 13:14

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Re: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL] Importance: High

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached a letter in response to your emails dated 12th and 20th December 18 sent to Ms Andrea Clemons.

Yours Sincerely

Kaunchita Maudhub

Anti-Social Behaviour - Team Leader

Community Safety Unit

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver St

Enfield EN1 3XA

Tel: 020 8379-4182 kaunchita.maudhub@enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 December 2018 13:55

To:

Andrea Clemons

Andrea.Clemons@enfield.gov.uk

Chief Executive

Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Jeremy Chambers

Jeremy.Chambers@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

I was wondering if you was going to reply to the below email as it has been a few days since I sent it and I feel this is very important due to the action going to be taken from Enfield Council, and I did not

153,

have a reply to my last email to you.

I would like the incorrect information corrected that is being used, and without a reply I cannot do this, I have attached a copy of your letter sent to the MP dated 12/12/2018.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 December 2018 17:12

To: 'Andrea Clemons’.

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue. EN3 7JQ

Dear Andrea Clemons

Today the MP's aid for Joan Ryan, Alev Cazimoglu sent me a copy of your letter dated the 12/12/2018, I am shocked to see what is written within it and the misleading information being passed over to the MP Joan Ryan.

It was not agreed on the condition that Mr Cordell should engage with mental health services and provide medical evidence to support the housing management transfer application. The court did not state this, so I do not know where this is coming from.

I also do not understand where it is coming from that Mr Cordell had to provided supporting letter from the mental health services to support his management transfer application, and he has not done this, he was never meant to have done this and the management transfer application was completed by Enfield Council to go to the panel on the 17/08/2018 and it was ready to go to the panel on this date, but this was deferred to be considered at the next panel meeting which would have taken place on 28/09/2018, which never happened.

The reason for it being deferred was so that I Miss Lorraine Cordell could try and get a letter from the mental health team, which I could not so it therefore should have gone ahead to the panel on the 28/09/2018, which I do have the emails to prove this. I also do not understand why Enfield Council is stating supported accommodation was being asked for as this was never asked for. I did however state in court that a 2 bedroom would be better as my son could have family live with him so he could get support from his family; I have never said I am his carer I have never said a lot of things that Enfield Council is stating I have said.

It was stated in the court order.

10.  UPON the Defendant's mother Mrs Lorraine Cordell, confirming that she will engage with the Claimant and assist the Defendant's neighbourhood officer in making a housing management transfer application on or before 16 August 2018.

11.  UPON the Claimant agreeing that it will deal with the housing management transfer application as quickly as possible after being made.

12.  AND UPON the Defendants mother agreeing to engage with the Enfield Mental Health Unit team so the Defendant could receive assistance with his mental health conditions and housing.

154,

The order was to be agreed with my son’s solicitor upon being drafted by Enfield Council, but my son’s solicitor was on annual leave and therefore did not reply to Enfield Council order until she came back of leave, But when you emailed her it came back that she was on annual leave so Enfield Council was well aware of this.

Upon her return from annual leave her amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, which my son’s solicitor never had a reply back from Ludmilla Iyavoo regarding her amended order, but some days after the amended order was sent over to Ludmilla Iyavoo, it seems an order was sealed at Edmonton Country Court which was not agreed on which was Enfield Council drafted order, which we never agreed to and feel it is misleading as to what was said in court.

I believe a lot of what was said in court is not being told and misleading information is being said, maybe someone should ask Ludmilla Iyavoo what the judge said when Ludmilla Iyavoo said she would go for a possession order to the judge because she did not get what she wanted.

There is also the fact that my son was willing to stay in Hospital when he was sectioned on the 25/10/2018, it was the hospital that discharged him on the 15/11/2018 due to not getting the section 3 on my son they wanted, that was heard on the 14/11/2018, my son said as soon as he knew they was not allowing the section 3 on the 14/11/2018 that they would kick him out of the hospital, as this is what they did in 2016, and the next day the 15/11/2018 that is what the doctors did kicked him out the hospital, yet my son was willing to stay and build trust up with the doctors and the mental health team, which had broken down due to what has been ongoing for some time.

Which in fact would have been a lot better as if he had been allowed to stay in hospital like he wanted maybe by now they would have been trust built up with the doctors and teams, this is what Soohah Appadoo wanted to do as he saw that there was a real problem with trust and stated this at the appeal on the section 2 at the hearing. On the 16/11/2018 I myself spoke to Soohah Appadoo on the phone, but since that we have heard nothing from him is this what is being called support put in place when my son was discharged from hospital?

This misleading information needs to stop as it is a beach of the data protection act.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this, please can you reply as I did not get a reply from you to my last email, I sent to you.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLNE NOW

www.enfield.gov

UK/newsletters

http://www.enfield. gov.uk

155,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

156,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Ludmilla Iyavoo_ RE_ Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018.pdf

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:45

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

I am not longer dealing with Simon's case. This matter has been re-allocated to my colleague Paul Buckridge who would be in touch.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:17

To: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move

Dear Ludmilla

Can you tell me when the next panel meeting is and if Simon paperwork will be put forward for the move at this meeting please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

157,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your Inbox

SIGN UPONL NENOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

158,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Ludmilla Iyavoo_ RE_ Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018-001.pdf

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo [Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:53

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Paul Buckridge

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL Dear Ms Cordell,

Paul Buckridge is a lawyer working in the legal team. I have copied him to this email and have asked him to contact you once he has received instructions from the relevant officer.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla Iyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:50

To: Ludmilla Iyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Ludmilla

Who is Paul Buckridge what department does he work for can you tell me this please and if you have a contract for him could this be passed on please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ludmilla Iyavoo

mailto: Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:45

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

159,

I am not longer dealing with Simon's case. This matter has been re-allocated to my colleague Paul Buckridge who would be in touch.

Kind regards,

Ludmilla lyavoo Solicitor Corporate Team Legal Services Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

DX 90615 Enfield 1

Telephone: 020 8379 8323

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 November 2018 12:17

To: Ludmilla lyavoo <Ludmilla.Iyavoo@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Move

Dear Ludmilla

Can you tell me when the next panel meeting is and if Simon paperwork will be put forward for the move at this meeting please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may

160,

contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

161,

162,

163,

164,

165,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ (2).pdf

·         Complaint 05/12/2018

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

I am writing this email due to issues I have regarding a member of staff who works for Enfield Council by the name off Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator,

Since 2016 when Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator started working for Enfield Council he has been working on investigations relating to my son Mr. Simon Cordell.

In this time not once has Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator, come to see my son’s side to the alleged allegations regarding what the neighbours have put in about my son.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator has taken one side to these said alleged allegations without no investigations,’ Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi it seem has taken one side to everything that has been said and that is the side of the neighbours, Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has been told many times we have information which would proof my son had not done things which have been stated by the neighbours

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator knows my son does not leave the flat he was told this, and also told that if he wanted to attend a meeting with my son he could do so with police there to have a meeting to hear my son’s side, he has never got back to me regarding having a meeting at my son’s home because he never wanted to, which I am sure if someone is a vulnerable person where was the duty of care where has it ever been for my son?

I believe Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator just through to himself that my son is in the wrong he is a vulnerable person I will put pressure on him and get him out without even thinking there is 2 side to anything. And just blamed my son without even talking to him this is how it has been since Mr Lemmy

1

166,

Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator starting working for Enfield

Council.

I also feel Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has taken information and not relayed it back correctly many times regarding my son’s health even to the courts. Information is being passed and obtained relating to my son which should never have been passed to 3 parties or used, how can this be allowed. There are many other points and failings which have been allowed to happen and this needs to stop. I will be drafting up a full complaint of failings and submitting it, but this will take a while to draft up as I have got to go back some years.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi also had my son arrested on the 09/01/2018 and even though we asked many times, even my own son’s solicitors could not understand why he was the person still investigating my son. When his case was part of the court actions being taken against my son by Enfield Council this is against the law that someone is investigating something within their own case, and it beaches many other things.

At this point in time I want Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi taken off dealing with anything to do with my son or related to him, I feel he has not done acted correctly and feel he has not investigated anything which would prove my son has done nothing wrong and only wanted to blame him for everything, I have asked this before and heard nothing back regarding this. But it has got to the point in time that this needs to happen.

Could someone please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

2

167,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ-05-12-2018.pdf

• Complaint 05/12/2018

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

I am writing this email due to issues I have regarding a member of staff who works for Enfield Council by the name off Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator,

Since 2016 when Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator started working for Enfield Council he has been working on investigations relating to my son Mr. Simon Cordell.

In this time not once has Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator, come to see my son’s side to the alleged allegations regarding what the neighbours have put in about my son.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator has taken one side to these said alleged allegations without no investigations,’ Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi it seem has taken one side to everything that has been said and that is the side of the neighbours, Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has been told many times we have information which would proof my son had not done things which have been stated by the neighbours

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator knows my son does not leave the flat he was told this, and also told that if he wanted to attend a meeting with my son he could do so with police there to have a meeting to hear my son’s side, he has never got back to me regarding having a meeting at my son’s home because he never wanted to, which I am sure if someone is a vulnerable person where was the duty of care where has it ever been for my son?

I believe Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator just through to himself that my son is in the wrong he is a vulnerable person I will put pressure on him and get him out without even thinking there is 2 side to anything. And just blamed my son without even talking to him this is how it has been since Mr Lemmy

1

168,

Nwabuisi the Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator starting working for Enfield

Council.

I also feel Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi has taken information and not relayed it back correctly many times regarding my son’s health even to the courts. Information is being passed and obtained relating to my son which should never have been passed to 3 parties or used, how can this be allowed. There are many other points and failings which have been allowed to happen and this needs to stop. I will be drafting up a full complaint of failings and submitting it, but this will take a while to draft up as I have got to go back some years.

Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi also had my son arrested on the 09/01/2018 and even though we asked many times, even my own son’s solicitors could not understand why he was the person still investigating my son. When his case was part of the court actions being taken against my son by Enfield Council this is against the law that someone is investigating something within their own case, and it beaches many other things.

At this point in time I want Mr Lemmy Nwabuisi taken off dealing with anything to do with my son or related to him, I feel he has not done acted correctly and feel he has not investigated anything which would prove my son has done nothing wrong and only wanted to blame him for everything, I have asked this before and heard nothing back regarding this. But it has got to the point in time that this needs to happen.

Could someone please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

2

169,

Blank Page!

170,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Paul Buckridge_ RE_ Simon Cordell-30-11-2018.pdf

From: Paul Buckridge [Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2018 15:43

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ms Cordell

My instructing client is the Council Housing and Anti-Social Behaviour section.

Regards,

Paul Buckridge

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 30 November 2018 14:54

To: Paul Buckridge  Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Paul Buckridge

Regarding point 1, I have not demanded a 2 bedroom flat for my son I only said it would be better as someone could be there with my son, but Enfield council was told to re-house my son by the court even if it was a like to like as Enfield Council stated this should have been done.

Regarding point 2, I will deal with this when the paperwork is received due to what the judge stated in court on the 09/08/2018 regarding this.

But could you please give me the name of the person who has instructed you to start the proceedings against Simon Cordell for possession.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Paul Buckridge

mailto: Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 30 November 2018 14:17

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ms Cordell

Thank you for your email. I apologise for not responding earlier I was waiting instructions.

In respect to point 1 of your email, I am advised by my client that they will not be submitting any paperwork to the exception panel. Our client informs that the court order of 9/8/18 does not mandate the council to offer a two-bed property to Mr Cordell.

I am now instructed by my client to issue proceedings against Simon Cordell for possession.

Regards,

Paul Buckridge

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

171,

Sent: 30 November 2018 11:12

To: Paul Buckridge  Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Paul Buckridge

I have not had a reply from you in regard to the emails I sent to Ludmilla.

·         Could you please tell me if my son paperwork will be put in front the next panel regarding moving him as was meant to be done via the court order of the 09/08/2018, if so, what date is the next panel meeting.

·         Or are you going to commence possession proceedings as was stated by Ludmilla emails dated the 18/10/2018

Could you please tell me if you have had instructions in regards as to what is the next steps to be taken. As I myself need to know so I can address this matter as soon as possible for my son.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Paul Buckridge

mailto: Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 27 November 2018 16:51

To: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: Simon Cordell

Importance: High

Dear Ms Cordell

I am in receipt of the email exchange between my colleague and yourself. I have recently taken over the matter and will on receipt of instructions from our client revert to you on the points that you have raised. I will endeavour to get instructions tomorrow and provide a full response.

Regards,

Paul Buckridge

Locum Solicitor | Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

020 8379 5492

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

DX: 90615

Enfield 1

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

172,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your Inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

173,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your Inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

174,

RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements ->Paul Buckridge_ RE_ Simon Cordell-30-11-2018-001.pdf

From: Paul Buckridge [Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 30 November 2018 14:17

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Ms Cordell

Thank you for your email. I apologise for not responding earlier I was waiting instructions.

In respect to point 1 of your email, I am advised by my client that they will not be submitting any paperwork to the exception panel. Our client informs that the court order of 9/8/18 does not mandate the council to offer a two-bed property to Mr Cordell.

I am now instructed by my client to issue proceedings against Simon Cordell for possession.

Regards,

Paul Buckridge

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 30 November 2018 11:12

To: Paul Buckridge <Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Alev Cazimoglu

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Dear Paul Buckridge

I have not had a reply from you in regard to the emails I sent to Ludmilla.

·         Could you please tell me if my son paperwork will be put in front of the next panel regarding moving him as was meant to be done via the court order of the 09/08/2018, if so, what date is the next panel meeting.

·         Or are you going to commence possession proceedings as was stated by Ludmilla emails dated the 18/10/2018

Could you please tell me if you have had instructions in regards as to what is the next steps to be taken. As I myself need to know so I can address this matter as soon as possible for my son.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Paul Buckridge

mailto: Paul.Buckridge@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 27 November 2018 16:51

To: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: Simon Cordell

Importance: High

Dear Ms Cordell

I am in receipt of the email exchange between my colleague and yourself. I have recently taken over the matter and will on receipt of instructions from our client revert to you on the points that you have raised. I will endeavour to get instructions tomorrow and provide a full response.

Regards,

Paul Buckridge

175,

Locum Solicitor | Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

m 020 8379 5492

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA DX: 90615 Enfield 1

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive

176,

it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.12.2019_FW Legal Aid Agency Requirements Simon Cordell

12/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 177,178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289

 

 

10.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.12.2019_FW Legal Aid Agency Requirements Simon Cordell

12/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 177,178,179,180

181,182,183,184,185,186

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289

--

177,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 February 2019 18:14

To: 'Liselle Archer'

Subject: FW: Legal Aid Agency Requirements Simon Cordell

Attachments:

ESA-Comfirmed-Letter-08-03-2018.pdf.

Fresh Possession Order 06_02_2019-Full.pdf

Simon-Licence-Front-Back.pdf

Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018.pdf

VLS_20171215_103522.pdf; VLS_20171215_103441.pdf

Citizencard.pdf; Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018-001 (2).pdf

2018 11 28 Signed response.pdf

A PHILIPPOU_ Re_ SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION-25-01-2019-001.pdf

A PHILIPPOU_SIMON CORDELL RE NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION- 25--01-2019.pdf

alev.cazimoglu@parliament.pdf

alev.cazimoglu@parliament-03-01-2019.pdf

alev.cazimoglu@parliament-17-12-2018.pdf

alev.cazimoglu@parliament-21-12-2018.pdf

alev.cazimoglu@parliament-23-11-2018.pdf

Chief Executive-FW-Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ [SEC=OFFICIAL] -06-12-2018.pdf

Enfield-Counci-Reply-28-12-2018.pdf

Joan Ryan-Re-Simon-Cordell (Case Ref_ JR14051) -10-12-2018.pdf

Kaunchita Maudhub-Re-Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf

Letter to ECC attaching Dr Dhinakaran's assessment report 10 7 2018.pdf

Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18 (2).pdf

Letter to Lorraine Cordell 28.12.18.pdf

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD RE LBE V SIMON CORDELL NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION 25JAN19 AP (2).pdf

Lorraine Cordell-RE-Mr Simon Cordell. 109 Burncroft Avenue.pdf

Ludmilla Iyavoo-RE- Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018.pdf

Ludmilla Iyavoo-RE-Simon Cordell Move [SEC=OFFICIAL] -27-11-2018-001.pdf

MEQ 13653 (4).pdf

MEQ 13653-001.pdf

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ (2).pdf

On behalf of Mr Simon Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ-05-12-2018.pdf

Paul Buckridge-RE-Simon Cordell-30-11-2018.pdf

Paul Buckridge-RE-Simon Cordell-30-11-2018-001.pdf

Simon-Bank-Statements-12-02-2019.pdf

Dear Liselle Archer

Please see attached documents including his bank statements which was missing from the below email. But can the solicitor please read below email as that says some bits about the case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk 

Sent: 11 February 2019 18:17

To: 'Liselle Archer'

Subject: RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Liselle Archer

I am writing this letter regarding the case that Enfield Council has laid before the court for a Possession Order for my son’s flat. The court hearing is for the 08/03/2019 at 10:00 hours. I have tried to attach the most up to date information as there is a long history to this with Enfield Council and my son. I have ordered my son's bank statements but am waiting for them to come in the post so have included the other documents asked for in the email, and if a date can be set for him to see someone maybe by the time we see someone we will have the bank statement, but my son has had legal aid in the below cases, Please see attached documents.

I am writing this to give you some form of information relating to this case as it has in some ways been ongoing for some time. Enfield Council has had 2 other court cases regarding these matters which were for injunction orders please see below information

178,

they were for the same cases as in this new Possession Order.

E00ED049: Edmonton Country Court

13.  Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 09th January 2018 at Edmonton Country Court, to replace the one that was struck out by the court on the 06/11/2017 as the Judge would not put it back in place.

14.  This case went on until the 09/08/2018, please see attached court order which was made, which Enfield Council was meant to have moved my son, which has never happened I have been trying to get this done since this date and Enfield Council have not done anything.

D02ED073: Edmonton Country Court

1. Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 9th August 2017 at Edmonton Country Court.

2. This case ended up being struck out on the 06/11/2017, the reason for this was due to Enfield Council not doing what the court asked them to do.

Even through there is a court order in place for Enfield Council to move my son, Enfield Council has done nothing only kept my son in a flat that is causing his health to be impacted and lied to multiple bodies regarding the order that was made on the 09/08/2018. The judge warned Enfield Council regarding a Possession Order on my son on the 09/08/2018, there is a lot of paperwork regarding all of this which will need to be gone over.

There are so many Emails and Documents regarding everything that has gone on it will be too much to send via email. So I have only put a few of the last emails and Letters including the new order, the other information will need to be done at a meeting as there is just so much information.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Liselle Archer

mailto: liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 07 February 2019 15:51

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

 Subject: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Madam

Following our telephone conversation today, please see below the requirements for the application for public funding (Legal Aid).

Please bring the following documents in order for us to open a case:

·         Most recent award letter confirming that your son receives ESA

·         Bank statements of all adults over the age 18 living in the household.

Please note that the bank statements must be:

Covering the last 3 months with no gaps, this includes 07 February 2019 -07 November 2018)

For all bank statements including savings accounts and dormant accounts)

179,

·         Passport or Driving Licence (proof of ID)

·         Tenancy Agreement and letters from your landlord

·         Anything else you consider relevant.

Please note we are unable to open a case until we have received all of the above documents.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

First for family law

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

180,

Same as Above!

181,

Same as Above!

182,

Same as Above!

183,

Same as Above!

184,

Same as Above!

185,

Same as Above!

186,

Same as Above!

187,188,189,190,191,192

193,194,195,196,197,198

199,200,201,202,203,204

205,206,207,208,209,210

211,212,213,214,215,216

217,218,219,220,221,222

223,224,225,226,227,228

229,230,231,232,233,234

235,236,237,238,239,240

241,242,243,244,245,246

247,248,249,250,251,252

253,254,255,256,257,258

259,260,261,262,263,264

265,266,267,268,269,270

271,272,273,274,275,276

277,278,279,280,281,282

283,284,285,286,287,288

289

 

 

 

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother

18-02-2019 -09-26

/ Page Numbers: 290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310  

 

 

11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother

18-02-2019 -09-26

/ Page Numbers: 290,291,292,293,294

295,296,297,298,299,300

301,302,303,304,305,306

307,308,309,310        

--

290,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 18/02/2019 09:26:54 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: RE: Enfield Council files Part 002

Attachments: Sar 1085 records 16022019-part 2.pdf

Part 2 of 3

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 18 February 2019 21:26

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: RE: Enfield Council files Part 001

please see attached please del this email once you have downloaded files 1 of 3

291,

292,

293,

294,

295,

296,

297,

298,

299,

300,

301,

302,

303,

304,

305,

306,

307,

308,

309,

310,    

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother 18-02-2019 -09-26

18/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 311,312

313,314,315,316,317,318

319,320,321,322

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Mother 18-02-2019 -09-26

18/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 311,312,313,314,

315,316,317,318, 319,320,321,322

--

311,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 18/02/2019 09:29:02 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: RE: Enfield Council files Part 003

Attachments: Sar 1085 records 16022019.part 3.pdf

Part 3 of 3

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 18 February 2019 21:27

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: RE: Enfield Council files Part 002

Part 2 of 3

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 18 February 2019 21:26

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: RE: Enfield Council files Part 001

please see attached please del this email once you have downloaded files 1 of 3

312,

313,

314,

315,

316,

317,

318,

319,

320,

321,

322,

 

 

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 1

Prob. lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.20.2019_Re Booked Appointments _001

20/02/2019 20:03:00

/ Page Numbers: 323,324

325,326

 

 

13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 1

Prob. lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.20.2019_Re Booked Appointments _001

20/02/2019 20:03:00

/ Page Numbers: 323,324,325,326

323,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 February 2019 20:03

To: Liselle Archer

Subject: Re: Booked Appointments

Dear Liselle Archer

Would it please be possible to set a meeting up for Simon Cordell for Monday afternoon, it has taken me longer to get a laptop then I was hoping.

If you can get back to me, I would be most grateful Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Sent from my iPhone

On 13 Feb 2019, at 12:36, Liselle Archer <liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Lorraine

Following our telephone conversation today, these appointments have been booked for you in relation to your son’s case:

Friday 15 February 2019 @ 12pm: Telephone Legal Aid Application Appointment

Monday 18 February 2019 @ 3pm: Office Face to Face Appointment

Please note: if the legal aid application is not submitting on Friday, the appointment booked for Monday will have to be rescheduled.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office

324,

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 February 2019 18:14

To: Liselle Archer <liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: FW: Legal Aid Agency Requirements Simon Cordell

Dear Liselle Archer

Please see attached documents including his bank statements which was missing from the below email. But can the solicitor please read below email as that says some bits about the case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 February 2019 18:17

To: 'Liselle Archer'

Subject: RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Liselle Archer

I am writing this letter regarding the case that Enfield Council has laid before the court for a Possession Order for my son’s flat. The court hearing is for the 08/03/2019 at 10:00 hours. I have tried to attach the most up to date information as there is a long history to this with Enfield Council and my son. I have ordered my son's bank statements but am waiting for them to come in the post so have included the other documents asked for in the email, and if a date can be set for him to see someone maybe by the time we see someone we will have the bank statement, but my son has had legal aid in the below cases, Please see attached documents.

I am writing this to give you some form of information relating to this case as it has in some ways been ongoing for some time.

Enfield Council has had 2 other court cases regarding these matters which were for injunction orders please see below information they were for the same cases as in this new Possession Order.

325,

E00ED049: Edmonton Country Court

1. Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 09th January 2018 at Edmonton Country Court, to replace the one that was struck out by the court on the 06/11/2017 as the Judge would not put it back in place.

2. This case went on until the 09/08/2018, please see attached court order which was made, which Enfield Council was meant to have moved my son, which has never happened I have been trying to get this done since this date and Enfield Council have not done anything.

D02ED073: Edmonton Country Court

1. Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 9th August 2017 at Edmonton Country Court.

2. This case ended up being struck out on the 06/11/2017, the reason for this was due to Enfield Council not doing what the court asked them to do.

Even through there is a court order in place for Enfield Council to move my son, Enfield Council has done nothing only kept my son in a flat that is causing his health to be impacted and lied to multiple bodies regarding the order that was made on the 09/08/2018. The judge warned Enfield Council regarding a Possession Order on my son on the 09/08/2018, there is a lot of paperwork regarding all of this which will need to be gone over.

There are so many Emails and Documents regarding everything that has gone on it will be too much to send via email. So I have only put a few of the last emails and Letters including the new order, the other information will need to be done at a meeting as there is just so much information.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Liselle Archer

mailto: liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 07 February 2019 15:51

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Madam

Following our telephone conversation today, please see below the requirements for the application for public funding (Legal Aid).

Please bring the following documents in order for us to open a case:

1. Most recent award letter confirming that your son receives ESA

2. Bank statements of all adults over the age 18 living in the household.

(Please note that the bank statements must be:

Covering the last 3 months with no gaps, this includes 07 February 2019 -07 November 2018)

• For all bank statements including savings accounts and dormant accounts)

326,

3. Passport or Driving Licence (proof of ID)

4. Tenancy Agreement and letters from your landlord

5. Anything else you consider relevant.

Please note we are unable to open a case until we have received all of the above documents.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

 

 

 

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 1

 Prob. lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.20.2019_Re Booked Appointments

20/02/2019 20:03:00

Double of 13

/ Page Numbers: 327,328,

329,330

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 1

 Prob. lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.20.2019_Re Booked Appointments

20/02/2019 20:03:00

Double of 13

/ Page Numbers: 327,328,329,330

327,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 20 February 2019 20:03

To: Liselle Archer

Subject: Re: Booked Appointments

Dear Liselle Archer

Would it please be possible to set a meeting up for Simon Cordell for Monday afternoon, it has taken me longer to get a laptop then I was hoping.

If you can get back to me, I would be most grateful Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Sent from my iPhone

On 13 Feb 2019, at 12:36, Liselle Archer <liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Lorraine

Following our telephone conversation today, these appointments have been booked for you in relation to your son’s case:

1.      Friday 15 February 2019 @ 12pm: Telephone Legal Aid Application Appointment

2.      Monday 18 February 2019 @ 3pm: Office Face to Face Appointment

Please note: if the legal aid application is not submitting on Friday, the appointment booked for Monday will have to be rescheduled.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office

328,

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 February 2019 18:14

To: Liselle Archer <liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: FW: Legal Aid Agency Requirements Simon Cordell

Dear Liselle Archer

Please see attached documents including his bank statements which was missing from the below email. But can the solicitor please read below email as that says some bits about the case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 February 2019 18:17

To: 'Liselle Archer'

Subject: RE: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Liselle Archer

I am writing this letter regarding the case that Enfield Council has laid before the court for a Possession Order for my son’s flat. The court hearing is for the 08/03/2019 at 10:00 hours. I have tried to attach the most up to date information as there is a long history to this with Enfield Council and my son. I have ordered my son's bank statements but am waiting for them to come in the post so have included the other documents asked for in the email, and if a date can be set for him to see someone maybe by the time we see someone we will have the bank statement, but my son has had legal aid in the below cases, Please see attached documents.

I am writing this to give you some form of information relating to this case as it has in some ways been ongoing for some time.

Enfield Council has had 2 other court cases regarding these matters which were for injunction orders please see below information they were for the same cases as in this new Possession Order.

329,

E00ED049: Edmonton Country Court

1.      Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 09th January 2018 at Edmonton Country Court, to replace the one that was struck out by the court on the 06/11/2017 as the Judge would not put it back in place.

2.      This case went on until the 09/08/2018, please see attached court order which was made, which Enfield Council was meant to have moved my son, which has never happened I have been trying to get this done since this date and Enfield Council have not done anything.

D02ED073: Edmonton Country Court

3.      Interim Injunction order started by Enfield Council on the 9th August 2017 at Edmonton Country Court.

4.      This case ended up being struck out on the 06/11/2017, the reason for this was due to Enfield Council not doing what the court asked them to do.

5.      Even through there is a court order in place for Enfield Council to move my son, Enfield Council has done nothing only kept my son in a flat that is causing his health to be impacted and lied to multiple bodies regarding the order that was made on the 09/08/2018. The judge warned Enfield Council regarding a Possession Order on my son on the 09/08/2018, there is a lot of paperwork regarding all of this which will need to be gone over.

6.      There are so many Emails and Documents regarding everything that has gone on it will be too much to send via email. So I have only put a few of the last emails and Letters including the new order, the other information will need to be done at a meeting as there is just so much information.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Liselle Archer

mailto: liselle@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk  

Sent: 07 February 2019 15:51

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Legal Aid Agency Requirements

Dear Madam

Following our telephone conversation today, please see below the requirements for the application for public funding (Legal Aid).

Please bring the following documents in order for us to open a case:

1.      Most recent award letter confirming that your son receives ESA

2.      Bank statements of all adults over the age 18 living in the household.

(Please note that the bank statements must be:

Covering the last 3 months with no gaps, this includes 07 February 2019 -07 November 2018)

• For all bank statements including savings accounts and dormant accounts)

330,

3.      Passport or Driving Licence (proof of ID)

4.      Tenancy Agreement and letters from your landlord

5.      Anything else you consider relevant.

Please note we are unable to open a case until we have received all of the above documents.

Kind Regards

Liselle Archer

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.22.2019_Re Simon Cordell

22/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 331,332

 

 

15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_02.22.2019_Re Simon Cordell

22/02/2019

/ Page Numbers: 331,332

331,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 22 February 2019 16:34

To: Ronak Ahmed

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell

Dear Ronak Ahmed

Thank you for the below email would it please be possible for you to call me on 07807 333545. I don't think it's going to be that easy on the 08/03/2019 as the last 2 court cases Enfield Council has tried to railroad my son with the court totally misleading the courts with everything including my son's health. My son did not even attend the last 3 hearings due to what was going on and the court assessment was ordered by the court. There have also been major data beaches between Enfield Council staying to the MH team there was a court order for information to be given to them regarding my son which there was not. I know on the 08/03/2019 that Enfield Council is going to try and get the possession order on that date. Even though they have not complied with the court order dated the 09/08/2018 where they were meant to have moved my son. They have never put anything in front of the housing management panel to even start this, they have lied to the MP and also the MH teams.

This case really does need to be heard by judge dais who heard the last 3 hearings from the last case.

Simon is very worried, and this is not helping him, Enfield Council knows he does not cope with court hearings also, the impact this is having on my son is very bad.

If you can call me, I would be most grateful.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Feb 2019, at 15:33, Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Ms Cordell

I have been forwarded your email below and can confirm that I am unfortunately not able to meet with you on Monday. Additionally, I am on holiday next week so if you need to speak to someone at the Office then please ask for Sean. My colleague Liselle Archer will also not be in the office from Monday so please do not send her any emails going forward.

The hearing on 8 March 2019 will be a brief 5-minute hearing and we will be requesting directions from the court on that occasion. This means that there will be opportunity to present further documents to trial (which will be sometime winter 2019 or spring 2020. Therefore I propose that we meet after I return from holiday. I will arrange for my colleague Sean or an external lawyer to represent Simon Cordell at the first hearing.

Best wishes

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tel (01582)726579

Email  ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 20 February 2019 20:03

To: Liselle Archer <liselle@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

332,

Subject: Re: Booked Appointments

Dear Liselle Archer

Would it please be possible to set a meeting up for Simon Cordell for Monday afternoon, it has taken me longer to get a laptop then I was hoping.

If you can get back to me, I would be most grateful

Regards

Lorraine Cordell Sent from my iPhone

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2019_RE Complaint [SEC=OFFICIAL]

ALL NEW STUFF

04/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 333,334,335

 

 

16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_03.04.2019_RE Complaint [SEC=OFFICIAL]

ALL NEW STUFF

04/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 333,334,335

333,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 04 March 2019 13:21

To: 'Chief Executive'

Subject: RE: Complaint [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Heather, Littler

Thank you for the below reply, but I fear just passing a copy of my correspondence will do very little, as I have been waiting for a reply just from one complaint since I believe the 05/12/2019, and there are multiple emails and letters going back to 2018 and the start of 2019 I have yet to have a reply from, also the SAR I put in on 25/11/2018 is still on going with really only data from 1997 included within a few documents I did get which I am writing emails for updates and getting no replies.

So you can see things are for some reason things are not being dealt with, Also I get no correspondence asking for more time, I write more emails to ask for an update but yet no replies so I think you can see that issues are not being dealt with in the correct way, and this has been like this for years not a few months, it is like I am wasting my time sitting and writing anything as it seem Enfield Council are not addressing anything I have asked.

This is why I have asked the Chief Executive's Unit to get involved as I feel I am getting nowhere, and that should not be the case I should at least get a reply. There are multiple issues and it seems where my son is involved Enfield Council just pushes it under the table.

As it seems you have just pushed this to the same teams that are not doing their job and have not done their job for some time, is there anyone else in Enfield Council I can take this to that is higher as it seems no one wants to do anything within Enfield Council,

I also do feel that departments within Enfield Council have deleted multiple of my correspondence from Enfield Council systems so it looks like I am doing nothing, when in fact I am. Multiple beaches in data can also be proven regarding the sharing of my son's data, and multiple other beaches. I have been told to ask under what jurisdiction within law; Enfield Council is using to share data, and what security is being taken by Enfield Council when passing information over to other bodies within, yet I have had no reply to this also along with multiple other questions I have asked.

I would like to know if anyone at Enfield Council is going to take anything serious?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Chief Executive

mailto: Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 04 March 2019 12:11

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: complaints and information; Andrea Clemons

Subject: RE: Complaint [SEC=OFFICIAL]

334,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell

Thank you for your email addressed to the Chief Executive. I am writing in acknowledgement and to advise you that a copy of your correspondence has been passed to the Complaints and Access to Information Team. A response will be sent to you direct on the issues raised.

Regards

Heather Littler

Senior Admin Officer

Chief Executive's Unit

London Borough of Enfield

Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XY

Tel: 020 8379 4037

Email: heather.littler@enfield.gov.uk

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities"

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Sent: 03 March 2019 15:29

To: Chief Executive <Chief.Executive@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Complaint

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I feel it is the only option I have left, I have written emails and complaints and I just do not get a reply to them,

I have had to CC you into some of them in order to try and get a reply some I do get a reply when I CC you into emails but most of the time I get nothing.

I do not feel it is correct have to do this and as far as I know when you are CC into emails I am sure you should over see it and make sure things are getting addressed but it seems like this is failing now and I would like to know the reason why it is failing so badly.

I do know there is a pending court case for my son which Enfield Council has submitted to the court, but I do not feel that is a reason why emails / letters / complaints are not followed up,

from my understanding when a complaint is submitted you are on a time limited in order to make a reply yet even complaints are failing to deal or address complaint in a timely manner, I do not just write emails and letters for the fun of things I write them in order to get answer to what I am asking.

I am sorry for the way in which I have had to word this email, but this is not just one letter / complaint / email which has gone un-replied to this has been ongoing now for years.

the way in which my son has been treated is a disgrace by Enfield Council, not once in all these years has anyone from Enfield Council come to see my son and as his side to anything or look at all the data my son has got which will prove he has not done all the things that is being said.

It seems all Enfield Council wants to do is court case after court case and mislead the courts as that has been done many times regarding my son, and when the court orders something Enfield Council fails to do that as well.

This is becoming more and more serious regarding the failing towards my son and I feel it has gone far enough and therefore I would like you to address these failing.

Regards

335,

Lorraine Cordell

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Diary to mother version 05_03_2019 - 05-03-2019-1-08-03

/ Page Numbers: 336

 

 

17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Diary to mother version 05_03_2019 - 05-03-2019-1-08-03

/ Page Numbers: 336

--

336,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 05/03/2019 08:03:29 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: This is updated version 05_03_2019

Attachments: 9b2fde35-b16e-a32d-2036-0151df77810a@yahoo.com

 

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c_03.29.2019_RE Your Son's Case 1

29/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 337

 

 

18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c_03.29.2019_RE Your Son's Case 1

29/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 337

--

337,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 29 March 2019 11:11

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son's Case

Good morning

Given the outcome of the last hearing, there is no further action to be taken at this stage. If the Council make further applications to the Court, then we will need to respond as appropriate.

I need to send some standard letters to your son which I will complete next week.

Kind Regards

Ron Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tel (01582) 726579

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 March 2019 11:21

To: Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE:

Dear Sean and Ron

I was wondering if you could give me an update regarding my son Mr Simon Cordell case, I just wanted to know what way we are going with this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_03.12.2019_Auto reply

/ Page Numbers: A, B, C

 

 

19

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_03.12.2019_Auto reply

/ Page Numbers: A, B, C,

A,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 March 2019 17:03

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto reply

** IMPORTANT NOTICE ON EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS **

Thank you for your email, which has been received by the court. Depending on the nature of your email you may receive a response via email or post.

What documents can be sent by email?

You can send all letters and documents relevant to the case including adoption cases. However, due to the sensitive nature of adoption work the court will only send emails to secure email accounts. If a hard copy of a document has been filed at court by DX or Post, an electronic copy should not be sent. As yet please note that court bundles are not part of this process and will not be printed.

For more information regarding e-mails please go to the following http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/email-guidance What is a secure email account?

An email account is considered secure when security measures are in place to make sure the data in the email can’t be accessed by users without the relevant approval. Any account that ends in the following is considered secured: gsi, pnn, gsx, gcsx, gse, cjsm, and nhs.net.

What emails will HMCTS accept?

To make sure we operate this service as efficiently and effectively as possible there are exemptions.

All Civil and Family process, applications and documents will be accepted by email as long as when the entire email is printed out it is not more than 50 pages. This should include the email, all attachments (including any documents embedded in another) and enough copies to serve on required parties.

Please note that:

15.  A page is one side, so 50 pages equals 25 pieces of paper printed on both sides.

16.  Do not use more than one email to take any step in a case which requires a document or documents to be filed.

DOCUMENTS FOR HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PD, 5B.2. FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE PD 5B

You have received an order to attend court for a hearing.

It would greatly assist the court staff if you could ensure documents you file into court have a hearing date endorsed on the covering letter, paperwork, or email.

This will then enable the court staff to identify the document is placed on file in readiness for the hearing.

Please note, if the court is unaware of the pending hearing, when you file your documents, this may result in the document not reaching the court file in time for the hearing.

Can processes that carry a fee be sent by email?

In both Civil and Family cases court processes that carry a fee can also be received by email and processed by court staff. However the same conditions as above must apply and in addition the party issuing the process must either quote a Fee Account number, or the party who wants to pay has a valid credit or debit card. If you wish to pay using this method, please say this on the

B,

email and include a contact number for the Court to contact you to take payment.

What is Fee Account?

This is a Direct Debit function that is quick, safe, and easy to use. It is available for solicitors and large organisations. Once you have set up an account all you need is to provide your fee account number within the body of the email. The fee will then be deducted from your account. For more information and to apply for Fee Account please visit www.justice.gov.uk/courts/fees/payment-by-account.

Any document submitted that breaches any of the above terms will remain unprocessed. This is in line with Court Practice Directions 5BPD.1 - 5BPD.9.3.

When you email the court the subject line of your mail must contain (in the following order): -

·         The claim numbers

·         The title of the claim (abbreviated if necessary) **

·         The subject matter (e.g. defence)

·         If relating to a hearing the date and time of hearing in bold black

·         The judge’s name, where the correspondence/document is for their attention

**If your email is in relation to a family matter, please refer to the initials only.

Your message should also contain the name, telephone number and email address of the sender. Correspondence and documents may be sent as either text or attachments. Where there is a practice form, it must be sent in that form by attachment. The complete email (including any attachment(s)) must not exceed 10Mb.

The rest of this automated message provides information that customers often find useful.

Edmonton County Court

The public counter services are no longer available at this court.

Urgent applications and processes that need to be dealt with in person will be through an appointment only system. Users should contact the court on 0208 8846510 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday to make an appointment.

The main telephone number for Civil and Family enquiries is 0208 884 6500 Gold fax 0870 3240314

Our address is The County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London, N18 2TN DX 136686 Edmonton 3

The court building is open between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm Monday to Friday.

We have a secure drop box located in reception for personal deliveries to the court, which is opened once a day at 9.00 am Monday to Friday.

Website links

Information on Court forms and fees can be also be obtained from www.justice.gov.uk Issuing a claim for Money or Possession of Property - MCOL & PCOL

C,

If you would like to issue a claim for money or property you can do so 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by visiting: www.moneydaim.gov.uk or www.possessionclaim.gov.uk.You will save money by issuing a claim for possession of property or a money claim online rather than sending it to the court.

Legal Advice

If you are uncertain how to proceed, the Civil Procedure Rules available on the Ministry of Justice website - http://www.justice.gov.uk - provide details. On many occasions it is best for people to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor, legal executive, legal advice agency or Citizens Advice Bureau. You can also contact Civil Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 or via their website.

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20.1. 1

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_03.12.2019_

12/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 341

 

 

20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20.1. 1

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_03.12.2019_

12/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 341

--

341,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 12 March 2019 16:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Kind Regards

D Shanmuganathan Partner

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2937

Email sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members ‘names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

first for family Law

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder_03.12.2019_RE urgent FOOED222

12/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 342      

 

 

21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder_03.12.2019_RE urgent FOOED222

12/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 342

--

342,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 March 2019 17:03

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: RE: urgent FOOED222

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email as I believe a mistake has been made with the above court case number FOOED222

We attended court on the 08/03/2019 where Mr S Cordell had an acting solicitor acting for him, but the court order has been sent to Mr S Cordell home address and not the acting solicitors.

Could you please amend the court case number to show the acting solicitors please so documents can be sent to them as they have not had the court order of the 08/03/2019 it has been sent to Mr S Cordell address.

The acting solicitor's information is:

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP D Shanmuganathan Partner 1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Email sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Kind Regards

 

 

 

 

 

22.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.co3.13.2019_Read urgent FOOED222

13/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 343, 344

 

 

22.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.co3.13.2019_Read urgent FOOED222

13/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 343, 344

--

343,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 13 March 2019 10:08

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: urgent FOOED222

Attachments: urgent FOOED222 (11.0 KB)

Importance: High

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

344,

Read: urgent FOOED222 -> urgent FOOED222 (11.0 KB).msg

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries [enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk]

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 13 March 2019 10:08:10

Subject: Read: urgent FOOED222

Your message

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries

Subject: RE: urgent FOOED222

Sent: 12/03/2019 17:02

was read on 13/03/2019 10:07

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2.

Mother 15-03-2019 -09-13

15/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 345,346,347

 

 

23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 1. 2.

Mother 15-03-2019 -09-13

15/03/2019

/ Page Numbers: 345,346,347

--

345,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 15/03/2019 09:13:56 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: re: document

Attachments: Court-Order=F00ED222-08-03-2019.pdf

here

346,

General Form of Judgment or Order in the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number:  F00ED222

Date: 11 March 2019

Ref LS/C/PB/159272

Ref     

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD h* Claimant

SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

Before District Judge Davies sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

Upon hearing the Solicitor for the Claimant and the Solicitor for the Defendant

Upon the Particulars of Claim setting out (at paragraph 12 that the Defendant was assessed by a Consultant Psychiatrist on 06/07/2018 as lacking capacity to litigate

IT IS ORDERED THAT

These proceedings are adjourned generally with permission to restore in order for the parties to apply to the Official Solicitor to consider whether he is prepared to act as Litigation Friend for the Defendant. If no request to restore is made by 4pm on 08/06/2019, the claim will stand struck out without further order.

Costs reserved.

Dated 8 March 2019

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money. Go to www.moneyclaim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by: A. ABIODUN

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

CJR065C

347,

Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Avenue Enfield EN3 7JQ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2.

Wix 27-04-2019-01-06

27/04/2019

/ Page Numbers: 348

 

 

24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 2.

Wix 27-04-2019-01-06

27/04/2019

/ Page Numbers: 348

--

348,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@notifications.wix.com>

Sent time: 27/04/2019 01:06:08 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject:  Your Domain horrificcorruption.com Will Renew Soon

Can't see this email

WlX.com

Your Domain Will Renew Soon

Your domain, horrificcorruption.com, will automatically renew for another year on Jun 6, 2019 for GBP20.72.

To ensure uninterrupted service, your payment method may be charged up to two weeks before the renewal date.

Simply check that your payment information is correct so your domain will renew on time:

·         Access your Billing & Payments

·         Click on horrificcorruption.com

·         Click Update Payment Method to check your payment info and make any changes

·         Click Update and you're ready to go for another year

To learn more about the way Wix processes your payments,

You may disable auto-renewal or cancel your subscription at any time through your account.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

25. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c_04.30.2019_RE Your Son's Case 1

30/04/2019

/ Page Numbers: 349      

 

 

25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

25. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c_04.30.2019_RE Your Son's Case 1

30/04/2019

/ Page Numbers: 349

--

349,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 30 April 2019 16:57

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son's Case

Good afternoon

Thank you or your email.

We have not heard anything yet and I am hoping that the Claimants do not take any action so that the claim is stuck out. If contact is made, then we shall of course be in touch.

In relation to opening up the old court order, I am not confident that such a step would be covered by Legal Aid.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tel (01582) 726579

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 23 April 2019 11:40

To: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Your Son's Case

Dear Ronak Ahmed

I was wondering if there was any update and if Enfield Council has made any contract with you regarding my son. Sean also said when we saw him at court maybe the old court order should be reopened due to Enfield Council not doing what the court ordered I was wondering your input in this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Wix 07-05-2019 -03-17

05/05/2019

/ Page Numbers: 350

 

 

26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 2.

Wix 07-05-2019 -03-17

05/05/2019

/ Page Numbers: 350

--

350,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@notifications.wix.com>

Sent time: 07/05/2019 03:17:46 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your Domain horrificcorruption.com Will Renew Soon

Can't see this email?

WlX.com

Your Domain Will Renew Soon

Your domain, horrificcorruption.com, will automatically renew for another year on Jun 6, 2019 for GBP20.72.

To ensure uninterrupted service, your payment method may be charged up to two weeks before the renewal date.

Simply check that your payment information is correct so your domain will renew on time:

·         Access your Billing & Payments

·         Click on horrificcorruption.com

·         Click Update Payment Method to check your payment info and make any changes

·         Click Update and you're ready to go for another year

To learn more about the way Wix processes your payments,

You may disable auto-renewal or cancel your subscription at any time through your account.

 

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Wix 06-06-2019 -05-55

06/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 351

 

 

27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Wix 06-06-2019 -05-55

06/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 351

--

351,

From: Wix.com <wix-team@notifications.wix.com>

Sent time: 06/06/2019 05:55:06 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your domain horrificcorruption.com has expiredWlX.com

Your Domain Has Expired

·         Your registration for horrificcorruption.com expired on Jun 6, 2019, and your domain has been disconnected from your site.

·         Take the following steps to keep your domain:

Access your Billing & Payments

Next to horrificcorruption.com, click on Extend

Keep Your Domain

Please note that once a domain's registration expires, there is a grace period during which the domain may be renewed, followed by a 30-day Redemption period with a $100 renewal penalty.

 

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Re Simon Cordell FOOED222 _001

12/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 352,353           

 

 

28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Re Simon Cordell FOOED222 _001

12/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 352,353

--

352,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:31

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

I have chased up London Borough of Enfield as to what steps if any they have taken to restore the matter and will revert to you once they reply. We are on court record so should be notified by the Court Direct of any developments.

In the interim, it may be advisable to set up a royal mail redirection service and have post sent elsewhere. Not fool proof but worth considering.

Please do note that I am not a full-time member of staff and am contracted to provide services to the Firm and so may not be dealing with my cases every single working day. If you are ever anxious about anything, please give the office a ring and speak to Sean who is normally in.

Please try not to worry.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1:40:16 PM

To: Sean Shanmuganathan; Ronak Ahmed

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean or Ronak

Can you please reply to the below email as we are worried.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 June 2019 13:25

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak Ahmed

Today I called Enfield Country Court to make sure FOOED222 had been struck out for my son Simon Cordell, but what I have been told is Enfield Council has reopened it, the person at the court would give me no other information as I am not listed on the court record that I can been told anything.

353,

My son has had no letters from the court as of yet and there is a real issue that he will not get any letters because his door was broken by the police and they had to put wood up so he has nowhere for the postman to post his letters, we know from a long time now also that the postman is just putting his letters in the hallway to his block and other people are taking his letters so I am worry that the court have sent his something but he had not had it, but I would have also through that seeing as you are the acting solicitors for my son for this case the court would have updated you I would have also through Enfield Council would have updated you regarding what they wanted to do, I spoke to Sean today and he has not heard anything at all.

Would it please be possible for you to make contract with the court and find out what is going on as I think this would be the better option to find out what Enfield Council is doing.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c2019_RE Simon Cordell FOOED222

12/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 354,355

 

29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c2019_RE Simon Cordell FOOED222

12/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 354,355

--

354,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:54

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

The London Borough of Enfield have reverted to us just now to state that they have written to the Court asking to take the matter forward. They have confirmed that we are on court record so all correspondence will be sent to us.

Please wait for further contact from us.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Ronak Ahmed

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:31

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

I have chased up London Borough of Enfield as to what steps if any they have taken to restore the matter and will revert to you once they reply. We are on court record so should be notified by the Court Direct of any developments.

In the interim, it may be advisable to set up a royal mail redirection service and have post sent elsewhere. Not fool proof but worth considering.

Please do note that I am not a full-time member of staff and am contracted to provide services to the Firm and so may not be dealing with my cases every single working day. If you are ever anxious about anything, please give the office a ring and speak to Sean who is normally in.

Please try not to worry.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1:40:16 PM

To: Sean Shanmuganathan; Ronak Ahmed

355,

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean or Ronak

Can you please reply to the below email as we are worried.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 June 2019 13:25

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak Ahmed

Today I called Enfield Country Court to make sure FOOED222 had been struck out for my son Simon Cordell, but what I have been told is Enfield Council has reopened it, the person at the court would give me no other information as I am not listed on the court record that I can been told anything.

My son has had no letters from the court as of yet and there is a real issue that he will not get any letters because his door was broken by the police and they had to put wood up so he has nowhere for the postman to post his letters, we know from a long time now also that the postman is just putting his letters in the hallway to his block and other people are taking his letters so I am worry that the court have sent his something but he had not had it, but I would have also through that seeing as you are the acting solicitors for my son for this case the court would have updated you I would have also through Enfield Council would have updated you regarding what they wanted to do, I spoke to Sean today and he has not heard anything at all.

Would it please be possible for you to make contract with the court and find out what is going on as I think this would be the better option to find out what Enfield Council is doing.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.coe.gov.uk_06.17.2019_Auto reply

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 356,357,358

 

 

 30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 1

Enquiries.edmonton.coe.gov.uk_06.17.2019_Auto reply

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 356,357,358

--

356,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 17 June 2019 15:25

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto reply

** IMPORTANT NOTICE ON EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS **

Thank you for your email, which has been received by the court. Depending on the nature of your email you may receive a response via email or post.

What documents can be sent by email?

You can send all letters and documents relevant to the case including adoption cases. However, due to the sensitive nature of adoption work the court will only send emails to secure email accounts. If a hard copy of a document has been filed at court by DX or Post, an electronic copy should not be sent. As yet please note that court bundles are not part of this process and will not be printed.

For more information regarding e-mails please go to the following http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/email-guidance What is a secure email account?

An email account is considered secure when security measures are in place to make sure the data in the email can’t be accessed by users without the relevant approval. Any account that ends in the following is considered secured: gsi, pnn, gsx, gcsx, gse, cjsm, and nhs.net.

What emails will HMCTS accept?

To make sure we operate this service as efficiently and effectively as possible there are exemptions.

All Civil and Family process, applications and documents will be accepted by email as long as when the entire email is printed out it is not more than 50 pages. This should include the email, all attachments (including any documents embedded in another) and enough copies to serve on required parties.

Please note that:

17.  A page is one side, so 50 pages equals 25 pieces of paper printed on both sides.

18.  Do not use more than one email to take any step in a case which requires a document or documents to be filed.

DOCUMENTS FOR HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PD, 5B.2. FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE PD 5B

You have received an order to attend court for a hearing.

It would greatly assist the court staff if you could ensure documents you file into court have a hearing date endorsed on the covering letter, paperwork, or email.

This will then enable the court staff to identify the document is placed on file in readiness for the hearing.

Please note, if the court is unaware of the pending hearing, when you file your documents, this may result in the document not reaching the court file in time for the hearing.

Can processes that carry a fee be sent by email?

In both Civil and Family cases court processes that carry a fee can also be received by email and processed by court staff. However the same conditions as above must apply and in addition the party issuing the process must either quote a Fee Account number, or the party who wants to pay has a valid credit or debit card. If you wish to pay using this method, please say this on the

357,

email and include a contact number for the Court to contact you to take payment.

What is Fee Account?

This is a Direct Debit function that is quick, safe, and easy to use. It is available for solicitors and large organisations. Once you have set up an account all you need is to provide your fee account number within the body of the email. The fee will then be deducted from your account. For more information and to apply for Fee Account please visit www.justice.gov.uk/courts/fees/payment-by-account.

Any document submitted that breaches any of the above terms will remain unprocessed. This is in line with Court Practice Directions 5BPD.1 - 5BPD.9.3.

When you email the court the subject line of your mail must contain (in the following order): -

·         The claim numbers

·         The title of the claim (abbreviated if necessary) **

·         The subject matter (e.g. defence)

·         If relating to a hearing the date and time of hearing in bold black

·         The judge’s name, where the correspondence/document is for their attention

**If your email is in relation to a family matter, please refer to the initials only.

Your message should also contain the name, telephone number and email address of the sender. Correspondence and documents may be sent as either text or attachments. Where there is a practice form, it must be sent in that form by attachment. The complete email (including any attachment(s)) must not exceed 10Mb.

The rest of this automated message provides information that customers often find useful.

Edmonton County Court

The public counter services are no longer available at this court.

Urgent applications and processes that need to be dealt with in person will be through an appointment only system. Users should contact the court on 0208 8846510 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday to make an appointment.

The main telephone number for Civil and Family enquiries is 0208 884 6500 Gold fax 0870 3240314

Our address is The County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London, N18 2TN DX 136686 Edmonton 3

The court building is open between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm Monday to Friday.

We have a secure drop box located in reception for personal deliveries to the court, which is opened once a day at 9.00 am Monday to Friday.

Website links

Information on Court forms and fees can be also be obtained from www.justice.gov.uk Issuing a claim for Money or Possession of Property - MCOL & PCOL

358,

If you would like to issue a claim for money or property you can do so 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by visiting: www.moneydaim.gov.uk or www.possessionclaim.gov.uk.You will save money by issuing a claim for possession of property or a money claim online rather than sending it to the court.

Legal Advice

If you are uncertain how to proceed, the Civil Procedure Rules available on the Ministry of Justice website - http://www.justice.gov.uk - provide details. On many occasions it is best for people to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor, legal executive, legal advice agency or Citizens Advice Bureau. You can also contact Civil Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 or via their website.

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 1

Enquiries. Edmonton. confield Council V Simon Cordell

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 359,360

 

 

31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 1

Enquiries. Edmonton. confield Council V Simon Cordell

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 359,360

--

359,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

Sent: 17 June 2019 15:31

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Attachments: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell (12.1 KB)

Importance: High

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

360,

Read: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell-> FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell (12.1 KB).msg

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 17 June 2019 15:31:16

Subject: Read: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell Your message

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries

Subject: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Sent: 17/06/2019 14:24

was read on 17/06/2019 14:30

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyondernfield Council V Simon Cordell 2

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 361,362

 

 32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyondernfield Council V Simon Cordell 2

17/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 361,362

--

361,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 17 June 2019 15:25

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email in the hope you will be able to help me.

It is regarding case FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

The case was last in court on the 08/03/2019 when District Judge Davies heard the case and set out an order due to my son's health please see attached court order dated 11/03/2019.

District Judge Davies ordered that

·         These proceedings are adjourned generally with permission to restore in order for the parties to apply to the Official Solicitor to consider whether he is prepared to act as Litigation Friend for the Defendant. If no request to restore is made by 4pm on 08/06/2019, the claim will stand "struck out without further order.

·         Costs reserved.

I have contacted the court and it would seem Enfield Council submitted a letter to restore this case FOOED222, and so far, nothing has been done with this.

But the issue I have is that Enfield Council has done nothing they have not tried to work with Mr Cordell's Official Solicitor they have not contacted them at all since the last hearing of the 08/03/2019, they also did not notify Mr Cordell's Solicitor that they had put in to restore this case FOOED222, the only reason we know anything is due to me contacting the court by telephone on the 10/06/2019 to see if the case had been "struck out" which I was told it has not been due to the letter Enfield Council had submitted to the court to restore it and move forward with the case.

We do not know any details of this letter Enfield Council has sent to the court to restore this case and under what grounds and when it was sent to the court from Enfield Council.

This is not the 1st time Enfield Council has not followed a court order, there is an outstanding court order that has never been dealt with by Enfield Council in which Enfield Council should have moved my son which they have never done anything about and then submitted this new case FOOED222.for which is an abuse of court process .

This is not helping my son's health and Enfield Council is very aware of this, I do not know what to do, all of these entire court cases one after the other which Enfield Council has done since 2017 is having a very damaging effect deteriorating and impacting my son's health.

It is Enfield Council that has chosen not to communicate with me on behalf of my son, It is Enfield Council that has not once asked to see proof that these alleged allegations are false, to be able to address anything I would need Enfield Council to work with me, but they will not and I have never been rude to anyone within Enfield Council for them to not to want to communicate with me.

Could the court please tell us what is going on with this court case as not knowing what is going on is making things worse for my son not knowing if he is going to be made homeless.

362,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell (on behalf of Simon Cordell)

 

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c2019_Re Simon Cordell FOOED222 6

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 363,364,365,366,367, 368,367

 

33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.c2019_Re Simon Cordell FOOED222 6

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 363,364,365,366,367, 368,367

--

363,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 25 June 2019 15:34

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Attachments: 20190625093129269[20838].pdf

Good afternoon

Please see attached court order received today.

We will wait a few weeks in case the Claimants apply to set aside the attached order. If no further action is taken by the Claimant in that time, I shall close this file.

Please also note that this Order does not prevent a new claim being brought in the future.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 3:03:02 PM

To: Sean Shanmuganathan

Cc: Ronak Ahmed.

Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean

Thank you for the update, can I ask did you get a final court order stating this and if you did can you email me a copy of it for our records.

Regards

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 25 Jun 2019, at 09:52, Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Lorraine

Edmonton County Court struck out the Enfield council's possession claim on 18.6.19.

Thanks

Yours

D Shanmuganathan

364,

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 17 June 2019 13:01

To: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean and Ronak

Can the below email please be dealt with my son is suffering not knowing what to do the court has said the file is going sitting there with nothing being done to it, this is unfair to my son he does not know where he stands and has had Enfield council over his head since 2016 this is not making his health any better. can you please contact the court and find out what is going on and tell them Enfield council has not contracted you at all in the last 3 months like they were meant to have done.

Can you please let me know what is going on please.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 16:29

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak

How are they going to try and take this forward when there is no Litigation Friend for my son. I am sure the court stated last time in court that Enfield Council had to work alongside you to see if you was willing to act as my son's Litigation Friend, but as we are aware they have not contracted you at all.

I hope they don’t think they can try and use me like they have in the past for this as I will not do it as I have to work for my son not Enfield Council.

Also Enfield Council is still in breach of the court order the court made which they should have moved my son, I know you have stated you are not sure if you can bring this case up due to legal aid but the legal aid was ordered by the court in this case, please see attached order which I will highlight the section regarding legal aid.

It seems to me that Enfield Council will do anything they can do to not help my son and only do everything to go against him.

·         Case EOOED049

·         The order of the 12/06/2018 is where legal aid is spoke about.

·         The Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018 is the final outcome, which Enfield Council has failed to do any part of it just lie to people as to the reason they have done nothing.

My son is getting badly effected by what Enfield Council is doing they have left this nearly 3 months to bring it back into court this is not right.

Could you please write to the court and say that Enfield Council has not contracted you once to even address what

365,

the court ordered on the 08/03/2019 as Enfield Council clearly has not done anything within that order and I think that the court needs to know this, I have enclosed the court order dated 08/03/2019.

Also could you please forward any documents you get relating to this to this email so I can pass them on to my son as right now this is the safest way to do this as any letters sent in the post my son may not get due to his door and no access for the postman.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 16:10

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak

How are they going to try and take this forward when there is no Litigation Friend for my son. I am sure the court stated last time in court that Enfield Council had to work alongside you to see if you was willing to act as my son's Litigation Friend, but as we are aware they have not contracted you at all.

I hope they don’t think they can try and use me like they have in the past for this as I will not do it as I have to work for my son not Enfield Council.

Also Enfield Council is still in breach of the court order the court made which they should have moved my son, I know you have stated you are not sure if you can bring this case up due to legal aid but the legal aid was ordered by the court in this case, please see attached order which I will highlight the section regarding legal aid.

It seems to me that Enfield Council will do anything they can do to not help my son and only do everything to go against him.

·         Case EOOED049

·         The order of the 12/06/2018 is where legal aid is spoke about.

·         The Seal-Court-0rder-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018 is the final outcome, which Enfield Council has failed to do any part of it just lie to people as to the reason they have done nothing.

My son is getting badly effected by what Enfield Council is doing they have left this nearly 3 months to bring it back into court this is not right.

Regards

366,

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ronak Ahmed

Mailto: ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:54

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

The London Borough of Enfield have reverted to us just now to state that they have written to the Court asking to take the matter forward. They have confirmed that we are on court record so all correspondence will be sent to us.

Please wait for further contact from us.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Ronak Ahmed

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:31

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

I have chased up London Borough of Enfield as to what steps if any they have taken to restore the matter and will revert to you once they reply. We are on court record so should be notified by the Court Direct of any developments.

In the interim, it may be advisable to set up a royal mail redirection service and have post sent elsewhere.

Not fool proof but worth considering.

Please do note that I am not a full-time member of staff and am contracted to provide services to the Firm and so may not be dealing with my cases every single working day. If you are ever anxious about anything, please give the office a ring and speak to Sean who is normally in.

Please try not to worry.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

367,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1:40:16 PM

To: Sean Shanmuganathan; Ronak Ahmed

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean or Ronak

Can you please reply to the below email as we are worried.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 10 June 2019 13:25

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak Ahmed

Today I called Enfield Country Court to make sure FOOED222 had been struck out for my son Simon Cordell, but what I have been told is Enfield Council has reopened it, the person at the court would give me no other information as I am not listed on the court record that I can been told anything.

My son has had no letters from the court as of yet and there is a real issue that he will not get any letters because his door was broken by the police and they had to put wood up so he has nowhere for the postman to post his letters, we know from a long time now also that the postman is just putting his letters in the hallway to his block and other people are taking his letters so I am worry that the court have sent his something but he had not had it, but I would have also through that seeing as you are the acting solicitors for my son for this case the court would have updated you I would have also through Enfield Council would have updated you regarding what they wanted to do, I spoke to Sean today and he has not heard anything at all.

Would it please be possible for you to make contract with the court and find out what is going on as I think this would be the better option to find out what Enfield Council is doing.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

368,

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the county Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: F00ED222

Date: 21 June 2019

Ref: LS/C/PB/159272

Ref:

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD If Claimant

SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

D.SHANMUGANATHAN

Before Deputy District Judge Hands sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN, on court's own motion to request to restore having been made by 8th June 2019 as per Order of 8th March 2019

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.      Claimant's claim stands struck out.

Dated: 18 June 2019

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NI8 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 88846500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneydnim.gov.uk to find out more.

Produced by: D. Humphreys

N24 Gen era I Form of Judgment or Order CJ R065 C

367,

Error Page!

 

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_06.25.2019_Order 2

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 369,370

 

 34.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_06.25.2019_Order 2

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 369,370

--

369,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 25 June 2019 15:10

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Order

Attachments: 20190625113102374.pdf

Dear Lorraine

Please find attached the order as you requested.

Kind Regards

D Shanmuganathan Partner

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2937

Email sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU11LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office. VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

370,

Order: 20190625113102374.pdf

General Form of Judgment or Order

In the County Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: F00ED222

Date: 21 June 2019

Ref: LS/C/PB/159272

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

And

SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant Ref

D. SH ANMUG ANATHAN

Before Deputy District Judge Harris sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN, on court's own motion to request to restore having been made by 8th June 2019 as per Order of 8th March 2019

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. Claimant's claim stands struck out.

Dated 18 June 2019

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N1S 2TN. When corresponding wills the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyclaim.gov.nlt to find out more.

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

Produced by: D. Humphreys CJR065C

 

 

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co2019_RE Simon Cordell FOOED222 4

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 371,372, 373, 374,373

 

35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co2019_RE Simon Cordell FOOED222 4

25/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 371,372, 373, 374,373

--

371,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 25 June 2019 09:53

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Ronak Ahmed; Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Lorraine

Edmonton County Court struck out the Enfield council's possession claim on 18.6.19.

Thanks

Yours

D Shanmuganathan

From: Lorraine Cordell [

Mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk  

Sent: 17 June 2019 13:01

To: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean and Ronak

Can the below email please be dealt with my son is suffering not knowing what to do the court has said the file is going sitting there with nothing being done to it, this is unfair to my son he does not know where he stands and has had Enfield council over his head since 2016 this is not making his health any better. can you please contact the court and find out what is going on and tell them Enfield council has not contracted you at all in the last 3 months like they were meant to have done.

Can you please let me know what is going on please.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 16:29

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak

How are they going to try and take this forward when there is no Litigation Friend for my son. I am sure the court stated last time in court that Enfield Council had to work alongside you to see if you was willing to act as my son's Litigation Friend, but as we are aware they have not contracted you at all.

I hope they don’t think they can try and use me like they have in the past for this as I will not do it as I have to work for my son not Enfield Council.

Also Enfield Council is still in breach of the court order the court made which they should have moved my son, I know you have stated you are not sure if you can bring this case up due to legal aid but the legal aid was ordered by the court in this case, please see attached order which I will highlight the section regarding legal aid.

It seems to me that Enfield Council will do anything they can do to not help my son and only do everything to go against him.

372,

Case EOOED049

·         The order of the 12/06/2018 is where legal aid is spoke about.

·         The Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018 is the final outcome, which Enfield Council has failed to do any part of it just lie to people as to the reason they have done nothing.

My son is getting badly effected by what Enfield Council is doing they have left this nearly 3 months to bring it back into court this is not right.

Could you please write to the court and say that Enfield Council has not contracted you once to even address what the court ordered on the 08/03/2019 as Enfield Council clearly has not done anything within that order and I think that the court needs to know this, I have enclosed the court order dated 08/03/2019.

Also could you please forward any documents you get relating to this to this email so I can pass them on to my son as right now this is the safest way to do this as any letters sent in the post my son may not get due to his door and no access for the postman.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

Mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 16:10

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak

How are they going to try and take this forward when there is no Litigation Friend for my son. I am sure the court stated last time in court that Enfield Council had to work alongside you to see if you was willing to act as my son's Litigation Friend, but as we are aware they have not contracted you at all.

I hope they don’t think they can try and use me like they have in the past for this as I will not do it as I have to work for my son not Enfield Council.

Also Enfield Council is still in breach of the court order the court made which they should have moved my son, I know you have stated you are not sure if you can bring this case up due to legal aid but the legal aid was ordered by the court in this case, please see attached order which I will highlight the section regarding legal aid.

It seems to me that Enfield Council will do anything they can do to not help my son and only do everything to go against him.

·         Case EOOED049

·         The order of the 12/06/2018 is where legal aid is spoke about.

373,

· The Seal-Court-Order-09-08-2018-got-on-the-06-12-2018 is the final outcome, which Enfield Council has failed to do any part of it just lie to people as to the reason they have done nothing.

My son is getting badly effected by what Enfield Council is doing they have left this nearly 3 months to bring it back into court this is not right.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ronak Ahmed

Mailto: ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:54

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

The London Borough of Enfield have reverted to us just now to state that they have written to the Court asking to take the matter forward. They have confirmed that we are on court record so all correspondence will be sent to us.

Please wait for further contact from us.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Ronak Ahmed

Sent: 12 June 2019 14:31

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

I have chased up London Borough of Enfield as to what steps if any they have taken to restore the matter and will revert to you once they reply. We are on court record so should be notified by the Court Direct of any developments.

In the interim, it may be advisable to set up a royal mail redirection service and have post sent elsewhere. Not fool proof but worth considering.

Please do note that I am not a full-time member of staff and am contracted to provide services to the Firm and so may not be dealing with my cases every single working day. If you are ever anxious about anything, please give the office a ring and speak to Sean who is normally in.

Please try not to worry.

374,

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1:40:16 PM

To: Sean Shanmuganathan; Ronak Ahmed

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Sean or Ronak

Can you please reply to the below email as we are worried.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent:10 June 2019 13:25

To: 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Dear Ronak Ahmed

Today I called Enfield Country Court to make sure FOOED222 had been struck out for my son Simon Cordell, but what I have been told is Enfield Council has reopened it, the person at the court would give me no other information as I am not listed on the court record that I can been told anything.

My son has had no letters from the court as of yet and there is a real issue that he will not get any letters because his door was broken by the police and they had to put wood up so he has nowhere for the postman to post his letters, we know from a long time now also that the postman is just putting his letters in the hallway to his block and other people are taking his letters so I am worry that the court have sent his something but he had not had it, but I would have also through that seeing as you are the acting solicitors for my son for this case the court would have updated you I would have also through Enfield Council would have updated you regarding what they wanted to do, I spoke to Sean today and he has not heard anything at all.

Would it please be possible for you to make contract with the court and find out what is going on as I think this would be the better option to find out what Enfield Council is doing.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

373,

Blank Page!

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 1

Complaints and inform at Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL] 3

27/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 375,376,377

 

 36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 1

Complaints and inform at Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL] 3

27/06/2019

/ Page Numbers: 375,376,377

--

375,

From: complaints and information <complaintsandmformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 27 June 2019 15:03

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Letter regarding Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Cordell letter 27.06.19.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council.

Yours sincerely Dionne Grant

Complaints and Information Service Manager

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

Classification: OFFICIAL

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

376,

377,

 

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co06.27.2019_Letter from Enfield 2

27/06/2019/

 Page Numbers: 378,379

 

37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co06.27.2019_Letter from Enfield 2

27/06/2019/

 Page Numbers: 378,379

--

378,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 27 June 2019 10:06

To: Lorraine Cordell

Cc: Ronak Ahmed

Subject: Letter from Enfield

Attachments: 20190627104617521.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell

Please find attached the letter we received from Enfield Council.

Kind Regards

D Shanmuganathan Partner

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2937

Email sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU11LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office. VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

379,

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL 5

08/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 380,381,382,383,384

 

38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL 5

08/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 380,381,382,383,384

--

380,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 08 July 2019 17:58

To: 'complaints and information'

Subject: RE: Letter regarding Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Reply to Enfield Councils Letter 27-06-2019.pdf

Dear Dionne Grant

Please see attached letter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: complaints and information

Mailto: complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 27 June 2019 15:03

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Letter regarding Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council.

Yours sincerely Dionne Grant

Complaints and Information Service Manager

Enfield Council

Civic Centre

Silver Street, Enfield

EN13XA

Classification: OFFICIAL

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute

381,

or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

382,

RE: Letter regarding Council contact [SEC=OFFICIAL]->Reply to Enfield Councils Letter 27-06-2019.pdf

Miss Lorraine Cordell

08 July 2019

· Re: Vexatious and Unreasonable Complaints

Dear Dionne Grant

I am writing this letter regarding the email I received on the 27th June 2019 where it has been stated that rules have been set out in regard to us contracting Enfield Council, and that my correspondence has been deemed Vexatious and Unreasonable Complaints.

I have issues with what has been said in your letter that has been sent to me.

You state in the letter

“The Council is of the view that the aspects of your correspondence are deemed as being unreasonable complainant behaviour. Unreasonable and unreasonably persistent complainants are those complainants who, because of the nature or frequency of their contacts with an organisation, hinder the organisation's consideration of their, or other people's complaints.

· We have concluded your contact is vexatious for the following reasons:

1.      This is not an exhaustive list but examples of unreasonable actions and behaviour which can be deemed as vexatious: You have sent frequent and overlapping correspondence on this same matter. Your contact is disproportionate and have or are likely to cause an unjustified level of disruption, irritation, or distress.

2.      You are making excessive demands on the time and resources of staff with lengthy phone calls, emails to numerous council staff, or frequent emails / letters to staff.

1

383,

3.      Submitting repeat contacts which have been addressed, essentially about the same issues, with additions/variations which the complainant insists make these 'new'.

4.      Refusing to accept the decision; repeatedly arguing points with no new evidence.”

The issue I have with the above is yes, I have sent letters and complaints, but we do not get any replies to these or if we do get a reply it does not cover what we have asked.

The last time I wrote was I believe 05/12/2018 with no reply, so I sent a few follow up emails in 2019 asking if there was any update which I never got a reply back, which since then I have just given up due to the fact I know I will not get a reply, I do not feel my letters are Vexatious and Unreasonable I am asking questions I would like replies to, I do not just sit here each day spending all my time writing to Enfield Council when I know I will not get a reply. The only reason I wrote in 2018 was after the court case and that was to address things within the court order, which Enfield Council failed to comply with.

The other letter I sent was for a DSAR this was sent on 25/11/2018 which I did not really get what I asked for on the 16/02/2019, there was some issues with some of the files that Enfield Council had uploaded, I could not get and sent an email over which was corrected so I could download the files, but once I opened them most of the data was for 1997, I did write back asking why everything was missing and once again got no reply regarding all the missing data.

In fact I am in the process of drawing up a new DSAR in the hope this time I will get the data I am asking for which so far Enfield Council has failed to do, should this be addressed to yourself?

In fact from 2015 most of my letters or emails have in fact gone without a reply and this can be proven. It seems very strange this letter has been written and I wonder if it is only due to the court action Enfield Council wants to take regarding my son.

I cannot understand your point regarding the “volume of letters becomes reasonable” as I have not sent that many emails as I know in fact I will hardly ever get a reply, it is for that reason I do not take my time in writing to you in order to try and address issues as it seems Enfield Council is unwilling to try and address anything.

2

384,

I did ask Enfield Council to confirm in writing more than once, what stage my complaint was at due to no replies, but I have never had a reply back to tell me what stage it was at.

I was not going to reply back to this letter that was sent on the 27th June 2019 as I felt it was Enfield Council that was being Vexatious and Unreasonable, I already know nothing will be addressed but in the end I felt I had to say something.

Yours sincerely,

Miss L Cordell

3

 

 

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

Mother 16-07-2019 -01-30

16/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 385,386

 

39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

Mother 16-07-2019 -01-30

16/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 385,386

--

385,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 16/07/2019 01:30:39 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Attachments: 20190625093129269[20838].pdf

here

From: Ronak Ahmed

Mailto: ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 25 June 2019 15:34

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Simon Cordell FOOED222

Good afternoon

Please see attached court order received today.

We will wait a few weeks in case the Claimants apply to set aside the attached order. If no further action is taken by the Claimant in that time, I shall close this file.

Please also note that this Order does not prevent a new claim being brought in the future.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

386,

General Form of Judgment or Order        

In the county Court at Edmonton

Claim Number: F00ED222

Date: 21 June 2019

Ref LS/C/PB/159272

Ref

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD |its Claimant

SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

D.SHANMUGANATHAN

Before Deputy District Judge Hands sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN, on court's own motion to request to restore having been made by 8th June 2019 as per Order of 8th March 2019

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.      Claimant's claim stands struck out.

Dated 18 June 2019

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, NI8 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number.

Tel: 020 88846500.

Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money.

Go to www.moneyclaim.gov.uk

to find out more.

Produced by: D, Humphreys

N24 Gen era I Form of Judgment or Order CJ R065 C

 

 

 

 

40.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 1

Shelaine @tyrerroxburggh of Enfield -v- Simon Cordell 3

17/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 387,388,389

 

40.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 1

Shelaine @tyrerroxburggh of Enfield -v- Simon Cordell 3

17/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 387,388,389

--

387,

From: Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell <Shelaine@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 17 July 2019 16:09

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Cc: Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: The London Borough of Enfield -v- Simon Cordell

Claim Number: F00ED222

Attachments: Court Order 12.07.19.pdf

Importance: High

Dear Ms Cordell,

RE: Housing Possession Matter

We write with regards to your son’s housing possession matter. Further enclosing a Court Order received from the court dated, 12th July 2019. Please read the enclosed Court Order carefully.

Please do not hesitate to contact Sean or Shelaine at our offices, with regards to this letter and the enclosed Order.

Yours sincerely

Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell Paralegal

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2950

Email shelaine@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

Head Office:

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

Luton Office:

Trend House Dallow Road Luton LU1 1LY

Tel +44 (0)1582 726579

Please reply to our Head Office www.tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

first for family law

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

388,

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

389,

RE: The London Borough of Enfield -v- Simon Cordell Claim Number; F00ED222 ->Court Order 12.07.19.pdf:

General Form of Judgment or Order        

In the County Court at Edmonton 

Claim Number: F00ED222

Date: 12 July 2019

Ref: LS/C/PB/159272

Ref:

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

1st Claimant

And

SIMON CORDELL

1st Defendant

D.SHANMUGANATHAN

Before Deputy District Judge Harris sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, London, N18 2TN.

Upon court's own motion and following consideration of Claimant's letter of 6 June and 26 June 2019, the letter of 6 June not having been before the court when it made the order of 18 June 2019

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.      Order of Deputy District Judge Harris dated 18 June 2019 be set aside and claim be re-instated.

2.      Matter be listed for directions hearing only on 12 December 2019 at 14:00pm, time estimate 20 minutes Dated 9 July 2019

The court office at the County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Sheet, London, N18 2TN. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 020 8884 6500. Check if you can issue your claim online. It will save you time and money. Go to www.moneyclaim,gov.uk to find out more.

N24 General Form of Judgment or Order

Produced by: A ABIODUN CJR065C

 

 

 

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.ck_07.18.2019_Re Your Son' Case 2

18/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 390,391

 

 41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.ck_07.18.2019_Re Your Son' Case 2

18/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 390,391

--

390,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 18 July 2019 15:05

To: Lorraine Cordell; Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case

Dear Ms Cordell Thank you for your email.

We are somewhat constrained by the regulations related to Legal Aid in that we can deal with the Claim for possession only. This means we can take all necessary steps to deal with your son's defence only.

In relation to the correspondence, I have requested copies and will forward these on to you once received.

In terms of the Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor will act only if there are no family members involved and here it is likely to be the case that you will be proposed as the litigation friend. If you refuse to act as such then the Official Solicitor will get involved and provide instructions to your son's solicitors as to how to proceed with your son's case. The London Borough of Enfield does not dictate who the Litigation Friend appointed is. All the Official Solicitor does is provide instructions on how to proceed with the case - which has been your role so far. They do not run the legal case.

Hope that answers your queries in relation to the Claim for Possession but if not either call or email back.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 1:51:48 PM

To: Ronak Ahmed; Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case

Dear Ronak and Sean

I have tried to call the office today to find out what is our next steps I do not understand what Enfield Council has done and what has been written in there letters to the court dated, 06/06/2019 10/06/2019 12/06/2019 and 26/06/2019, should we have not been included in these letters so we had an understanding of what and how Enfield Council wanted to process with this case?

Should we not be aware what Enfield Council has done regarding the Official Solicitor to consider whether he is prepared to act as Litigation Friend?

I am not sure what the Official Solicitor does, and how Enfield Council can get a solicitor they choose I just do not understand how this works and if Enfield Council has ever had contract with this Official Solicitor, does this also mean you will not be acting for my son and it will be this Official Solicitor Which would not be someone my son has chosen to act for him.?

Could someone please get back to me regarding this and can the letters that have been sent to the court via Enfield Council be requested, I do believe we have a right to know what is going on here and right now are we going to be left with not knowing anything until the 12/12/2019?

Regards

391,

Lorraine Cordell

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto: ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 18 July 2019 11:37

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your Son' Case

Good morning

Please see attached order received from the Council today.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

 

 

 

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_07.18.2019_Your Son' Case 2

18/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 392,393

 

42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_07.18.2019_Your Son' Case 2

18/07/2019

/ Page Numbers: 392,393

--

392,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 18 July 2019 11:37

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Your Son' Case

Attachments: LBE-SV-PRN-002_PR-ECCBS-GPV59544-IRC5045_3382_001.pdf

Good morning

Please see attached order received from the Council today.

Kind Regards

Ronak Ahmed

Consultant Solicitor

Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP

393,

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.ck_08.04.2019_RE Your Son' Case 4

04/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 394,395,396,397

 

43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.ck_08.04.2019_RE Your Son' Case 4

04/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 394,395,396,397

--

394,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 04 August 2019 19:42

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject:  RE: Your Son' Case

Attachments: 1101491.doc; 1113833.doc

Good afternoon

Thank you for your email of 1 August 2019; the Council's solicitors have provided the attached letters and have stated that "there were no letters to the court on 10/6/2019 and 12/6/2019".

I confirm that the letters do not contain anything of concern to our client.

Kind regards

Ronak Ahmed

Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace London N22 7SJ DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0) 20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

ft resolution

first for family law

Partners • Mukesh Badhan • D Shanmuganathan

395,

396,

397,

for Director of Law and Governance

PB /159272/ 01113833

Page 2

 

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 1

OS_Civil_Litigation@oov.uk_08.06.2019_Auto-response 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 398

 

 44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 1. 1

OS_Civil_Litigation@oov.uk_08.06.2019_Auto-response 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 398

--

398,

From: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 August 2019 12:10

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto-response

Your email has been received by the Official Solicitor's Civil Litigation Team. If you wish to speak to someone by telephone, please call 020 3681 2750.

If your enquiry is not about civil proceedings, you will find the contact details for other teams at the end of this auto ­response:

Request to the Official Solicitor to act as litigation friend in civil proceedings:

The Official Solicitor's criteria for acting as litigation friend in civil proceedings are:

1.      undisputed satisfactory evidence that the party lacks capacity to conduct the proceedings.

2.      security for the costs of legal representation (

3.      last resort (i.e. that there is no other person suitable and willing to act as litigation friend).

If your email is urgent, please ring the Civil Litigation enquiry line on 020 3681 2750 and speak to the Team Leader. If your email is not urgent, we aim to respond within 10 working days.

Contact details for other teams within the Official Solicitor's office:

public law family Tel: 020 3681 2755

private law family Tel: 020 3681 2754

COP healthcare & welfare Tel: 020 3681 2751

COP property & affairs Tel: 020 3681 2758

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 1

OS_Civil_Litigation@ok_08.06.2019_Auto-response_001 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 399

 

45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 1

OS_Civil_Litigation@ok_08.06.2019_Auto-response_001 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 399

--

399,

From: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 August 2019 12:09

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto-response

Your email has been received by the Official Solicitor's Civil Litigation Team. If you wish to speak to someone by telephone, please call 020 3681 2750.

If your enquiry is not about civil proceedings, you will find the contact details for other teams at the end of this auto ­response:

Request to the Official Solicitor to act as litigation friend in civil proceedings:

The Official Solicitor's criteria for acting as litigation friend in civil proceedings are:

4.      undisputed satisfactory evidence that the party lacks capacity to conduct the proceedings.

5.      security for the costs of legal representation (

6.      last resort (i.e. that there is no other person suitable and willing to act as litigation friend).

If your email is urgent, please ring the Civil Litigation enquiry line on 020 3681 2750 and speak to the Team Leader. If your email is not urgent, we aim to respond within 10 working days.

Contact details for other teams within the Official Solicitor's office:

public law family Tel: 020 3681 2755

private law family Tel: 020 3681 2754

COP healthcare & welfare Tel: 020 3681 2751

COP property & affairs Tel: 020 3681 2758

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

46.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 1

 OS_Civil_Litigation@ok_08.06.2019_Auto-response_002 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 400

 

 46.     

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 1

 OS_Civil_Litigation@ok_08.06.2019_Auto-response_002 1

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 400

--

400,

From: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 August 2019 11:55

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto-response

Your email has been received by the Official Solicitor's Civil Litigation Team. If you wish to speak to someone by telephone, please call 020 3681 2750.

If your enquiry is not about civil proceedings, you will find the contact details for other teams at the end of this auto ­response:

Request to the Official Solicitor to act as litigation friend in civil proceedings:

The Official Solicitor's criteria for acting as litigation friend in civil proceedings are:

7.      undisputed satisfactory evidence that the party lacks capacity to conduct the proceedings.

8.      security for the costs of legal representation (

9.      last resort (i.e. that there is no other person suitable and willing to act as litigation friend).

If your email is urgent, please ring the Civil Litigation enquiry line on 020 3681 2750 and speak to the Team Leader. If your email is not urgent, we aim to respond within 10 working days.

Contact details for other teams within the Official Solicitor's office:

public law family Tel: 020 3681 2755

private law family Tel: 020 3681 2754

COP healthcare & welfare Tel: 020 3681 2751

COP property & affairs Tel: 020 3681 2758

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 1

 OS_Civil_Litigation@o9_RE Simon Cordell information 4

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 401,402,403,404

 

 47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 1

 OS_Civil_Litigation@o9_RE Simon Cordell information 4

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 401,402,403,404

--

401,

From: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 August 2019 12:02

To: 'Lorraine Cordell'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell information

Lorraine,

Thank you for your email. Can you please provide me with the contact details of Mr. Sean Shanmuganathan to enable me to resolve this matter.

Kind regards,

Bina

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 06 August 2019 11:55

To: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell information

Importance: High

Dear Bina

Thank you for the reply to my email I am not sure why Mr Ronak Ahmed advised the Official Solicitor’s I would be willing to act for my son as I clearly told Mr. Sean Shanmuganathan who was at court acting for my son on the 08/03/2019 I could not do this.

There is good reason for me not being able to act as litigation friend, which has been stated two times before in court action that Enfield Council brought regarding my son, which I refused these two times also.

Enfield Council has caused so much damage to my son in what has been ongoing since late 2014, Enfield council has never wanted to deal with my son nor me regarding issues which has happened and have just allowed me to live in the home he lives going through hell with what the neighbours have been doing to him, in fact there is a court order dated the 09/08/2018 in which Enfield Council should have moved my son, Enfield Council has refused to do so, and then just started the possession proceedings against my son, which is the case we are dealing with now.

Due to everything that has gone on my son has no trust in anyone and our relationship has suffered badly due to everything that is ongoing. I believe if I submitted to act as my son's litigation friend our relationship could suffer beyond repair, and at this point in time I feel everything that is going on is not helping my own health, and I cannot afford my relationship with my son to break down any further than it already is.

I am also very unwell myself and the stress I am suffering is making my health worse, I have been told by my doctors I need to have rest and at this point I am not doing that and the stress is not helping me at all.

My Health problems are listed below:

19.  Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 3

20.  Fibrillary Glomerulonephritis (GN)

21.  IGA Nephropathy

22.  Immune system issues

402,

23.  Fibromyalgia

24.  Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

25.  Chronic Asthma

26.  Possible Lupus

27.  Blood Issues

28.  Double Incontinence (Sacral Nerve Implant)

29.  Osteoarthritis Spine

30.  Nerve Damage Spine

31.  Spine Disc Degeneration

32.  Lumbar Spondylosis

33.  Osteophytic Narrowing Foramina

34.  Eye Disease

35.  Bile Salt Malabsorption

36.  Heart murmur, fast and slow heartbeat

I am there for my son and always will be but I cannot take on any more pressure due to my own health, and I cannot cause my relationship to break down any more than it already has with my son and the trust between me and my son to get worse.

Please can this email be kept confidential as I do not want Enfield Council knowing my personal health issues as I sure they would find a way to use it against my son, and also my son does not know how bad my health really is and this is how I would like it to stay?

Could you please re-open the case file for my son.

Best Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: OS Civil Litigation [mailto:OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk]

Sent: 06 August 2019 07:42

To: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell information

Lorraine,

Thank you for your email.

It may help if I firstly, explain that the Official Solicitor will only act as a litigation friend if:

8. nobody else is suitable and willing to be litigation friend.

9. there's money available to pay the Official Solicitor's costs, e.g. legal aid.

10. the person's doctor or another medical professional, e.g. their psychiatrist, confirms they lack capacity to manage the

case.

403,

The Official Solicitor was contacted on 30 April 2019 by Enfield Council regarding possession proceedings against your son, Simon Cordell. However, after contacting the representatives for Simon, Tyrer Roxburgh, the solicitor with conduct of this matter, Mr Ronak Ahmed advised that you, Simon's mother, is willing and suitable to act as his litigation friend in these proceeding and as such the Official Solicitor's last resort criteria was not met. Consequently, Enfield Council were requested to contact Mr Ronak Ahmed and were also notified that we would close our file.

I am sorry that you were misinformed. This may have been because a search was not undertaken to check the closed cases on the system. Please accept my apologises for this oversight.

I trust this clarifies the situation.

Regards,

Bina.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 05 August 2019 11:29

To: OS - Enquiries (OSPT) <Enquiries@ospt.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell information

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to your offices this morning where I was told no application had been made regarding my son Mr Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981 address 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ to act in court proceedings as a Litigation Friend for a Claim for Possession of my son's home 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ by Enfield Council.

On the 8 March 2019 the court ordered that Enfield Council contract The Official Solicitor and ask if The Official Solicitor to consider whether they are prepared to act as Litigation Friend for the Defendant.

Enfield Council proceeded to restore their Claim for Possession with Edmonton County Court on the 06 June 2019 which was granted by the court on the grounds that The Official Solicitor had responded to the request from Enfield Council.

Yesterday I received an email from my son's acting solicitors with the letters sent to the court to restore by Enfield Council and this is the reason I made the call to The Official Solicitor this morning. I felt it very concerning that I have never been contracted since the 8 March 2019 from The Official Solicitor or Enfield Council, yet The Official Solicitor stated to Enfield Council that I could act as Litigation Friend for my son.

This is what has been stated in the letter to the court to restore the court proceedings from Enfield Council for the Claim for Possession.

"We write to request that the proceedings be now restored. The Official Solicitor has responded to the request to act as Litigation Friend to the Defendant advising that they not so act instead the Defendant mother Mrs Cordell will act as Litigation Friend to the Defendant".

Could you please confirm via this email, what was stated to me this morning on the phone call I made, that there has never been any application to The Official Solicitor from Enfield Council regarding my son Mr Simon Cordell to act as a Litigation Friend in court proceedings for a Claim for Possession?

404,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 1

OS_ Civil_ Litigation @o Simon Cordell information_001 2

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 405,406

 

 48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 1

OS_ Civil_ Litigation @o Simon Cordell information_001 2

06/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 405,406

--

405,

From: OS Civil Litigation <OS_Civil_Litigation@ospt.gov.uk>

Sent: 06 August 2019 07:42

To: 'lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell information

Lorraine,

Thank you for your email.

It may help if I firstly, explain that the Official Solicitor will only act as a litigation friend if:

37.  nobody else is suitable and willing to be litigation friend.

38.  there's money available to pay the Official Solicitor's costs, e.g. legal aid.

39.  the person's doctor or another medical professional, e.g. their psychiatrist, confirms they lack capacity to manage the case.

The Official Solicitor was contacted on 30 April 2019 by Enfield Council regarding possession proceedings against your son, Simon Cordell. However, after contacting the representatives for Simon, Tyrer Roxburgh, the solicitor with conduct of this matter, Mr Ronak Ahmed advised that you, Simon's mother, is willing and suitable to act as his litigation friend in these proceeding and as such the Official Solicitor's last resort criteria was not met. Consequently, Enfield Council were requested to contact Mr Ronak Ahmed and were also notified that we would close our file.

I am sorry that you were misinformed. This may have been because a search was not undertaken to check the closed cases on the system. Please accept my apologises for this oversight.

I trust this clarifies the situation.

Regards,

Bina.

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 05 August 2019 11:29

To: OS - Enquiries (OSPT) <Enquiries@ospt.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Information

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after a call I made to your offices this morning where I was told no application had been made regarding my son Mr Simon Cordell DOB: 26/01/1981 address 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ to act in court proceedings as a Litigation Friend for a Claim for Possession of my son's home 109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield EN3 7JQ by Enfield Council.

On the 8 March 2019 the court ordered that Enfield Council contract The Official Solicitor and ask if The Official Solicitor to consider whether they are prepared to act as Litigation Friend for the Defendant.

Enfield Council proceeded to restore their Claim for Possession with Edmonton County Court on the 06 June 2019 which was granted by the court on the grounds that The Official Solicitor had responded to the request from Enfield Council.

Yesterday I received an email from my son's acting solicitors with the letters sent to the court to restore by Enfield Council and this

406,

is the reason I made the call to The Official Solicitor this morning. I felt it very concerning that I have never been contracted since the 8 March 2019 from The Official Solicitor or Enfield Council, yet The Official Solicitor stated to Enfield Council that I could act as Litigation Friend for my son.

This is what has been stated in the letter to the court to restore the court proceedings from Enfield Council for the Claim for Possession.

• "We write to request that the proceedings be now restored. The Official Solicitor has responded to the request to act as Litigation Friend to the Defendant advising that they will not so act instead the Defendant mother Mrs Cordell will act as Litigation Friend to the Defendant".

Could you please confirm via this email, what was stated to me this morning on the phone call I made, that there has never been any application to The Official Solicitor from Enfield Council regarding my son Mr Simon Cordell to act as a Litigation Friend in court proceedings for a Claim for Possession?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 1

Nasir. Uddin @enfield. G Alteration Form [SEC=OFFICIAL] 21

09/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427

 

49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 1

Nasir. Uddin @enfield. G Alteration Form [SEC=OFFICIAL] 21

09/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 407,408

409,410,411,412,413,414

415,416,417,418,419,420

421,422,423,424,425,426

427

--

407,

From: Nasir Uddin <Nasir.Uddin@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 09 August 2019 12:20

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Improvement and Alteration Form  [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Improvement and alterations form and policy.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Please complete and forward back to me.

Kind regards

Nasir Uddin Neighbourhood Officer

Housing Services Housing & Regeneration Place Department Enfield Council the Edmonton Centre 36-44 South Mall Edmonton Green N9 0TN

Email: nasir.uddin@enfield.gov.uk

Tel: 02083758008

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print

'Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities'

We are consulting on our Housing Strategy and our Homelessness Prevention Strategy - tell us what you think

THE RIGHT HOME FOR EVERYONE

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

408,

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

409,

410,

411,

412,

413,

414,

415,

416,

417,

418,

419,

420,

421,

422,

423,

424,

425,

426,

427,

 

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Mother 19-08-2019-10-09

19/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 428,429

 

50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Mother 19-08-2019-10-09

19/08/2019

/ Page Numbers: 428,429

--

428,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 19/08/2019 10:09:24 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE; insurance

Attachments: public liability insurance-2019.doc

here

429,

public liability insurance-2019.doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 04/04/2019

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this Letter to request the information relating to your public liability insurance, can you please confirm the details of who your public liability insurance is held by and the policy certificate details.

This would include all policy certificate details held by for each year from 2014 to 2019. Could the information please be sent via this email address?

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 3

22/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 430,431,432

 

51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 3

22/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 430,431,432

--

430,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments: LB Enfield 21 Oct 2019.pdf

CL 22 Oct 2019.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell

I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22 October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email  ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2 t

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

431,

432,

 

 

 

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2.

Mother 23-10-2019-10-13

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 433,434,435

 

52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2.

Mother 23-10-2019-10-13

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 433,434,435

--

433,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 23/10/2019 10:13:56 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments:   LB Enfield 21 Oct 2019.pdf   CL 22 Oct 2019.pdf

here is the email he has sent you the letters in the post but please don't start calling Enfield Council as that will just cause more problems you need this case to be dropped and it has not been fully yet until you get a court letters to say it dropped.

mum

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto:ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case Dear Ms Cordell I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

434,

435,

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_001 5

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 436,437,438,439,440,441

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_001 5

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 436,437,438,439,440,441

--

436,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 23 October 2019 12:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ms Cordell

That is fine I can hold off until Monday (the Council called me today requesting a response). However legally as you have not been appointed as a litigation friend, yet by the Court, if your son instructs us to refuse the offer we will need to comply (his instructions override your instructions). Currently our instructions are to refuse the offer.

Following on from this morning’s telephone call, I am afraid that I have asked the office to not take calls from your son any longer and to request anything to be put in writing from him. I was unable to get through to your son and he began attacking me. Ordinarily we would cease to act but we are aware of his underlying health issues.

Finally, I appreciate the feeling of injustice but quite simply, the legal aid agency will only pay for a case if there is a risk of eviction. Here there is no longer a risk of eviction as the Council are offering to withdraw their case.

As an added precaution, the consent order will need to be signed by your son - normally we would sign such documents.

Please let me know next week or over the weekend of your son's final instructions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

437,

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 12:34:47 PM

To: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Hi Ronak

I do not think my son understands fully can you hold off for a few days and let me speak to my son please I have to do it in a way he understands.

Can you let me know please.

Regards

Lorraine

Sent from my iPhone

On 23 Oct 2019, at 12:11, Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk> wrote:

438,

Good afternoon

A consent order in this case will say that the Councils case is dismissed. You will have a copy of this I’m advance.

I have just spoken to your son on the phone and had to terminate the call due to him shouting. Your son has said he refuses to agree to the Councils offer and as he is the client, I will follow through with this.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089 www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221808878

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

439,

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 11:26:24 AM

To: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ronak

Can you please explain what a consent order is and what will be in this consent order, and can we be supplied a copy of it before it goes to the court?

My son is really unhappy regarding the way in which he has been treated by Enfield Council and the lies in which they have told about him and the way in which they have made him suffered and the fact that they could just start this backup at any time they want.

He said it seems funny that the neighbours that caused all these issues and put in all the complaints and Enfield Council believed 100% without once looking or seeing any evidence my son had and we offered that many times but no Enfield Council just did what they wanted and my son was suffering badly and had to deal with 4 cases against him which Enfield Council took. It seems funny now that the neighbours got what they wanted and was moved now Enfield Council does not have any complaints to still want to take this to court.

Could it be maybe that Enfield Council can't get them to come to court as witnesses now they have got what they want. My son does not feel safe in that flat the court ordered them to move my son on the 09/08/2019 yet Enfield Council done nothing and left him to suffer and my son is still there.

Seems Enfield Council can just get away with what they have done to my son, start a case when they want to and end it will they want to is there a way that it can be asked at court that Enfield Council cannot bring a new case with the same information in it as what's in it now they have put the same information in 3 court cases and I believe they should not be allowed to be able to use it again and again whenever they want.

My son feels he should just go to court and have this dealt with once and for all, but that could lead to my son losing his home and that should not be allowed.

Regards

Lorraine

440,

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto:ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case Dear Ms Cordell I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22 October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email  ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

441,

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

 

 

 

 

54.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_001 5

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 442,443,444,445,446

 

 54.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

54. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_001 5

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 442,443,444,445,446

--

442,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 23 October 2019 12:15

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case – Withdrawal of the Case

I omitted to add that I advised your son that the Legal Aid Agency will not fund a possession case where the Landlord has offered to withdraw the case. You could decide to continue the case, but it would be privately paid, and such costs easily amount to thousands of pounds.

I will let the Council know tomorrow that their offer to withdraw the case has been rejected. I will also inform the Legal Aid Agency of the offer being made as I am duty bound.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221808878

SRA No: 560748

443,

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 12:11:14 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Good afternoon

A consent order in this case will say that the Councils case is dismissed. You will have a copy of this I’m advance.

I have just spoken to your son on the phone and had to terminate the call due to him shouting. Your son has said he refuses to agree to the Councils offer and as he is the client, I will follow through with this.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

444,

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 11:26:24 AM

To: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ronak

Can you please explain what a consent order is and what will be in this consent order, and can we be supplied a copy of it before it goes to the court?

445,

My son is really unhappy regarding the way in which he has been treated by Enfield Council and the lies in which they have told about him and the way in which they have made him suffered and the fact that they could just start this backup at any time they want.

He said it seems funny that the neighbours that caused all these issues and put in all the complaints and Enfield Council believed 100% without once looking or seeing any evidence my son had and we offered that many times but no Enfield Council just did what they wanted and my son was suffering badly and had to deal with 4 cases against him which Enfield Council took. It seems funny now that the neighbours got what they wanted and was moved now Enfield Council does not have any complaints to still want to take this to court.

Could it be maybe that Enfield Council can't get them to come to court as witnesses now they have got what they want. My son does not feel safe in that flat the court ordered them to move my son on the 09/08/2019 yet Enfield Council done nothing and left him to suffer and my son is still there.

Seems Enfield Council can just get away with what they have done to my son, start a case when they want to and end it will they want to is there a way that it can be asked at court that Enfield Council cannot bring a new case with the same information in it as what's in it now they have put the same information in 3 court cases and I believe they should not be allowed to be able to use it again and again whenever they want.

My son feels he should just go to court and have this dealt with once and for all, but that could lead to my son losing his home and that should not be allowed.

Regards

Lorraine

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto:ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ms Cordell, I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22 October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

446,

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78 SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

 

 

 

 

 

55.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_002 3

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 447,448,449

 

55.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh. ce - Withdrawal of the Case_002 3

23/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 447,448,449

--

447,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 23 October 2019 12:11

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Re: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal   of the Case

Good afternoon

A consent order in this case will say that the Councils case is dismissed. You will have a copy of this I’m advance.

I have just spoken to your son on the phone and had to terminate the call due to him shouting. Your son has said he refuses to agree to the Councils offer and as he is the client, I will follow through with this.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221808878

SRA No: 560748

448,

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 11:26:24 AM

To: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ronak

Can you please explain what a consent order is and what will be in this consent order, and can we be supplied a copy of it before it goes to the court?

My son is really unhappy regarding the way in which he has been treated by Enfield Council and the lies in which they have told about him and the way in which they have made him suffered and the fact that they could just start this backup at any time they want.

He said it seems funny that the neighbours that caused all these issues and put in all the complaints and Enfield Council believed 100% without once looking or seeing any evidence my son had and we offered that many times but no Enfield Council just did what they wanted and my son was suffering badly and had to deal with 4 cases against him which Enfield Council took. It seems funny now that the neighbours got what they wanted and was moved now Enfield Council does not have any complaints to still want to take this to court.

Could it be maybe that Enfield Council can't get them to come to court as witnesses now they have got what they want. My son does not feel safe in that flat the court ordered them to move my son on the 09/08/2019 yet Enfield Council done nothing and left him to suffer and my son is still there.

Seems Enfield Council can just get away with what they have done to my son, start a case when they want to and end it will they want to is there a way that it can be asked at court that Enfield Council cannot bring a new case with the same information in it as what's in it now they have put the same information in 3 court cases and I believe they should not be allowed to be able to use it again and again whenever they want.

My son feels he should just go to court and have this dealt with once and for all, but that could lead to my son losing his home and that should not be allowed.

Regards

449,

Lorraine

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto:ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case Dear Ms Cordell I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22 October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221808878

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

 

 

 

 

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2.

Mother 24-10-2019 -12-22

24/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 450

 

56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

56. 1. 2.

Mother 24-10-2019 -12-22

24/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 450

--

450,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/10/2019 12:22:24 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: MP3 Solicitor

You were not that bad but when you started saying they have not done their job in so many ways that's what done it. No solicitors will accept they are not working for your best interest. (I told you this on the phone)

What you need to understand what he is trying to say, which you just seem to think he is going against you is.

1.      Enfield Council started this case and it does not matter what you say Enfield Council has the right to withdraw the case whenever they want, and for whatever reason they want, and you cannot do anything about that.

2.      Legal Aid will see it you have chosen to carry on, and you was no longer at risk of losing your home as Enfield Council was willing to withdraw the case, so they are no longer legal bound to pay for you to carry on as at the stage Enfield Council wanted to withdraw you did not wish to do so and by the withdrawal you are no longer at risk, so you have chosen to carry on at the risk yourself of losing your home and you did not care of the risk.

3.      As I tried to say to you yesterday you are better to allow them to withdraw and allow your solicitors to get the case dismissed as that is what they were going to address, Enfield Council had to dismiss there case against you which would mean they did not have a case that would stand up which goes in your favour.

4.      Once this is done you would then have 3 cases that Enfield Council had dismissed against you at the same court all for the same allegations, which would show Enfield Council in bad light. Then you bring a case against Enfield Council for what they have done the case is your case you don't have to pay for the application to the court, and you can use the 3 cases that has been dismissed which gives your case more grounds in your favour, also you would not be at risk of losing your home as that will be off the table, so you are in a much better place then Enfield Council would be, as it would not be there case but yours. there is more to this, but I know you are not going to agree with anything I am saying.

From: Rewired [mailto: re_wired@ymail.com]

Sent: 23 October 2019 14:12

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: MP3 Solicitor

This is the only two times that I have spoken to him. The 38 one is the newest and quickest to listen to.

 

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 1

Elections@enfield.gov9_RE 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield 2

28/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 451,452

 

 57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57. 1. 1

Elections@enfield.gov9_RE 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield 2

28/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 451,452

--

451,

From: Elections <Elections@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 28 October 2019 11:38

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield

Good morning Lorraine,

Thank you for your email,

Unfortunately, the Household Enquiry Form is dispatched to every address in the borough and address to 'The Occupier' in case people have moved in/out. We would not be able to send this or any other forms within the nature of electoral services to yourself in order to complete for your son.

As you have confirmed he is the sole occupant and I have managed to check this against local sources, I have now taken the no change response and he will not be required to complete that form and I can assure you he will not be fined.

Apologies for any distress caused,

Kind regards,

Stefanie Vales

Senior Electoral Services Officer Chief Executives Department Electoral and Democratic Services Enfield Council

PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street,

Enfield Middlesex, EN1 3ES

Direct Dial: 0208 379 3341

Main Office: 0208 379 8588

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 27 October 2019 12:14

To: Elections <Elections@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email for my son Mr Simon Cordell he lives at 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield EN3 7JQ.

Enfield Council knows my son has health issues and everything that is sent to him should be sent to me so I can deal with it, this is on Enfield Councils system, and I know he would have been sent a form to register which he is meant to fill in or he can be fined.

I do not have the form in which to deal with this and do not want my son to be fined due to not filling the form in.

452,

My son is the only person who lives at the above address.

Could someone please get back to me in order that I can deal with this for my son as soon as possible?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

58.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 1

Elections @enfield.gov RE 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield 1

28/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 453

 

58.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

58. 1. 1

Elections @enfield.gov RE 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield 1

28/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 453

--

453,

From: Elections <Elections@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 28 October 2019 11:34

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: RE: 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield

Importance: High

[Campaign] https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/UKENFIELD/subscriber/new?preferences=true

[Enfield] http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 2

31/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 454,455

 

59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 2

31/10/2019

/ Page Numbers: 454,455

--

454,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 31 October 2019 14:36

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Good afternoon

Thank you for your email dated 28 October 2019. You state “But I do think this is wrong that Enfield Council has put this on my son when Enfield Council know at this point no-one has been appointed for Simon by the court to act in his best interest. Enfield Council is well aware as it has been stated in their application that my son lacks capacity to litigate and give appropriate instructions in his defence.”. We cannot file a defence as the claim is being terminated. If the case had continued, then we would have had to prepare and file a Defence after the hearing in December 2019 - this is what I was expecting to occur.

I have let the Legal Aid Agency know of the Council’s offer to discontinue the claim. I will telephone Simon Cordell in the next day or so (unless you come back to me first) and ask again if he has changed his mind. The Agency are likely to terminate funding given the offer received. I will then let the Council’s lawyer know of the decision of Simon. If the claim is not agreed to be terminated, then at the next hearing the Judge will dismiss the Claim - as the Council want. So by Simon refusing to agree to terminate, all that is occurring is that the Council is being forced to attend the next hearing.

You also state in your above email “If Enfield Council have instructed their solicitors to discontinue, they should just do this, and not put costs first over welfare knowing no one has been appointed for Simon by the court at this stage.” This is not correct - if the Council wishes to end the Claim, they have to obtain the Defendant’s consent or the permission of the Court (The Council cannot just end the Claim). The latter option costs money as you can appreciate in court fees etc. Therefore the Council wants an agreement to be reached without a court hearing or having to ask the Court to end the claim- it is the cheaper option.

I would be grateful if you could explain this point to Simon the best you can.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

455,

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

 

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 4

05/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 456,457,458,459

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 4

05/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 456,457,458,459

--

456,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent:   05 November 2019 14:25

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments: CL 5-nov 2019.pdf.

LB Enfield 5 Nov 2019.pdf

Good afternoon I trust you are well.

The lawyer for the Council telephoned me again today and I explained the situation. I have today written a letter to the Council which is attached and sent a copy to Simon Cordell also attached.

I think what will next happen is the Legal Aid contact us and then seek to terminate the Public Funding.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email  ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

457,

RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case-CL 5-nov 2019.pdf

Family and Housing Law Specialists

Mr Simon Cordell 4 Crompton Place Enfield Middlesex EN3 6XS

Our Ref: RA/007034.01 Your Ref:

Partners

D. Shanmuganathan Ph.D. (Wales) Solicitor-Advocate Mukesh Badhan*/** Vasoulla Constantinou**** Consultants Eleni Nicolaou*** Philip Eldin-Taylor*** Solicitor-Advocate Ronak Ahmed Sally Goldman Trainee Solicitor Nitu Johal Paralegal Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Date: 5 November 2019

Dear Mr Cordell

RE: Your Housing Possession Matter

Please find enclosed a letter dated 5 November 2019 sent to the London Borough of Enfield confirming that you do not agree to their proposal to withdraw the claim. Additionally, we have informed the Legal Aid Agency of the offer made by the Council and it is likely that they will withdraw the Public Funding shortly as they will consider that further costs are not justified.

We did leave a voicemail for you on 1 Nov 2019 at 16:16 to see if you had changed your mind after calming down but to date you have not contacted us back. You may recall that the previous telephone conversation was terminated abruptly due to your conduct.

Yours faithfully

rahmed

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL.B LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace, London N22 7SJ

Tel: 020 8889 3319

Fax: 020 8881 6089 DX: 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Email: info@tvrerroxbureh.co.uk

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authority *PANEL CBE3

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under SRA

no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

458,

RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case->LB Enfield 5 Nov 2019.pdf

Family and Housing Law Specialists

Attention: Ms Kulwinder Johal Legal Services, The London Borough of Enfield PO Box 50, Civic Centre Enfield EN1 3AA

Our Ref: RA/007034.01

Your Ref: LS/C/KJ/159272

Partners

D. Shanmuganathan Ph.D. (Wales) Solicitor-Advocate Mukesh Badhan*/** Vasoulla Constantinou**** Consultants Eleni Nicolaou*** Philip Eldin-Taylor*** Solicitor-Advocate Ronak Ahmed Sally Goldman Trainee Solicitor Nitu Johal Paralegal Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Date: 05 November 2019

Dear Sirs

RE: LB Enfield v Simon Cordell CLAIM: F00ED222

Further to recent telephone conversations, we can confirm that we have conveyed the contents of your letter dated 21 October 2019 to both our client and his mother. We remind you that our client suffers from serious mental health issues and there is currently no litigation friend appointed which places us in difficulties in relation to disposing of this matter.

Our client has instructed us that he does not agree to the terms as stipulated in your above letter. The reason for this is that our client feels a great injustice has been inflicted upon him due to the false allegations founding the current claim and by it being discontinued, our Client is being deprived of his day in court.

As discussed, you may file a notice of discontinuance to the Court immediately or wait until the hearing on 12 December 2019 and ask the Court to dismiss the Claim. Should Public Funding be terminated, please note that we will not attend that hearing but is it likely that our client will attend.

1 St Michaels Terrace, London N22 7SJ

Tel: 020 8889 3319

Fax: 020 8881 6089

DX: 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Email: info@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authority *PANEL CBE3

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under SRA

no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

459,

We will of course, update you should our instructions change but this is unlikely to be the case.

Yours faithfully

Rahmed

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office 0208 889 3319

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

61.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2.

Mother 08-11-2019 -11-48

08/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 460,461,462

 

61.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 1. 2.

Mother 08-11-2019 -11-48

08/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 460,461,462

--

460,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 08/11/2019 11:48:08 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: A/C No. 13039124P Name Mr SIMON PAUL CORDELL Account in London North East

see here

From: Ansen, Simone [mailto: Simone.Ansen@justice.gov.uk] On Behalf Of NCESCCC

Sent: 08 November 2019 10:50

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: A/C No. 13039124P Name Mr SIMON PAUL CORDELL Account in London North East Good Morning,

Please see a breakdown of payment below:

22/07/2013

TTPAY BD 19/08/2013

UE

 

01/07/2014

TTPAY Ł20.00 MO 23/09/2014

MD

 

26/09/2014

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

23/10/2014

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

24/11/2014

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

18/12/2014

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

22/12/2014

ACCOUNT CONSOLIDATED

 

Ł0.00

14060821C IA TOTAL PAID

 

CR

22/12/2014

ACCOUNT CONSOLIDATED

 

Ł0.00

14060824N IA TOTAL PAID

 

CR

15/01/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

12/02/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

27/02/2015

ACCOUNT CONSOLIDATED

 

Ł0.00

15010349C VN TOTAL PAID

 

CR

27/02/2015

ACCOUNT CONSOLIDATED

 

Ł0.00

15010360N VN TOTAL PAID

 

CR

13/03/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

10/04/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

08/05/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

05/06/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

03/07/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

04/08/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

26/08/2015

PAYMNT CT

DH

Ł20.00

CR

24/09/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

21/10/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

20/11/2015

PAYMNT CT

DH

Ł20.00

CR

17/12/2015

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

15/01/2016

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

12/02/2016

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

11/03/2016

PAYMNT CT

KC

Ł20.00

CR

461,

08/04/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

06/05/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

03/06/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

30/06/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

27/07/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

24/08/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

21/09/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

WZ

Ł20.00

CR

24/10/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

WZ

Ł20.00

CR

21/11/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

14/12/2016

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

11/01/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

08/02/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

DH

Ł20.00

CR

09/03/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

05/04/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

FP

Ł20.00

CR

16/06/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

02/09/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

OB

Ł20.00

CR

04/01/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

OB

Ł20.00

CR

04/10/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

GS

Ł20.00

CR

24/10/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł10.00

CR

16/11/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

13/12/2017

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

10/01/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

07/02/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

08/03/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

05/04/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

02/05/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

31/05/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

28/06/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

26/07/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

23/08/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

21/09/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

17/10/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

16/11/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

12/12/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

DP

Ł20.00

CR

462,

15/01/2019

PAYMNT CT

 

KC

Ł20.00

CR

08/02/2019

PAYMNT CT

 

DP

Ł20.00

CR

12/12/2018

PAYMNT CT

 

DP

Ł20.00

CR

Thanks

Simone

HMCTS Enforcement Contact Centre | HMCTS/GLITEM | Wales |

Phone: 01633 645112

Web: www.gov.uk/hmcts

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you, please see: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm- courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Mother 12-11-2019-11-25

12/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 463,464,465,466,467,468,469

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Mother 12-11-2019-11-25

12/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 463,464,465,466,467,468,469

--

463,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 12/11/2019 11:25:44 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE; DWP-Letter-30-10-2019-Rent-Statment-2019

Attachments: Simon-Rent-Account-2019.pdf

Simon-DWP-30-10-2019.pdf

Please see attached

464,

465,

466,

467,

468,

469,

 

 

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 4

20/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 470,471,472,473

 

 

63.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

63. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Case - Withdrawal of the Case 4

20/11/2019

/ Page Numbers: 470,471,472,473

--

470,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 20 November 2019 19:49

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments: 23799436_15871692.PDF

CL20-nov-2019.pdf

Good afternoon I trust you are well.

Please find attached a copy of a letter sent to your son and a notification from the Legal Aid Agency dated 20 November 2019.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

471,

RE: Your Son’ Case - Withdrawal of the Case->23799436_15871692.PDF

Legal Aid Agency

Legal Aid Agency

1

PO BOX 10619

Nottingham

NG66DX

DX 324205

Nottingham 59

Telephone: 0300 200 2020

TYRER ROXBURGH SOLICITORS LLP

Our Ref: 300000520852

Your Ref: RA/007034.02

Date: 20/11/2019

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: SIMON CORDELL

We refer to the client's Legal Aid certificate, which was issued on 15/02/2019.

The certificate was placed under review on 20/11/2019 for the following reasons:

· Your case has been reviewed in the light of an offer to discontinue pursuit of the claim by the claimant. It is therefore unreasonable for further funding to be given by civil legal aid under the relevant Funding Code criteria or the equivalent regulations under the Legal Aid, Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.

You are entitled to reply to this certificate embargo with your reasons as to why you feel legal aid funding should continue. Please be advised that, if no reply is received within 21 days, a decision will be made as to whether the certificate should be discharged.

Any work undertaken after the review date will not be covered under your certificate, unless we decide that this can continue.

If you think Legal Aid should continue, please contact us within 14 days of the date of this letter to provide full reasons. Please note that if you do not take the action required within this time the certificate will be discharged.

We have written to the client separately to advise them.

If you have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to contact us. Details can be found at the top of this letter.

Yours faithfully,

472,

Ms Jane E Harbottle

Head of Civil Case Management

473,

RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case->CL 20-nov-2019.pdf

Family and Housing Law Specialists

Mr Simon Cordell 4 Crompton Place Enfield Middlesex EN3 6XS

Our Ref: RA/007034.01

Your Ref:

Partners

D. Shanmuganathan Ph.D. (Wales) Solicitor-Advocate Mukesh Badhan*/** Vasoulla Constantinou**** Consultants Eleni Nicolaou*** Philip Eldin-Taylor*** Solicitor-Advocate Ronak Ahmed Sally Goldman Trainee Solicitor Nitu Johal Paralegal Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Date: 20 November 2019

Dear Mr Cordell

RE: Your Housing Possession Matter

Please find enclosed a letter dated 20 November 2019 from the Legal Aid Agency which states that Public Funding will be terminated as the Claimant has offered to withdraw the case. Should Public Funding be terminated then we will close your case and you will need to represent yourself.

If you wish to have Funding continue then please contact the Legal Aid Agency on 0300 200 2020

Yours sincerely

rahmed

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace, London N22 7SJ

Tel: 020 8889 3319

Fax: 020 8881 6089

DX: 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Email: info@tvrerroxbureh.co.uk

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authority *PANEL CBE3

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under SRA no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

 

 

 

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019 -12-58

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 474,475,476

 

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019 -12-58

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 474,475,476

--

474,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 02/12/2019 12:58:17 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments: LB Enfield 21 Oct 2019.pdf  

CL-22 Oct 2019.pdf

see letters

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto: ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 22 October 2019 20:30

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Dear Ms Cordell, I trust you are well.

I have good news in that the Council have decided to not pursue the case further due to a lack of recent incidents. Please see attached their letter received recently and our letter dated 22October 2019 sent to your son.

Please speak to your son and get back to me with any questions.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tvrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by Email.

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

475,

476,

 

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019-12-51

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 477,478

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019-12-51

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 477,478

--

477,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 02/12/2019 12:51:02 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: RE: your sol letter

Attachments: CL 22 Oct 2019-si-sol-001.pdf

here look

478,

CL 22 Oct 2019-si-sol-001.pdf

Family and Housing Law Specialists

Mr Simon Cordell 4 Crompton Place Enfield Middlesex EN3 6XS

Our Ref: RA/007034.01

Your Ref:

Partners

D. Shanmuganathan Ph.D. (Wales) Solicitor-Advocate Mukesh Badhan*/** Vasoulla Constantinou**** Consultants Eleni Nicolaou*** Philip Eldin-Taylor*** Solicitor-Advocate Ronak Ahmed Sally Goldman Trainee Solicitor Nitu Johal Paralegal Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Date: 22 October 2019

Dear Mr Cordell

RE: Your Housing Possession Matter

Please find enclosed a letter dated 21 October 2019 from the London Borough of Enfield confirming that they do not wish to proceed with the case to evict you. This is good news.

Please do bear in mind that a new case can be started if the Council find that there are fresh complaints in the future.

We will shortly begin to agree terms of a consent order to formally terminate the case at the Courts. Thereafter we shall close the case. If you have any questions, please get in touch.

Yours faithfully

rahmed

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace, London N22 7SJ

Tel: 020 8889 3319

Fax: 020 8881 6089 DX: 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Email: info@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authority *PANEL C1BB1

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under SRA no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

 

 

 

 

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019-12-56

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 479,480,481,482

 

66.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

66. 1. 2.

Mother 02-12-2019-12-56

02/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 479,480,481,482

--

479,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 02/12/2019 12:56:00 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case

Attachments: 23799436-15871692.PDF

CL 20-nov-2019.pdf

please see attached letters

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto: ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 20 November 2019 19:49

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Withdrawal of the Case Good afternoon I trust you are well.

Please find attached a copy of a letter sent to your son and a notification from the Legal Aid Agency dated 20 November 2019.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office 0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tvrerroxburah.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburah.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221808878

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

480,

23799436-15871692.PDF

Legal Aid Agency

Legal Aid Agency

1 PO BOX 10619

Nottingham

NG66DX

DX 324205 Nottingham 59

Telephone: 0300 200 2020

TYRER ROXBURGH SOLICITORS LLP

Our Ref: 300000520852

Your Ref: RA/007034.02

Date: 20/11/2019

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: SIMON CORDELL

We refer to the client's Legal Aid certificate, which was issued on 15/02/2019.

The certificate was placed under review on 20/11/2019 for the following reasons:

• Your case has been reviewed in the light of an offer to discontinue pursuit of the claim by the claimant. It is therefore unreasonable for further funding to be given by civil legal aid under the relevant Funding Code criteria or the equivalent regulations under the Legal Aid, Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.

You are entitled to reply to this certificate embargo with your reasons as to why you feel legal aid funding should continue. Please be advised that, if no reply is received within 21 days, a decision will be made as to whether the certificate should be discharged.

Any work undertaken after the review date will not be covered under your certificate, unless we decide that this can continue.

If you think Legal Aid should continue, please contact us within 14 days of the date of this letter to provide full reasons. Please note that if you do not take the action required within this time the certificate will be discharged.

We have written to the client separately to advise them.

If you have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to contact us. Details can be found at the top of this letter.

Yours faithfully,

481,

Ms Jane E Harbottle

Head of Civil Case Management

482,

CL 20-nov-2019.pdf

Family and Housing Law Specialists

Mr Simon Cordell 4 Crompton Place Enfield Middlesex EN3 6XS

Our Ref: RA/007034.01

Your Ref:

Partners

D. Shanmuganathan Ph.D. (Wales) Solicitor-Advocate Mukesh Badhan*/** Vasoulla Constantinou**** Consultants Eleni Nicolaou*** Philip Eldin-Taylor*** Solicitor-Advocate Ronak Ahmed Sally Goldman Trainee Solicitor Nitu Johal Paralegal Shelaine Stanley-Mitchell

Date: 20 November 2019

Dear Mr Cordell

RE: Your Housing Possession Matter

Please find enclosed a letter dated 20 November 2019 from the Legal Aid Agency which states that Public Funding will be terminated as the Claimant has offered to withdraw the case. Should Public Funding be terminated then we will close your case and you will need to represent yourself.

If you wish to have Funding continue then please contact the Legal Aid Agency on 0300 200 2020

Yours sincerely

rahmed

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace, London N22 7SJ

Tel: 020 8889 3319

Fax: 020 8881 6089

DX: 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Email: info@tvrerroxbureh.co.uk

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authority *PANEL C1BB1

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under SRA no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

 

 

 

 

 

67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Termination of Public Funding 6

08/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 483,484,485,486,487,488

 

 67.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

67. 1. 1

Ronak @tyrerroxburgh.c Termination of Public Funding 6

08/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 483,484,485,486,487,488

--

483,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 08 December 2019 23:31

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: RE: Your Son' Case - Termination of Public Funding

Attachments: Cert Discharged-24094496-16073974.pdf

Dear Ms Cordell

Please find attached a letter dated 5 December 2019 which confirms that your son’s case has no Legal Aid. Therefore there is no funding to cover the Court hearing on 12 December 2019 and we shall not be attending.

I would be grateful if you could speak to your son about this issue.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

TR TYRER ROXBURGH

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail

Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

484,

RE: Your Son’ Case - Termination of Public Funding->Cert Discharged 24094496_16073974.pdf

Legal Aid Agency

Legal Aid Agency

1 PO BOX 10619

Nottingham

NG66DX

DX 324205

Nottingham 59

Telephone: 0300 200 2020

TYRER ROXBURGH SOLICITORS LLP

Our Ref: 300000520852

Your Ref: RA/007034.02

Date: 05/12/2019

To Whom It May Concern:

Re: SIMON CORDELL

The above certificate, granted on 15/02/2019, has been discharged with effect from 05/12/2019 for the following reasons:

· This certificate has been discharged, effective from the date of this letter, for the reasons listed below.

Your case has been reviewed in the light of an offer to discontinue pursuit of the claim by the claimant. It is therefore unreasonable for further funding to be given by civil legal aid under the relevant Funding Code criteria or the equivalent regulations under the Legal Aid, Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.

We have attached a copy of the cancelled certificate.

Please note that if you continue to work on this case on a private basis, you are obliged to report the outcome to us when the matter concludes. You will also need to notify us of any monies awarded to the client as a result of the proceedings, in accordance with Regulation 49 of the CLS (Financial) Regulations 2000.

If you wish to request an appeal/review in relation to the discharge of the above certificate, this will need to be submitted online within 14 days of the date of this letter.

If you have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to contact us. Details can be found at the top of this letter.

Yours faithfully,

Ms Jane E Harbottle

Head of Civil Case Management

485,

CIVIL LEGAL AID CERTIFICATE

Reference Number: 300000520852

Agency

Client Name

SIMON CORDELL

Client Address

109, Burncroft Avenue ENFIELD Middlesex EN3 7JQ

Firm Name

TYRER ROXBURGH SOLICITORS LLP

Fee Earner

 

Provider Internal Reference

RA/007034.02

Office Address

1 ST MICHAELS TERRACE WOOD GREEN LONDON N22 7SJ

Opponent Details

Guardian Name

Guardian Address

London Borough of Enfield Council

 

 

This is to certify that the status of the Certificate is as specified in the 'Certificate Summary' box below. Its scope is specified in the 'Notice' overleaf. It covers the proceedings listed overleaf and is subject to the limitations and conditions listed overleaf.

The date and limitations on substantive certificates issued on or after 13th October 2015 are effective from the date of issue of the emergency (if an emergency has been issued).  

Certificate Summary

 

Substantive Certificate Status:

Discharged

Effective Date:

15/02/2019

End Date:

05/12/2019

Reinstatement Date:

Cost Limitation:

Ł2,250.00

Cost Limitation effective date:

20/03/2019

Certificate Limitation:

N/A

This certificate imposes both scope and financial limitations on the work to be done under it.

Solicitors should check the limitations imposed carefully and apply for an amendment where

appropriate.

486,

Payment will not be made for work undertaken outside the scope specified or

in excess of the costs limit.

487,

NOTICE

Proceeding(s)

CATEGORY OF LAW: Housing

Recover possession - tenant - Housing

Current Status:

to be represented in an action for possession of property and/or demotion of tenancy and, if appropriate, for arrears of rent and/or other remedies in the same action.

Date work can commence on the above proceeding:

15/02/2019

Proceeding end date:

 

Client involvement type:

Defendant/respondent

Form of Service:

Full Representation

Date current Form of Service effective:

15/02/2019

Previous Form of Service:

 

Date previous Form of Service effective:

 

Limitation

Effective Date End Date

Limited to all steps up to and including the hearing on 8 March 2019

15/02/2019 12/04/2019

Limited to all steps up to and including trial/final hearing and any action to implement (but not enforce) the judgment or order.

20/03/2019

 

488,

Legal Aid Agency

Address

PO BOX 10619 Nottingham NG66DX

Signed

Ms Jane E Harbottle

Head of Civil Case Management

 

 

 

 

68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_12.11.2019_ 3

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491

 

 68.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

68. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_12.11.2019_ 3

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 489,490,491

--

489,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 11 December 2019 17:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Attachments: 20191211184453485.pdf

Dear Lorraine

Please see the attached the order.

D Shanmuganathan Partner

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2943

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Christmas Opening Hours

The office will close on Tuesday 24th December 2019 at 13:00pm- reopening at 09:00am on Thursday 2nd January 2020 at 9.00am We wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners P Mukesh Badhan D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

490,

'

491,

 

 

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

69. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_12.11.2019__001 3

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 492,493,494

 

69.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

69. 1. 1

Sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_12.11.2019__001 3

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 492,493,494

--

492,

From: Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 11 December 2019 17:35

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Attachments: 20191211184453485.pdf

Dear Lorraine

Please see the attached the order.

D Shanmuganathan Partner

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Direct Dial +44 (0)20 8829 2943

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089

www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Christmas Opening Hours

The office will close on Tuesday 24th December 2019 at 13:00pm- reopening at 09:00am on Thursday 2nd January 2020 at 9.00am We wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners P Mukesh Badhan D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

493,

494,

 

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder Cordell Claim Number

FOOED222 1

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 495

 

 70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder Cordell Claim Number

FOOED222 1

11/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 495

--

495,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

 

 

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

12.12.2019_Auto reply

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 496,497,498

 

71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

12.12.2019_Auto reply

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 496,497,498

--

496,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:35

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto reply

** IMPORTANT NOTICE ON EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS **

Thank you for your email, which has been received by the court. Depending on the nature of your email you may receive a response via email or post.

What documents can be sent by email?

You can send all letters and documents relevant to the case including adoption cases. However, due to the sensitive nature of adoption work the court will only send emails to secure email accounts. If a hard copy of a document has been filed at court by DX or Post, an electronic copy should not be sent. As yet please note that court bundles are not part of this process and will not be printed.

For more information regarding e-mails please go to the following http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/email-guidance What is a secure email account?

An email account is considered secure when security measures are in place to make sure the data in the email can’t be accessed by users without the relevant approval. Any account that ends in the following is considered secured: gsi, pnn, gsx, gcsx, gse, cjsm, and nhs.net.

What emails will HMCTS accept?

To make sure we operate this service as efficiently and effectively as possible there are exemptions.

All Civil and Family process, applications and documents will be accepted by email as long as when the entire email is printed out it is not more than 50 pages. This should include the email, all attachments (including any documents embedded in another) and enough copies to serve on required parties.

Please note that:

40.  A page is one side, so 50 pages equals 25 pieces of paper printed on both sides.

41.  Do not use more than one email to take any step in a case which requires a document or documents to be filed.

DOCUMENTS FOR HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PD, 5B.2. FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE PD 5B

You have received an order to attend court for a hearing.

It would greatly assist the court staff if you could ensure documents you file into court have a hearing date endorsed on the covering letter, paperwork or email.

This will then enable the court staff to identify the document is placed on file in readiness for the hearing.

Please note, if the court is unaware of the pending hearing, when you file your documents, this may result in the document not reaching the court file in time for the hearing.

Can processes that carry a fee be sent by email?

In both Civil and Family cases court processes that carry a fee can also be received by email and processed by court staff. However the same conditions as above must apply and in addition the party issuing the process must either quote a Fee Account number, or the party who wants to pay has a valid credit or debit card. If you wish to pay using this method, please say this on the

497,

email and include a contact number for the Court to contact you to take payment.

What is Fee Account?

This is a Direct Debit function that is quick, safe and easy to use. It is available for solicitors and large organisations. Once you have set up an account all you need is to provide your fee account number within the body of the email. The fee will then be deducted from your account. For more information and to apply for Fee Account please visit www.justice.gov.uk/courts/fees/payment-by-account.

Any document submitted that breaches any of the above terms will remain unprocessed. This is in line with Court Practice Directions 5BPD.1 - 5BPD.9.3.

When you email the court the subject line of your mail must contain (in the following order): -

42.  The claim numbers

43.  The title of the claim (abbreviated if necessary) **

44.  The subject matter (e.g. defence)

45.  If relating to a hearing the date and time of hearing in bold black

46.  The judge’s name, where the correspondence/document is for their attention

**If your email is in relation to a family matter, please refer to the initials only.

Your message should also contain the name, telephone number and email address of the sender. Correspondence and documents may be sent as either text or attachments. Where there is a practice form, it must be sent in that form by attachment. The complete email (including any attachment(s)) must not exceed 10Mb.

The rest of this automated message provides information that customers often find useful.

Edmonton County Court

The public counter services are no longer available at this court.

Urgent applications and processes that need to be dealt with in person will be through an appointment only system. Users should contact the court on 0208 8846510 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday to make an appointment.

The main telephone number for Civil and Family enquiries is 0208 884 6500 Gold fax 0870 3240314

Our address is The County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London, N18 2TN DX 136686 Edmonton 3

The court building is open between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm Monday to Friday.

We have a secure drop box located in reception for personal deliveries to the court, which is opened once a day at 9.00 am Monday to Friday.

Website links

Information on Court forms and fees can be also be obtained from www.justice.gov.uk Issuing a claim for Money or Possession of Property - MCOL & PCOL

498,

If you would like to issue a claim for money or property you can do so 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by visiting: www.moneydaim.gov.uk or www.possessionclaim.gov.uk.You will save money by issuing a claim for possession of property or a money claim online rather than sending it to the court.

Legal Advice

If you are uncertain how to proceed, the Civil Procedure Rules available on the Ministry of Justice website - http://www.justice.gov.uk - provide details. On many occasions it is best for people to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor, legal executive, legal advice agency or Citizens Advice Bureau. You can also contact Civil Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 or via their website.

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

12.12.2019_Auto reply_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 499,500,501

 

 72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk

12.12.2019_Auto reply_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 499,500,501

--

499,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 00:00

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto reply

** IMPORTANT NOTICE ON EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS **

Thank you for your email, which has been received by the court. Depending on the nature of your email you may receive a response via email or post.

What documents can be sent by email?

You can send all letters and documents relevant to the case including adoption cases. However, due to the sensitive nature of adoption work the court will only send emails to secure email accounts. If a hard copy of a document has been filed at court by DX or Post, an electronic copy should not be sent. As yet please note that court bundles are not part of this process and will not be printed.

For more information regarding e-mails please go to the following http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/email-guidance What is a secure email account?

An email account is considered secure when security measures are in place to make sure the data in the email can’t be accessed by users without the relevant approval. Any account that ends in the following is considered secured: gsi, pnn, gsx, gcsx, gse, cjsm, and nhs.net.

What emails will HMCTS accept?

To make sure we operate this service as efficiently and effectively as possible there are exemptions.

All Civil and Family process, applications and documents will be accepted by email as long as when the entire email is printed out it is not more than 50 pages. This should include the email, all attachments (including any documents embedded in another) and enough copies to serve on required parties.

Please note that:

47.  A page is one side, so 50 pages equals 25 pieces of paper printed on both sides.

48.  Do not use more than one email to take any step in a case which requires a document or documents to be filed.

DOCUMENTS FOR HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PD, 5B.2. FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE PD 5B

You have received an order to attend court for a hearing.

It would greatly assist the court staff if you could ensure documents you file into court have a hearing date endorsed on the covering letter, paperwork, or email.

This will then enable the court staff to identify the document is placed on file in readiness for the hearing.

Please note, if the court is unaware of the pending hearing, when you file your documents, this may result in the document not reaching the court file in time for the hearing.

Can processes that carry a fee be sent by email?

In both Civil and Family cases court processes that carry a fee can also be received by email and processed by court staff. However the same conditions as above must apply and in addition the party issuing the process must either quote a Fee Account number, or the party who wants to pay has a valid credit or debit card. If you wish to pay using this method, please say this on the

500,

email and include a contact number for the Court to contact you to take payment.

What is Fee Account?

This is a Direct Debit function that is quick, safe, and easy to use. It is available for solicitors and large organisations. Once you have set up an account all you need is to provide your fee account number within the body of the email. The fee will then be deducted from your account. For more information and to apply for Fee Account please visit www.justice.gov.uk/courts/fees/payment-by-account.

Any document submitted that breaches any of the above terms will remain unprocessed. This is in line with Court Practice Directions 5BPD.1 - 5BPD.9.3.

When you email the court the subject line of your mail must contain (in the following order): -

49.  The claim numbers

50.  The title of the claim (abbreviated if necessary) **

51.  The subject matter (e.g. defence)

52.  If relating to a hearing the date and time of hearing in bold black

53.  The judge’s name, where the correspondence/document is for their attention

**If your email is in relation to a family matter, please refer to the initials only.

Your message should also contain the name, telephone number and email address of the sender. Correspondence and documents may be sent as either text or attachments. Where there is a practice form, it must be sent in that form by attachment. The complete email (including any attachment(s)) must not exceed 10Mb.

The rest of this automated message provides information that customers often find useful.

Edmonton County Court

The public counter services are no longer available at this court.

Urgent applications and processes that need to be dealt with in person will be through an appointment only system. Users should contact the court on 0208 8846510 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday to make an appointment.

The main telephone number for Civil and Family enquiries is 0208 884 6500 Gold fax 0870 3240314

Our address is The County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London, N18 2TN DX 136686 Edmonton 3

The court building is open between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm Monday to Friday.

We have a secure drop box located in reception for personal deliveries to the court, which is opened once a day at 9.00 am Monday to Friday.

Website links

Information on Court forms and fees can be also be obtained from www.justice.gov.uk Issuing a claim for Money or Possession of Property - MCOL & PCOL

501,

If you would like to issue a claim for money or property you can do so 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by visiting: www.moneydaim.gov.uk or www.possessionclaim.gov.uk.You will save money by issuing a claim for possession of property or a money claim online rather than sending it to the court.

Legal Advice

If you are uncertain how to proceed, the Civil Procedure Rules available on the Ministry of Justice website - http://www.justice.gov.uk - provide details. On many occasions it is best for people to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor, legal executive, legal advice agency or Citizens Advice Bureau. You can also contact Civil Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 or via their website.

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read RE FOOED222

Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 502,503

 

 

73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read RE FOOED222

Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 502,503

--

502,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon  Cordell

Attachments: Read: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell (10.1KB)

Importance:   High

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

503,

Read: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell->Read_ RE_ FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell (10.1 KB).msg

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries [enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk]

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41:13

Subject: Read: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell Your message

To: Edmonton County, Enquiries

Subject: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Sent: 12/12/2019 00:00

was read on 12/12/2019 09:41

 

 

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Automatic reply RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FO

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 504

 

 74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Automatic reply RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FO

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 504

--

504,

From: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 20:11

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Automatic reply: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

I am on annual leave on 13, 16 and 17 December 2019. I shall return to the office on 18 December. During my absence I will not have access to my emails until my return. If your matter is urgent please refer to Antonia Makanjuola on Antonia.makanjuola@enfield.gov.uk or Jill Bayley on Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk.

Kind regards,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

75.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 505,506

 

 75.     

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 505,506

--

505,

From: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

506,

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards Lorraine Cordell

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Auth

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 507,508

 

 76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Auth

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 507,508

--

507,

From: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:17

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Attachments: Read: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority (10.9 KB)

[Campaign]

www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

508,

Read: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority->Read_ RE_ Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority (10.9 KB).msg

From: Kulwinder Johal [Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:16:36

Subject: Read: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Attachments: winmail.dat (6 KB)

 

 

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 509,510

 

 77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.12.2019_Read Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 509,510

--

509,

From: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 07:46

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Attachments: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 (10.7KB)

[Campaign]

www.enfield.gov.uk

http://www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

510,

Read: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222-> Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 (10.7 KB).msg

From: Kulwinder Johal [Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

To: Lorraine Cordell

Sent: 12 December 2019 07:45:30

Subject: Read: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Attachments: winmail.dat (6 KB)

 

 

 

 

 

 

78.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 1 

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_

RE FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518

 

 78.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

78. 1. 1 

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_

RE FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518

--

511,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent:   12 December 2019 09:34

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Attachments: Simon-Cordell-authority-Letter-Edmonton-Country-Court-11-12-2019.pdf.

Claim  Number FOOED22211-12-2019.pdf

20191211184453485.pdf

Importance:   High

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached letter of complaint and a court order dated the 06/12/2019 regarding claim number FOOED222.

I have resent this email as I forgot to add the letter of authority. Please see attached documents.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Mr Simon Cordell

512,

RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell->Simon_Cordell_authority_Letter-Edmonton-Country-Court-11-12-2019.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 11/12/2019

RE: Letter of Authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell dated 11/12/2019

To whom it may concern:

I Mr Simon Paul Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield EN3 7JQ am writing this letter to confirm I give authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell to speak or send any data or letters and for my mother to receive any information requested from Edmonton Country Court, regarding Claim Number FOOED222. In addition, any other court applications Enfield Council has submitted to Edmonton Country Court against me Mr Simon Cordell

I also agree my mother can request to see the complete files held via the court for any applications Enfield Council has made against me.

I have the right to withdraw my authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell at any time I wish to do so.

Contact can be made to my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell via the information below and you may speak to her or send data what is being asked for on my behalf.

Phone: 07807 3335454

Email: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Letter: 23 Byron Terrace, Edmonton, London N9 7DG

1

513,

Regards

Simon Cordell

2

514,

RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell->Claim Number FOOED222 11-12-2019.pdf

54.  Complaint: Fraudulent Consent Order in Claim Number FOOED222:

55.  11th December 2019

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after I got a call from my son’s Mr Simon Cordell’s solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors at around 17:20 hours on the 11thDecember 2019. The solicitors are no longer acting due to legal aid being removed, which The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield are already aware of due to being told via my son’s solicitors.

I was informed that they had received a Court order today the 11th December 2019 regarding the hearing, which was listed for 12th December 2019 at 2pm at the County Court at Edmonton, under Claim Number FOOED222.

It would seem that The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield has contacted the court via letter and a court order has been made on their behalf via Deputy District Judge Brown on the 06th December 2019. Please see attached Court Order.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield sent a Consent Order received by the Court on 5th December 2019, and this is how Deputy District Judge Brown made the court order on the 06th December 2019.

I am upset regarding this Court Order, It is my believe a Consent Order would need to be signed and agreed by all parties, in the Claim Number FOOED222, this has not happened therefore I believe it is a Fraudulent Consent Order that has been submitted to the court, which was never agreed to or signed.

I know my son Mr Simon Cordell also his solicitor Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors have not signed and agreed to any Consent Order for Claim Number FOOED222.

So how has, The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield sent a Consent Order to the court, which was received by the Court on 5th December 2019. Then a court order made from this Consent Order when only one party has signed it, no agreement made by the parties involved in

1

515,

this case. It is me believe it is the rule of law that all parties have to agree and sign a Consent Order for the court to be able to accept it.

Neither my son nor his solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors have seen this Consent Order so could the court please forward it to this email as soon as possible.

Also within the Court order dated the 09th December 2019, Deputy District Judge Brown has allowed the Claim Number FOOED222 to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore. There is no date set by the court by which time The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield would need to restore this case, so in fact no End date for this Claim Number FOOED222 it would seem it is an unlimited case with no time limited set by the court.

How can this be allowed so by no date being placed on the court order, The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield can wait five or Ten years or a lifetime and then decide to being this case back to court whenever they wish to do so.

This is not acceptable by any means, and would never have been agreed, I do not understand how a court could allow this.

My son is unwell which the court is aware, and to have this hanging over his head for the rest of his life I believe is unlawful and would make my son’s health worse, knowing whenever they want they can bring this case up again for the rest of his life.

District Judge Das warned The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield about bring a Possession claim on the 09/08/2018. Yet all The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield did was wait some months and then submitted the Possession claim to the court. Moreover, failed to comply with District Judge Das court order dated 09/08/2018.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield acting solicitors wrote to my son’s solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors the letter was dated 21/10/2019. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield had instructed their acting solicitors to discontinue the claim on the basis that each party bears their own costs. In addition, that could my son’s acting solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors contact them as soon as possible so a suitable worded consent order maybe agreed.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield would know my son is unwell and that someone should have been placed to act in his best interest, this is listed on court orders, from

2

516,

the court. This was due to happen on the 12thDecember 2019 hearing which Deputy District Judge Brown has now vacated.

This is not the first time The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield has submitted a draft court order, which was not agreed. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield have had my son in the County Court at Edmonton three times different Claim Numbers for the same said alleged allegations, since 2017. The last case was dismissed, and The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield are in breach of that court order. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield was meant to have moved my son yet have not; District Judge Das made this court order on the 09/08/2018.

My son has had no input regarding this court order dated 09th December 2019 that has been made, under a consent order via Deputy District Judge Brown.

Therefore, I am asking for the court order dated the 09thDecember 2019 is Set Aside in Claim Number FOOED222.

The court will have on file I Miss Lorraine Cordell has been trying to deal with cases for my son Mr Simon Cordell and this will be on record at the court. Since legal Aid has been withdrawn and The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield know this fact I have been left to write this letter and try to deal with this serious matter.

I would also request to see the complete file on demand in Claim Number FOOED222 and this is my demand. I will attend the court as soon as a date is set to see the complete case file. This to be as soon as possible as I believe this cannot wait. In addition, we have not agreed to anything that The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield have submitted to the court, and I would like this addressed.

I wait to hear from you regarding this most serious matter.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Mr. Simon Cordell

3

517,

518,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

79.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_FW RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 519,520,521,522

 

 

79.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

79. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_FW RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 519,520,521,522

--

519,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:46

To: Jill.bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Ronak Ahmed

Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal

Ronak Ahmed

Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

520,

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal

Ronak Ahmed

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto:Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

521,

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5th December 2019, and Deputy

522,

District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:          

80. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_FW RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 523,524,525,526

 

 80.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue: 

80. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_FW RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 523,524,525,526

--

523,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:44

To: Jill.bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Ronak Ahmed

Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: Kulwinder Johal

Ronak Ahmed

Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

524,

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal

Ronak Ahmed

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto:Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

525,

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

526,

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it?

As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

81.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 527,528,529,530,531,532

 

 81.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

81. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 527,528,529,530,531,532

--

527,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 00:00

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell

Attachments: Claim Number FOOED222 11-12-2019.pdf

20191211184453485.pdf

Importance: High

To Whom It May Concern:

Please see attached letter of complaint and a court order dated the 06/12/2019 regarding claim number FOOED222.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

528,

RE: FOOED222 Enfield Council V Simon Cordell->Claim Number FOOED222 11-12-2019.pdf

· Complaint: Fraudulent Consent Order in Claim Number FOOED222:

· 11th December 2019

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this email after I got a call from my son’s Mr Simon Cordell’s solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors at around 17:20 hours on the 11thDecember 2019. The solicitors are no longer acting due to legal aid being removed, which The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield are already aware of due to being told via my son’s solicitors.

I was informed that they had received a Court order today the 11th December 2019 regarding the hearing, which was listed for 12th December 2019 at 2pm at the County Court at Edmonton, under Claim Number FOOED222.

It would seem that The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield has contacted the court via letter and a court order has been made on their behalf via Deputy District Judge Brown on the 06th December 2019. Please see attached Court Order.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield sent a Consent Order received by the Court on 5th December 2019, and this is how Deputy District Judge Brown made the court order on the 06th December 2019.

I am upset regarding this Court Order, It is my believe a Consent Order would need to be signed and agreed by all parties, in the Claim Number FOOED222, this has not happened therefore I believe it is a Fraudulent Consent Order that has been submitted to the court, which was never agreed to or signed.

I know my son Mr Simon Cordell also his solicitor Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors have not signed and agreed to any Consent Order for Claim Number FOOED222.

So how has, The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield sent a Consent Order to the court, which was received by the Court on 5th December 2019. Then a court order made from this Consent Order when only one party has signed it, no agreement made by the parties involved in

1

529,

this case. It is me believe it is the rule of law that all parties have to agree and sign a Consent Order for the court to be able to accept it.

Neither my son nor his solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors have seen this Consent Order so could the court please forward it to this email as soon as possible.

Also within the Court order dated the 09th December 2019, Deputy District Judge Brown has allowed the Claim Number FOOED222 to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore. There is no date set by the court by which time The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield would need to restore this case, so in fact no End date for this Claim Number FOOED222 it would seem it is an unlimited case with no time limited set by the court.

How can this be allowed so by no date being placed on the court order, The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield can wait five or Ten years or a lifetime and then decide to being this case back to court whenever they wish to do so.

This is not acceptable by any means, and would never have been agreed, I do not understand how a court could allow this.

My son is unwell which the court is aware, and to have this hanging over his head for the rest of his life I believe is unlawful and would make my son’s health worse, knowing whenever they want they can bring this case up again for the rest of his life.

District Judge Das warned The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield about bring a Possession claim on the 09/08/2018. Yet all The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield did was wait some months and then submitted the Possession claim to the court. Moreover, failed to comply with District Judge Das court order dated 09/08/2018.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield acting solicitors wrote to my son’s solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors the letter was dated 21/10/2019. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield had instructed there acting solicitors to discontinue the claim on the basis that each party bears their own costs. In addition, that could my son’s acting solicitors Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors contact them as soon as possible so a suitable worded consent order maybe agreed.

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield would know my son is unwell and that someone should have been placed to act in his best interest, this is listed on court orders, from

2

530,

the court. This was due to happen on the 12thDecember 2019 hearing which Deputy District Judge Brown has now vacated.

This is not the first time The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield has submitted a draft court order, which was not agreed. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield have had my son in the County Court at Edmonton three times different Claim Numbers for the same said alleged allegations, since 2017. The last case was dismissed, and The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield are in breach of that court order. The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield was meant to have moved my son yet have not; District Judge Das made this court order on the 09/08/2018.

My son has had no input regarding this court order dated 09th December 2019 that has been made, under a consent order via Deputy District Judge Brown.

Therefore, I am asking for the court order dated the 09thDecember 2019 is Set Aside in Claim Number FOOED222.

The court will have on file I Miss Lorraine Cordell has been trying to deal with cases for my son Mr Simon Cordell and this will be on record at the court. Since legal Aid has been withdrawn and The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield know this fact, I have been left to write this letter and try to deal with this serious matter.

I would also request to see the complete file on demand in Claim Number FOOED222 and this is my demand. I will attend the court as soon as a date is set to see the complete case file. This to be as soon as possible as I believe this cannot wait. In addition, we have not agreed to anything that The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield have submitted to the court, and I would like this addressed.

I wait to hear from you regarding this most serious matter.

Regards

Miss Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Mr. Simon Cordell

3

531,

532,

 

 

 

 

82.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 533,534,535

 

82.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

82. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 533,534,535

--

533,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Attachments: Simon-Cordell-authority-Letter-Enfield-Council-11-12-2019.pdf

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards Lorraine Cordell

534,

RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority-Simon_Cordell_authority-Letter-Enfield-Council-11-12-2019.pdf

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 11/12/2019

RE: Letter of Authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell dated 11/12/2019

To whom it may concern:

I Mr Simon Paul Cordell of 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield EN3 7JQ am writing this letter to confirm I give authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell to speak or send any data and for my mother to receive any information requested from Enfield Council.

My authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell is already on Enfield Council systems and I do not understand why it needs to be resent so many times.

I have the right to withdraw my authority for my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell at any time I wish to do so.

Contact can be made to my mother Miss Lorraine Cordell via the information below and you may speak to her or send data what is being asked for on my behalf.

Phone: 07807

Email: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Letter: 23 Byron Terrace, Edmonton, London N9 7DG

1

535,

Regards

Simon Cordell

2

 

 

 

 

 

83.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 536,537,538

 

 83.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

83. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Author_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 536,537,538

--

536,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto: Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed

537,

without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

538,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

84.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 539,540,541,542,543

 

 84.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

84. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 539,540,541,542,543

--

539,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 20:11

To: 'Jill.bayley@enfield.gov.uk'; 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal and Jill Bayley

I do not understand why I am being ignored well this is what it feels like and I can only ask why.

When I spoke to Kulwinder Johal today on the phone, she told me that it was the court that had made an error and it was not a consent order that was sent to the court, so the Judge that made the order misread the letter Kulwinder Johal had sent the court and mistakenly approved it as a consent order.

So can I ask if there is nothing being hidden in the letter that was sent to the court why is Kulwinder Johal withholding it, if it was the court that made an error there is nothing to hide and it should be able to be corrected via the court?

It would seem only Kulwinder Johal and the court has seen a letter that the Judge deemed as a consent order,

Do you not feel we have the right to see the letter, if not can you please explain why? Also why would it have not been sent to the solicitors that were acting for my son before Legal Aid was withdrawn, why was it only to the court?

My son Mr Simon Cordell no longer has a solicitor acting for him as legal aid was withdraw, which you will be aware of. I have also stated this in emails that have been sent today, but I still feel I am being ignored, and the only reason I can think of why I am being ignored is something is written in the letter that has been sent to the court that you don’t want us to see, or why would you withhold it?

Can this issue please be addressed as a matter of urgency and a copy of the letter sent to the court forwarded via this email?

I do feel we have a right to see what was written to the court for them to make such an order and word it the way it has been, moreover listed your letter as Consent Order approved.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:46

To: 'Jill.bayley@enfield.gov.uk'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

540,

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

541,

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@,tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto:Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

542,

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it?

As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

543,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

85.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 544,545,546,547

 

85.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

85. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_

12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

12/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 544,545,546,547

--

544,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr

545,

Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto:Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

546,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

 Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

547,

Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

86.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

86. 1. 1

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk_

12.13.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

13/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 548,549,550,551,552,553,554

 

86.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

86. 1. 1

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk_

12.13.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

13/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 548,549,550,551,552,553,554

--

548,

From: Jill Bayley <Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 13 December 2019 15:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Attachments: 1221485 - Letter to court and draft Court Order.pdf

Dear Madam,

Further to your emails, please find attached the letter sent to the court by Ms Johal as you request. This letter was sent to Mr Cordell's solicitors, but they have since stopped acting for him.

Yours faithfully

Jill Bayley

Jill Bayley

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

Please note my new telephone number 020 8132 1221

Telephone: 020 8132 1221

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this e-mail is given on behalf of the Director of Law and Governance; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:44

To: Jill Bayley

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

549,

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto:lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

550,

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal [mailto:Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

551,

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

552,

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

553,

554,

 

 

 

 

87.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

87. 1. 1 

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk_

12.18.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 555,556,557,558,559,560,561

 

 87.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

87. 1. 1 

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk_

12.18.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 555,556,557,558,559,560,561

--

555,

From: Jill Bayley <Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 18 December 2019 16:07

To: Ronak Ahmed; Lorraine Cordell; Sean Shanmuganathan

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Dear Mr Ahmed,

Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted.

Yours sincerely Jill Bayley Jill Bayley

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

Please note my new telephone number 020 8132 1221

Telephone: 020 8132 1221

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this e-mail is given on behalf of the Director of Law and Governance; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without authorisation.

From: Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sent: 18 December 2019 15:24

To: Jill Bayley

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Good afternoon

It is correct to say that we no longer are on record as acting for the Defendant as Legal Aid has been terminated. However, we can confirm receipt of the letter dated 4 December 2019 from the Claimants to the Court requesting the December hearing be vacated. It does appear that the most recent sealed court order was incorrect when it referred to a "consent order” when it should have referred to the draft order that was attached. No such consent order was agreed given the specific and direct instructions from the Defendant, Mr Cordell. It appears that the court made an order in accordance with the draft order provided by the claimant.

It is also important to note that the Claim is not struck out and the Claimant can apply for it to be reinstated. Therefore the Claim is live but with no hearing date listed so if there are any further allegations then the case is likely to be restored.

If Mr Cordell is unhappy about the Court making any such order, he can apply using Form N244 to set it aside.

I am not proposing to engage in further debate on this matter given we are not getting paid for our continued

556,

involvement.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Jill Bayley [mailto: Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 13 December 2019 15:41

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Dear Madam,

Further to your emails, please find attached the letter sent to the court by Ms Johal as you request. This letter was sent to Mr Cordell's solicitors, but they have since stopped acting for him.

Yours faithfully

Jill Bayley

Jill Bayley

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

Please note my new telephone number 020 8132 1221

Telephone: 020 8132 1221

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this e-mail is given on behalf of the Director of Law and Governance; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:44

To: Jill Bayley

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

557,

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

558,

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell I~mailto:lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal mailto: Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

559,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

560,

Lorraine Cordell

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or acting in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

561,

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

88.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.18.2019_Read RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 562

 

88.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

88. 1. 1

Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk_

12.18.2019_Read RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 562

--

562,

From: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 18 December 2019 07:48

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Read: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

[Campaign] <https://enfield-council.msgfocus.eom/k/Enfield-Council/sign up>

www.enfield.gov.uk<http://www.enfield.gov.uk>

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

89.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_

12.18.2019_Re RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 563,564,565,566,567,568,569,570

 

89.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

89. 1. 1

Ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_

12.18.2019_Re RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 563,564,565,566,567,568,569,570

--

563,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 18 December 2019 16:36

To: Lorraine Cordell; Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: Re: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Attachments: image001.jpg

Dear Ms Cordell

You will need to call the office and ask them. I am not sure what difference that makes. The most important issue is that the case is still live.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M Solicitor (Consultant)

Tel +44 (0) 20 8889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

1 St Michaels Terrace

London

N22 7SJ

DX 34704 WOOD GREEN 2

Tel +44 (0)20 8889 3319

Fax +44 (0)20 8881 6089 www.tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership under the no.560748. A list of the members' names is open to inspection at the registered office.

VAT REG No: 221 8088 78

SRA No: 560748

564,

Contracted with the Legal Aid Agency

We do not accept service of documents or other process by e-mail Email us at lawmakers@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

This message may contain privileged information and is only intended to be received by the person to whom it is addressed.

If you are not the intended recipient, please contact us as soon as possible.

Partners - Mukesh Badhan - D Shanmuganathan - Vasoulla Constantinou

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 4:31:40 PM

To: Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Ronak Ahmed

May I ask on what date your office got the letter dated the 04th December 2019 from the Claimants, was it sent via post or email?

Did your office have the letter before the court made the order or after? As we knew nothing about this letter until the 11th December 2019, when Sean made a call to me, and sent the court order via my email which he got in the office on the 11th December 2019 from the court.

You state in your reply email below you confirm receipt of the letter dated 4th December 2019 from the Claimants but have not confirmed what date you received it.

It does seem it was delivered to the court very fast; the letter is dated the 04th December 2019, the court got the letter on the 05th December 2019, and the court made there ruling on the 06th December 2019.

I await your reply.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

565,

From: Ronak Ahmed [mailto:ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk]

Sent: 18 December 2019 15:24

To: Jill Bayley; Lorraine Cordell; Sean Shanmuganathan

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Good afternoon

It is correct to say that we no longer are on record as acting for the Defendant as Legal Aid has been terminated. However, we can confirm receipt of the letter dated 4 December 2019 from the Claimants to the Court requesting the December hearing be vacated. It does appear that the most recent sealed court order was incorrect when it referred to a "consent order” when it should have referred to the draft order that was attached. No such consent order was agreed given the specific and direct instructions from the Defendant, Mr Cordell. It appears that the court made an order in accordance with the draft order provided by the claimant.

It is also important to note that the Claim is not struck out and the Claimant can apply for it to be reinstated. Therefore the Claim is live but with no hearing date listed so if there are any further allegations then the case is likely to be restored.

If Mr Cordell is unhappy about the Court making any such order, he can apply using Form N244 to set it aside.

I am not proposing to engage in further debate on this matter given we are not getting paid for our continued involvement.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Jill Bayley [mailto:Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 13 December 2019 15:41

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>; Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>; Sean Shanmuganathan <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Cc: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Madam,

Further to your emails, please find attached the letter sent to the court by Ms Johal as you request. This letter was sent to Mr Cordell's solicitors, but they have since stopped acting for him.

Yours faithfully

Jill Bayley

Jill Bayley

566,

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

Please note my new telephone number 020 8132 1221

Telephone: 020 8132 1221

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this e-mail is given on behalf of the Director of Law and Governance; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:44

To: Jill Bayley <Jill.Bavlev@enfield.gov.uk>: 'Ronak Ahmed' <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>: 'Sean Shanmuganathan' <sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

567,

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far

568,

from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal mailto: Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell  ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

569,

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

570,

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

90.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

90. 1. 1

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_

12.18.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 571,572,573,574,575,576

 

90.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

90. 1. 1

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk_

12.18.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222_001

18/12/2019

/ Page Numbers: 571,572,573,574,575,576

--

571,

From: Ronak Ahmed <ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk>

Sent: 18 December 2019 15:24

To: Jill Bayley; Lorraine Cordell; Sean Shanmuganathan

Cc: Kulwinder Johal

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Good afternoon

It is correct to say that we no longer are on record as acting for the Defendant as Legal Aid has been terminated. However, we can confirm receipt of the letter dated 4 December 2019 from the Claimants to the Court requesting the December hearing be vacated. It does appear that the most recent sealed court order was incorrect when it referred to a "consent order” when it should have referred to the draft order that was attached. No such consent order was agreed given the specific and direct instructions from the Defendant, Mr Cordell. It appears that the court made an order in accordance with the draft order provided by the claimant.

It is also important to note that the Claim is not struck out and the Claimant can apply for it to be reinstated. Therefore the Claim is live but with no hearing date listed so if there are any further allegations then the case is likely to be restored.

If Mr Cordell is unhappy about the Court making any such order, he can apply using Form N244 to set it aside.

I am not proposing to engage in further debate on this matter given we are not getting paid for our continued involvement.

Kind regards

Mr. Ronak Ahmed LL. B, LL.M

Solicitor (Consultant)

Direct Dial 07515 121781

Office  0208 889 3319

Email ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

From: Jill Bayley [mailto:Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 13 December 2019 15:41

To: Lorraine Cordell

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Cc: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Madam,

Further to your emails, please find attached the letter sent to the court by Ms Johal as you request. This letter was sent to Mr Cordell's solicitors, but they have since stopped acting for him.

Yours faithfully

Jill Bayley

Jill Bayley

Principal Lawyer, Safeguarding and Corporate Teams

572,

Legal Services, Enfield Council Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

Please note my new telephone number 020 8132 1221

Telephone: 020 8132 1221

Fax: 020 8379 6492

Mobile: 07930 858193

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this e-mail is given on behalf of the Director of Law and Governance; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 13:44

To: Jill Bayley

Jill.Bayley@enfield.gov.uk

Ronak Ahmed

ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Sean Shanmuganathan

sean@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: FW: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Jill Bayley

I have been given your email regarding an issue I have, I believe you are the manager of Kulwinder Johal, Kulwinder Johal is dealing with a case for Enfield Council which relates to my son Mr Simon Cordell.

It would seem a letter which was deemed by the court and Judge as a consent order was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal. I have requested that the letter be sent to me via this email as we have never seen it.

I do have Authority to address things for my son Simon Cordell, but it would seem I am being ignored, which my request to be sent the letter that was sent to the court by Kulwinder Johal.

Please see below a list of emails sent which there has only been one reply, with all the information for the case.

Could you please address this matter as a matter of urgency?

I look forward to your reply to this matter.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 11:44

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell

Claim Number: FOOED222

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

573,

I know you have read the below email so cannot understand why you have not replied and sent over the letter sent to the court which they received on the 05/12/2019 and deemed it to be a consent order.

I have just made a call to Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors who are no longer dealing with this case as legal aid was withdrawn which you will be aware of.

Mr Ahmed is on leave so I have asked Sean Shanmuganathan to call me back, as he is the one who called me last night to explain regarding the court order which was received in there office on the 11/12/2019 which he forwarded me the court order over via my email last night.

I do not understand why you are not sending me the letter, which was sent to the court for this court order to be made up.

Could you please forward me the letter sent to the court. You did ask me on the phone call we had this morning you would need an Authority letter which you have had so there is no reason the letter cannot be sent to me, as you have had what you asked for.

In addition, can you please forward it to Sean Shanmuganathan sean@tvrerroxburgh.co.uk as he does know about my son's case and the letter can then be added to their file, as Mr Ahmed is on leave, he will not be able to deal with this until his return. I have CC in both Mr Ahmed and Sean Shanmuganathan all the emails.

Could this matter please be addressed as a matter of urgency?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 10:10

To: 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Kulwinder Johal

As you will already be aware Legal Aid funding has been withdrawn from this case, as you stated in your in your letter dated the 21/10/2019 to Mr Ahmed, you had been instructed to discontinue the claim from your clients Enfield Council, so Mr Ahmed is no longer dealing with this matter.

You have had the letter of Authority, which you asked for on the phone today and received this, which has been confirmed in your below email. However, there has always been Authority on Enfield Councils systems for me to address matters for my son, Mr Simon Cordell.

I would like to see the letter that that has been sent to the court which the court received on the 05/12/2019, which the court has deemed as a consent order for claim number FOOED222. No consent order has been agreed or signed, so I cannot understand how Edmonton Country Court, more so a judge has deemed you letter as a consent order, which is stated in the court order dated 06/12/2019.

Also there is a large issue your client Enfield Council instructed you for this claim to be discontinue, I will state the court order is far

574,

from being discontinue as you have it would seem instructed the court for it to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore this is far from what your clients asked to be done on this case.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

From: Kulwinder Johal mailto: Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:41

To: Lorraine Cordell; ronak@tyrerroxburgh.co.uk

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Dear Ms Cordell and Mr Ahmed,

Further to Ms Cordell's emails this morning (see below) I am writing to refer the matter to Mr Ahmed, who will advise you. I have included Mr Ahmed into this email for completeness.

Mr Ahmed - I trust that you will advise Ms Cordell.

Yours sincerely,

Kulwinder Johal

Litigation Lawyer |Corporate Team | Legal Services On behalf of the Director of Law and Governance

PO Box 50, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield EN1 3XA

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities.

Legal advice in this email is given on behalf of the Assistant Director of Legal Services; it is subject to legal professional privilege and should not be disclosed without expressed prior authorisation.

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Sent: 12 December 2019 09:12

To: Kulwinder Johal <Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222 Authority

Importance: High

Dear Kulwinder Johal

Please see attached letter of Authority, could you please send me over the letters, which have been sent to the court.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

575,

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 11 December 2019 23:41

To: 'Kulwinder.Johal@enfield.gov.uk'

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222

Dear Kulwinder Johal

I am writing this email with regard to a telephone call that I received tonight from my son Mr Simon Cordell solicitor, Tyrer Roxburgh Solicitors.

I was forwarded a court order dated the 09/12/2019 from Edmonton Country Court, heard on the 06/12/2019.

It would seem that Edmonton Country Court received a consent order at the court on the 5 th December 2019, and Deputy District Judge Brown made a court order on the 06/12/2019.

Can you please forward this consent order over via this email ASAP as we have never seen it yet alone agreed to it or signed it? As you will be aware, no consent order has been agreed upon or signed, so how has the court been sent a consent order by you?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

576,

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Headers

2020

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_01.02.2020_

Auto reply

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 1,2,3

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.1

enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk_01.02.2020_

Auto reply

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 1,2,3

--

1,

From: Edmonton County, Enquiries <enquiries.edmonton.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 January 2020 10:55

To: Lorraine Cordell

Subject: Auto reply

** IMPORTANT NOTICE ON EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS **

Thank you for your email, which has been received by the court. Depending on the nature of your email you may receive a response via email or post.

What documents can be sent by email?

You can send all letters and documents relevant to the case including adoption cases. However, due to the sensitive nature of adoption work the court will only send emails to secure email accounts. If a hard copy of a document has been filed at court by DX or Post, an electronic copy should not be sent. As yet please note that court bundles are not part of this process and will not be printed.

For more information regarding e-mails please go to the following http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/email-guidance What is a secure email account?

An email account is considered secure when security measures are in place to make sure the data in the email can’t be accessed by users without the relevant approval. Any account that ends in the following is considered secured: gsi, pnn, gsx, gcsx, gse, cjsm, and nhs.net.

What emails will HMCTS accept?

To make sure we operate this service as efficiently and effectively as possible there are exemptions.

All Civil and Family process, applications and documents will be accepted by email as long as when the entire email is printed out it is not more than 50 pages. This should include the email, all attachments (including any documents embedded in another) and enough copies to serve on required parties.

Please note that:

56.  A page is one side, so 50 pages equals 25 pieces of paper printed on both sides.

57.  Do not use more than one email to take any step in a case which requires a document or documents to be filed.

DOCUMENTS FOR HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH

CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PD, 5B.2. FAMILY PROCEDURE RULE PD 5B

You have received an order to attend court for a hearing.

It would greatly assist the court staff if you could ensure documents you file into court have a hearing date endorsed on the covering letter, paperwork, or email.

This will then enable the court staff to identify the document is placed on file in readiness for the hearing.

Please note, if the court is unaware of the pending hearing, when you file your documents, this may result in the document not reaching the court file in time for the hearing.

Can processes that carry a fee be sent by email?

In both Civil and Family cases court processes that carry a fee can also be received by email and processed by court staff. However the same conditions as above must apply and in addition the party issuing the process must either quote a Fee Account number, or the party who wants to pay has a valid credit or debit card. If you wish to pay using this method, please say this on the

2,

email and include a contact number for the Court to contact you to take payment.

What is Fee Account?

This is a Direct Debit function that is quick, safe and easy to use. It is available for solicitors and large organisations. Once you have set up an account all you need is to provide your fee account number within the body of the email. The fee will then be deducted from your account. For more information and to apply for Fee Account please visit www.justice.gov.uk/courts/fees/payment-by-account.

Any document submitted that breaches any of the above terms will remain unprocessed. This is in line with Court Practice Directions 5BPD.1 - 5BPD.9.3.

When you email the court the subject line of your mail must contain (in the following order): -

58.  The claim numbers

59.  The title of the claim (abbreviated if necessary) **

60.  The subject matter (e.g. defence)

61.  If relating to a hearing the date and time of hearing in bold black

62.  The judge’s name, where the correspondence/document is for their attention

**If your email is in relation to a family matter, please refer to the initials only.

Your message should also contain the name, telephone number and email address of the sender. Correspondence and documents may be sent as either text or attachments. Where there is a practice form, it must be sent in that form by attachment. The complete email (including any attachment(s)) must not exceed 10Mb.

The rest of this automated message provides information that customers often find useful.

Edmonton County Court

The public counter services are no longer available at this court.

Urgent applications and processes that need to be dealt with in person will be through an appointment only system. Users should contact the court on 0208 8846510 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday to make an appointment.

The main telephone number for Civil and Family enquiries is 0208 884 6500 Gold fax 0870 3240314

Our address is The County Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London, N18 2TN DX 136686 Edmonton 3

The court building is open between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm Monday to Friday.

We have a secure drop box located in reception for personal deliveries to the court, which is opened once a day at 9.00 am Monday to Friday.

Website links

Information on Court forms and fees can be also be obtained from www.justice.gov.uk Issuing a claim for Money or Possession of Property - MCOL & PCOL

3,

If you would like to issue a claim for money or property you can do so 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by visiting: www.moneydaim.gov.uk or www.possessionclaim.gov.uk.You will save money by issuing a claim for possession of property or a money claim online rather than sending it to the court.

Legal Advice

If you are uncertain how to proceed, the Civil Procedure Rules available on the Ministry of Justice website - http://www.justice.gov.uk - provide details. On many occasions it is best for people to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor, legal executive, legal advice agency or Citizens Advice Bureau. You can also contact Civil Legal Advice on 0845 345 4 345 or via their website.

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

This e-mail and any attachments is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage, or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded, and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.2

replies@optic.justice.gov.uk_01.02.2020_Complaint (ref 1560887)

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 4,5       

 

2.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.2

replies@optic.justice.gov.uk_01.02.2020_Complaint (ref 1560887)

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 4,5

--

4,

From: HM Courts and Tribunals Service <replies@optic.justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 02 January 2020 09:02

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Complaint (ref: 1560887)

Dear Miss Cordell

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

-v-

SIMON CORDELL

Thank you for your email of 12 December 2019. I am sorry you have had cause to complain about the service you have received from the Court. It is my role in accordance with HMCTS complaints procedure to investigate your complaint.

I have fully investigated the matter. The order of 6 December 2019 has been incorrectly drawn. The claimant had sent to the Court a draft order which was referred to a Judge and approved. I have sent by Royal Mail a copy of the amended order for your records.

Your request to view the Court file was referred to a Judge who has made the following comments:

'Defendant is entitled only to copies of orders and statements of cash, plus other documents as listed in Civil Procedure Rules Practise Direction 5.A 4.2A (page 264 of 2019 Green Book).'

If you ask the court to make copies of documents or provide a copy of a document already provided there will be a Court fee applicable. Please refer to the EX 50 Civil and Family Court Fees booklet for further information.

Please highlight the documents you require from the Court file and we will inform you of the Court fee due.

Please accept my apologies for the administrative error and for any inconvenience this has caused. I hope that this is a satisfactory conclusion to your complaint.

If you are unhappy with my reply, you are entitled to escalate your complaint and request a review by writing to Ms J Billyack, Operations Manager, at The Civil and Family Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London N18 2TN.

Yours sincerely,

Mr A Mustafa Customer Services

Edmonton County, HM Courts and Tribunals Service | HMCTS | 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, N18 2TN

5,

Phone: 0208 884 6500

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.3

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.02.2020_FW Complaint (ref 1560887)

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 6,7,8,9

 

3.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.3

lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_01.02.2020_FW Complaint (ref 1560887)

02/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 6,7,8,9

--

6,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 02 January 2020 10:55

To: 'Edmonton County, Enquiries'

Subject: FW: Complaint (ref: 1560887)

Attachments: LB Enfield 21 Oct 2019 (2).pdf

Importance: High

Please see below email

From: Lorraine Cordell [mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk]

Sent: 02 January 2020 10:44

To: 'HM Courts and Tribunals Service'

Subject: RE: Complaint (ref: 1560887)

Importance: High

Dear Mr, A Mustafa

Thank you for the below reply regarding the complaint submitted.

I do feel some points have not been addressed, which I will list within this email.

The draft order, which the claimant had drawn up for the court to seal, was incorrect, where is stated the (The claim be adjourned generally with liberty to restore)

The letter my son's acting solicitors received from the claimant regarding the case was stated they had been instructed to discontinue the claim, not what the draft order sent to the court stated, the claim be adjourned generally with liberty to restore.

I will enclose a full copy of the letter sent by the claimant acting solicitors, to my son's solicitors, which was then forwarded to my son and me.

It would see that the claimant waited for legal aid to be removed from my son's acting solicitors and then drafted a court order that was completely different from what had been stated in their letter. Now the claimant's case is a live case for however long they want it to be, and not discontinued they had stated in their letter. Unless the Judge has changed that within the amended order that you have sent in the royal mail to me.

I did ask in my complaint for the order to be set aside, as I do not feel that the claimant's case should be allowed to stay a live case for however long they want with no end date attached to the court order.

Can you please update me regarding this issue as soon as possible if the wording on the court order is still with (The claim be adjourned generally with liberty to restore)

Please see attached letter.

Case Ref: FOOED222

Regards

7,

Lorraine Cordell

From: HM Courts and Tribunals Service

mailto: replies@optic.justice.gov.uk

Sent: 02 January 2020 09:02

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Complaint (ref: 1560887)

Dear Miss Cordell

THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

-v-

SIMON CORDELL

Thank you for your email of 12 December 2019. I am sorry you have had cause to complain about the service you have received from the Court. It is my role in accordance with HMCTS complaints procedure to investigate your complaint.

I have fully investigated the matter. The order of 6 December 2019 has been incorrectly drawn. The claimant had sent to the Court a draft order which was referred to a Judge and approved. I have sent by Royal Mail a copy of the amended order for your records.

Your request to view the Court file was referred to a Judge who has made the following comments:

'Defendant is entitled only to copies of orders and statements of his case plus other documents as listed in Civil Procedure Rules Practise Direction 5.A 4.2A (page 264 of 2019 Green Book).'

If you ask the court to make copies of documents or provide a copy of a document already provided there will be a Court fee applicable. Please refer to the EX 50 Civil and Family Court Fees booklet for further information.

Please highlight the documents you require from the Court file and we will inform you of the Court fee due.

Please accept my apologies for the administrative error and for any inconvenience this has caused. I hope that this is a satisfactory conclusion to your complaint.

If you are unhappy with my reply, you are entitled to escalate your complaint and request a review by writing to Ms J Billyack, Operations Manager, at The Civil and Family Court at Edmonton, 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, London N18 2TN.

Yours sincerely

8,

Mr A Mustafa Customer Services

Edmonton County, HM Courts and Tribunals Service | HMCTS | 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, N18 2TN Phone: 0208 884 6500

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

9,

 

 

 

 

4.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.4

replies@optic.justice.gov.uk_01.07.2020_Complaint (ref 1560887)

07/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 10,11,12

 

4.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.4

replies@optic.justice.gov.uk_01.07.2020_Complaint (ref 1560887)

07/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 10,11,12

--

10,

From: HM Courts and Tribunals Service <replies@optic.justice.gov.uk>

Sent: 07 January 2020 13:30

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Complaint (ref: 1560887)

Attachments: Letter.doc

Dear Miss Cordell

Please find attached the response to your request for review.

Kind regards

Miss L Frost Team Leader

Edmonton County, HM Courts and Tribunals Service | HMCTS | 59 Fore Street, Edmonton, N18 2TN

Phone: 0208 884 6500

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

11,

Complaint (ref: 1560887)->Letter.doc

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

Lorraine Cordell on behalf of Simon Cordell

7 January 2020

Dear Miss Cordell

Edmonton County Court

59 Fore Street Upper Edmonton London N182TN

DX 136686 Edmonton 3

020 8884 6500

Fax 020 8803 0564

enquiries@edmonton.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk

Minicom VII 0191 478 1476 (Helpline for the deaf and hard of hearing)

www.iustice.qov.uk

Our ref: OPTIC 1560887

Case Number F00ED222

F00ED222 L B ENFIELD - V - CORDELL

Thank you for your email received via resolver, I am sorry to hear that you remain dissatisfied with the service you have received from the court in relation to this case.

I should explain that this letter represents the second stage of the complaints process.

If you are not satisfied with my reply, you can write to HMCTS Correspondence and Customer Service Team for review.

I have now undertaken a review of your case, and all correspondence relating to your complaint on the information held by The Civil and Family Court at Edmonton and concluded no administrative error was made by the court staff at Edmonton County Court in the handling of your case.

I am unable to offer you any payment of costs in the matter as explained below: -

The circumstances under which HMCTS can offer financial compensation. It should first be established that there has been a maladministration by court staff.

Maladministration

Meaning generally that an error has been made in the performance of our administrative duties which has resulted in a loss.

I note that you feel my colleague’s Mr Mustafa’s email dated 2 January 2020 still did not address your concerns. It would also seem you are not happy with the way the District Judge has dealt with your case. Though you may feel unhappy with the conduct of the judge’s decision, you cannot use HMCTS complaints procedure to complain on the handling of a case by a Judge or to challenge a Judicial Decision.

12,

I have nothing further to add to Mr Mustafa’s letter. As Operation Manager, I am unable to comment or intervene in matters that have been subject to judicial decision. The judiciary are independent, and it is important that I do nothing to undermine this.

Please be assured that your comments are appreciated. We understand the importance of excellent customer service and your views are invaluable in helping us to continue to improve the service we provide.

Once again, I apologise for the inconvenience you have experienced and trust that further dealings you may have with The Civil and Family Court at Edmonton will be of a higher standard and without delay.

J Billyack

Operations Manager

In the Civil and Family Court at Barnet, Edmonton, and Willesden.

If you are not satisfied with my reply, you can write to: -

HMCTS Customer Service Team, 6th Floor, 102 Petty France, and London SW19 9AJ or email customerinvestigations@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk.

The team will respond within 15 working days.

Judicial decision

We only handle the administration for courts and tribunals. We are always impartial, and we do not have any influence over a Judge’s decision. We cannot comment or review their decision for you

Appeal Judge’s decision

If you are complaining about the conduct of the judiciary you can write to Judicial Conduct Investigation Office.

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

K and Me-03-02-2020 15-09

03/02/2020

/ Page Numbers: 13,14,15

 

 5.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

K and Me-03-02-2020 15-09

03/02/2020

/ Page Numbers: 13,14,15

--

13,

 

14,

 

15,

 

 

 

 

 

6.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.

5 Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk_02.19.2020_FW Simon Cordell Update

19/02/2020

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18,19,20,21,22

 

 

 6.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1.

5 Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk_02.19.2020_FW Simon Cordell Update

19/02/2020

/ Page Numbers: 16,17,18,19,20,21,22

--

16,

From: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk

Sent: 19 February 2020 22:27

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: FW: Simon Cordell Update

Hi Lorraine,

Please see the below email which sent to you on the 30/12/2019 with the decision regarding SIMONS case.

Many thanks,

PC Alex DAVIS 2669NA ERT C

Great Cambridge Industrial Estate Patrol Base (YB)

Units 17 to 19 Lincoln Road Enfield London EN1 1SH Radio no: 480504

From: Davis Alex H - NA-CU

Sent: 30 December 2019 10:13

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Update

Hi Lorraine,

A decision has been made regarding Simon and no further action will be taken.

I appreciate yours and Simons patience with regards to the investigation.

Much appreciated,

PC Alex DAVIS 2669NA ERT C

Great Cambridge Industrial Estate Patrol Base (YB)

Units 17 to 19 Lincoln Road Enfield London EN1 1SH PR: 480504

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 28 December 2019 10:00

To: Davis Alex H - NA-CU <Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Update

Dear Alexander Davis

I am writing this email to see if there are any updates, I did send an email on the 23/12/2019 and have not have a reply. Could you please let me have an update on the case for my son Simon Cordell, I know the last time you emailed me on the 29/09/2019 you stated you was looking at an NFA outcome with your supervisor, but have had no update since this date.

17,

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 23 December 2019 12:41

To: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Dear Alexander Davis

I was wondering if there was any update the last time, I heard you stated you were looking at an NFA outcome this was on the 29/09/2019, I have not heard anything since this. Could you please give me an update as to what is going on now with this case please has it been NFA?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk

mailto: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk 

Sent: 29 September 2019 10:57

To: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Hi Lorraine,

Apologies firstly for the delayed response.

The case is still awaiting a decision however, I am in discussion with my supervisor regarding a no further action outcome. As soon as I have any updates, I will be sure to let you know.

Kind regards,

PC Alex DAVIS 2669NA ERT C

Great Cambridge Industrial Estate Patrol Base (YB)

Units 17 to 19 Lincoln Road Enfield London EN1 1SH Radio no: 480504

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 19 September 2019 11:46

To: Davis Alex H - NA-CU <Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Dear Alexander Davis

I was wondering if there are any updates regarding my son Simon Cordell Can you let me have a full update please

18,

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk mailto:Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk

Sent: 28 June 2019 02:37

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Hi Lorraine,

The case papers are created and managed on an electronic online system. For some reason when this was sent to the CPS the case papers have not all correctly sent over. The reason it has taken a little while is because I have not had a chance to properly review the papers until now due to the daily demand of answering 999 calls and investigating numerous other crimes.

I apologise for any inconvenience caused and I appreciate yours and Simons cooperation. I am on annual leave until 12/07/2019 and will be in touch as soon as I have any case updates.

Kind regards,

PC Alex DAVIS 2669NA ERT C

Great Cambridge Industrial Estate Patrol Base (YB)

Units 17 to 19 Lincoln Road Enfield London EN1 1SH PR: 480504

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk

Sent: 25 June 2019 09:36

To: Davis Alex H - NA-CU <Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Dear PC Alex DAVIS

I am just replying to your below email as something is worrying me.

When my son was arrested on the 26/05/2019 he was then interviewed in the early hours of the 27/05/2019, at that point after interview the file was sent to the CPS for a decision, around 10:30 hours me and my son's solicitors attended again for a next interview for something else and when we asked for an update regarding the 1st interview we were told by PC Law that there was something wrong with the servers and that the CPS did not get the file to make the decision and that the file had to be sent over to the CPS via email due to the issue with the server and it was going to be done on that date.

We had the interview and as I was leaving I asked if a decision was going to be made in time due to the 24 hours nearly going to be ended, which I was told yes, but on the way home I got a call to come back to the police station due to my son being released on bail as it would have taken too long to get a decision and the time would have run out, again I was told the file would be sent to the CPS, and my son was released on a 28 day bail to return so yesterday when we came to the police station with Simon I was shocked when you called and said Simon was going to be released under investigation as the case needs to be sent back up to the CPS for a decision.

19,

May I ask at this point why the file has not been sent to the CPS already and a decision made?

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk mailto: Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk

Sent: 24 June 2019 14:47

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Hi Lorraine,

As discussed on the phone Simon is now released under investigation as the case needs to be sent back up to the CPS for a decision which means he is not required to attend the police station until requested by me once a decision has been made.

I want to thank you and Simon once again for your cooperation and patience.

Kind regards,

PC Alex DAVIS 2669NA ERT C

Great Cambridge Industrial Estate Patrol Base (YB)

Units 17 to 19 Lincoln Road Enfield London EN1 1SH PR: 480504

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 24 June 2019 10:45

To: Davis Alex H - NA-CU <Alexander.Davis2@met.police.uk>: Law Jeff A - NA-CU Jeff.Law2@met.police.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Dear PC Davis

I am writing this email as I have not heard from you regarding the bail to return today for my son Simon Cordell, When my son was released from the police station we was told by PS NICOLAOU and PC Law in custody my son would not need to return today, that if my son was charged he would get a letter before this date to go to court, or if it was NFA we would also be told before this date. I also asked which was confirmed I would be updated of the outcome via this email or a phone call.

Over the last days I have sent emails and PC Law did reply to me and told me that you was the officer in charge, and you would get back to me, I know you have been given the messages and she told me that she would pass them over to you, but I have had no replies I also know my son's solicitors have contracted you also getting no reply.

The police are well aware my son does not leave his home and finds it very hard to do so.

Could you please get back to me regarding this issue via this email or my phone number is 07807 333545 or could you contract

20,

Mr Cordell's solicitors and let them know the outcome, if my son is to be charged all we need to know is the court date that he will need to attend court, I do not see why my son would need to attend the police station to be told this which would cause him more stress.

Regards Lorraine Cordell

From: Lorraine Cordell mailto: lorraine32@bluevonder.co.ukl

Sent: 23 June 2019 09:07

To: p244590@met.pnn.police.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM Dear PC Davis

I am writing this email in regard to the bail to return for my son Mr. Simon Cordell on 24/06/2019 at 2:00 hours to wood Green Police station.

I know we spoke about me getting an update due to Simon mail issues, but I have not heard anything from you regarding the outcome of the bail to return, and I was expecting I would have known by now the outcome.

I am not sure if Simon will need to attend the police station on the 24/06/2019 as it was stated he will not need to attend and we would have the outcome before this date, and I would be contracted to be informed so I knew what was going on.

Could you please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this matter, you can email me on this email and let me know the information I need please.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

From: Jeff.Law2@met.police.uk

mailto: Jeff.Law2@met.police.uk

Sent: 23 June 2019 07:11

To: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Good morning Lorraine

The OIC in this case is pc Alex DAVIS and he will be in contact shortly

Kind regards

From: Lorraine Cordell

mailto: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Sent: 21 June 2019 16:47

To: Law Jeff A - NA-CU <Jeff.Law2@met.police.uk>

Subject: RE: Simon Cordell Bail to return 24-06-2019 at 2:00PM

Dear PC Law

I am writing this email in regard to the bail to return for my son Mr. Simon Cordell on 24/06/2019 at 2:00 hours to wood Green Police station.

I know we spoke about me getting an update due to Simon mail issues, but I have not heard anything from you regarding the outcome of the bail to return, and I was expecting I would have known by now the outcome.

21,

I am not sure if Simon will need to attend the police station on the 24/06/2019 as it was stated he will not need to attend, and we would have the outcome before this date.

Could you please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this matter, you can email me on this email, and I know you took my phone number also so should have this.

Regards

Lorraine Cordell

NOTICE - This email and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this email or in any attachment without the permission of the sender. Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law and any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of the MPS by email and no responsibility is accepted for unauthorised agreements reached with other personnel. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this email, its security and that of any attachments cannot be guaranteed.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this email or in any attachment without the permission of the sender. Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law and any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of the MPS by email and no responsibility is accepted for unauthorised agreements reached with other personnel. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this email, its security and that of any attachments cannot be guaranteed.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this email or in any attachment without the permission of the sender. Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law and any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of the MPS by email and no responsibility is accepted for unauthorised agreements reached with other personnel. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this email, its security and that of any attachments cannot be guaranteed.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Do not use, copy, or disclose the information contained in this email or in any attachment without the permission of the sender. Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) communication systems are monitored to

22,

the extent permitted by law and any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of the MPS by email and no responsibility is accepted for unauthorised agreements reached with other personnel. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this email, its security and that of any attachments cannot be guaranteed.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this email or in any attachment without the permission of the sender. Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law and any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude binding agreements on behalf of the MPS by email and no responsibility is accepted for unauthorised agreements reached with other personnel. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this email, its security and that of any attachments cannot be guaranteed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -21-03-2020 08-22

21/03/2020

/ Page Numbers: 23,24

 

 7.       

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -21-03-2020 08-22

21/03/2020

/ Page Numbers: 23,24

--

23,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 21/03/2020 08:22:28 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Resources to help you stay open during COVID-19.

Need help?

Contact us.

Customer Number: 37486337

Dear GoDaddy Customers,

As COVID-19 continues to spread, there's nothing more important to us than the well-being of our customers and employees.

To help you keep your venture going, we've pulled together free products, resources and tools from trusted sources.

You'll find videos and articles specific to your challenges and a community of small businessowners to support you with creative solutions that are working.

You can find everything here, including Fogue Studios & Gallery's great example of adapting its business to continue to sell fine art.

Our GoDaddy Guides continue to answer the phones and chat, 24/7. No

question is off-topic or too small (though there may be increased wait times since they're working from home, and you might hear kids and dogs). Call us if you need help. We're here for you.

Our services are up and running so your online business can remain open — so you can reach your customers and they can connect with you.

Lastly, please take good care of yourself and your loved ones. Stay safe. Stay healthy. Be patient and kind. There is no better time to strengthen our bonds, to stand together (digitally), to help each other through this storm, and come out the other side stronger.

Together, we will.

P.S. We appreciate your input. Tell us how we can help.

24,

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3487168395

 

 

 

 

 

8.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Too Smooth DPR Wholesalers -24-03-2020 19-48

24/03/2020

/ Page Numbers: 25,26

 

 8.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

Too Smooth DPR Wholesalers -24-03-2020 19-48

24/03/2020

/ Page Numbers: 25,26

--

25,

From: DPR Wholesalers <sales@dprwholesalers.com>

Sent time: 24/03/2020 07:48:19 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: COVID-19 Safety and Changes at DPR Wholesalers

COVID-19 Operating Procedures and Safety

Wholesalers

Sales@DPRWholesalers.com

COVID-19 Safety and Changes at DPR Wholesalers

As a Home & Hardware business, government advice is that we are able to continue to trade. However, we take the health & safety of our team, customers, and the wider community very seriously. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic we have taken the difficult decision to TEMPORARILY CLOSE our store.

We will be closed on Saturday 28th March 2020 - UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. We will keep you updated via email, twitter and our website regarding our re-opening and operating procedures.

Operating procedures until Friday 27th March 2020

In the meantime we will be open as usual but have made some changes to the way we work to try and minimise the risk of transmission:

Ř  We ask that if you feel unwell or are displaying any of the symptoms of COVID-19 such as a temperature of 37.8 degrees or higher, a sore throat or cough you stay away from the premises for a minimum of two weeks after these symptoms have passed.

Ř  All customers that wish to enter the premises must wear protective gloves and masks provided upon entry and keep them on until they leave.

Ř  We will allow only one-person entry per registered account.

Ř  We ask that you complete your visit as quickly and efficiently as possible, if customers fail to do this, we may need to restrict the number of people we allow inside the premises at one time.

Ř  Please keep conversations with our staff and other customers to a minimum.

Ř  All customers must stay at least 2 meters away from our staff and each other at all times.

Ř  Failure to comply with above will mean we cannot serve you and you will need to leave the premises immediately.

We thank you for your understanding and patience during these uncertain times. DPR Wholesalers Ltd

26,

For more offers, news and information,

find us on Facebook,

follow us on Twitter and also please visit our website www.DPRWholesalers.com.

Sales@DPRWholesalers.com

020 3583 5200

This email was sent to re_wired@ymail.com because you registered with us in store or on-line. Copyright © 2016 DPR Wholesalers Ltd. All rights reserved. Our mailing address is DPR Wholesalers Ltd., 17 Suez Road, Off Mollison Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex EN3 7SN,

UK.

Sales@DPRWholesalers.com | 020 8583 5200

 

 

 

 

 

9.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-04-2020 14-47

14/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 27,28,29,30,31,32

 

 

9.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-04-2020 14-47

14/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 27,28,29,30,31,32

--

27,

From: Pro Writing Aid <noreplys@prowritingaid.com>

Sent time: 14/04/2020 02:47:18 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Master the Plot Points that Matter

Master the Plot Points that Matter.

Pro Writing Aid

Improve your writing

View this email in your browser

Master the Plot Points that Matter

What comes easiest to you when working on your novel? For me, it's writing specific scenes. I often have a clear vision for what I want my characters to say and do in a certain moment. Mapping out an overarching plot, on the other hand? Not my strong suit.

Speaking to some of my writer friends, I know that others feel differently. Some writers love thinking about the plot of their story. But executing the mechanics of that plot on a scene-by-scene basis isn't nearly as fun for them.

In this newsletter, we're talking all about plot. We have articles about everything from the four plot mistakes you might be making to the difference between plot, story, and structure... and why that difference matters.

Plus, at the end, we have an invitation to our next Pro Writing Aid Write-In. Join us as we work on mastering suspense together, live.

Read on!

28,

Paid for so I could complete the repot and case files!

29,30,31,32,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare - 21-04-2020 09-05

21/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 33,34

 

10.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare - 21-04-2020 09-05

21/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 33,34

--

33,

From: GoDaddy Blog <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 21/04/2020 09:05:34 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simple tips to make you more productive + 30% off GoDaddy products.

Productivity tips.

How to be more productive.

Unusual times can mean you work in unusual ways, in unusual places. These simple tips can help you work more productively, even if things are different.

The story behind Clap For Our Carers.

Discover the story behind the inspirational Clap for Our Carers event, as told by the person who came up with the idea.

Boost your SEO with keyword research.

Keyword research is one of the building blocks of good search engine optimization. Find out how to identify the right keywords for your website.

34,

GoDaddy UK Blog Editor

P.S. Grab a 30% discount* on GoDaddy products by using the code blogsmbuk at checkout when making your next purchase.

We Stand with small business.

During these tough times we have free resources to help you keep your business open, even if your doors are closed.

Get Free Resources

See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3578639854

 

 

 

 

 

 

11.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-04-2020 16-36

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 35,36

 

 11.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-04-2020 16-36

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 35,36

--

35,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 22/04/2020 04:36:11 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

GoDaddy

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810 Simon Cordell

Customer Number:

Your domains are about to auto­ renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

Manage Your Renewals

Auto-renews on 22/05/2020

Term: 1 Year toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

Domain Renewal Ł11.99

Auto-renews on 22/05/2020 |

Term: 1 Year toosmoothentertainment.com

+ .COM Domain Renewal Ł15.99**

UK domains need to be renewed 15 days before they cancel. Learn more > We participate in account update services. As part of Visa® and MasterCard® programs, banks may notify us of updated credit card expiration date(s) and/or card number(s), which will automatically update your payment information in our system and allow us to attempt to renew your product(s) as scheduled. If paying with American Express, auto­renewal on an expired/re-assigned card may be automatically billed by American Express using the new expiration date and/or card number without notification to us. Similar services may be supported by other card brands. If attempts to bill your credit card are unsuccessful, your

36,

product(s) will expire. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

We will automatically renew the above product(s) on the renewal date and charge the credit card you have associated with each product. If the credit card associated with each product has expired or been closed, we cannot automatically renew the product and your product(s) will expire. We may be notified by banks of updates to your expiration date and/or card number, allowing for successful product renewal. Some card brands may automatically bill the new credit card without notification to us. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part.

If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

*Plus ICANN fee of Ł0.11 per domain name per year. Domains automatically renew at original registration length.

Prices are current as of 22/04/2020 and may be changed without notice. All domain name registrations and renewals are non-refundable and are subject to the terms and conditions of our Registration Agreement. Certain domains will be billed up to 30 days prior to the renewal date.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3583046637

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work -Re to web-22-04-2020 15-11 (2)

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 37

 

 12.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work -Re to web-22-04-2020 15-11 (2)

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 37

--

37,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 22/04/2020 03:11:41 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Don't recognise this account?

Google

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

13.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-22-04-2020 15-11

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 38

 

 13.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-22-04-2020 15-11

22/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 38

--

38,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 22/04/2020 03:11:23 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Don't recognise this account?

Google

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

14.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-23-04-2020 16-15

23/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 39

 

 14.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-23-04-2020 16-15

23/04/2020

/ Page Numbers: 39

--

39,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 23/04/2020 04:15:26 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Don't recognise this account?

Google

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-05-2020 22-23 (1)

14/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 40,41

 

 15.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

15. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-05-2020 22-23 (1)

14/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 40,41

--

40,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 14/05/2020 10:23:33 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your May account summary is inside.

Need help? Contact us.

Customer Number:

May Account Summary for Simon.

Pro tips, just for you:

What's your domain worth? Find out now.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

Here's a sweet discount on your next new order.

Get 30%* off.

Shop Now _»

Use promo code RPACC20DA at checkout.

What's in your account:

41,

DOMAINS

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

t-s-enterprises.com

toosmooth.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.com

Manage your domains —»

GODADDY MOBILE APP

All the tools and help you need to succeed online — all on your phone.

Register a domain, build your website and manage your account on the fly.

Launch your business or share your passion with. club.

Available at Ł15.14 Ł0.99

Ł19.14

 Ł34.47

Ł1.78*

Ł19.14

Ł9.99*

See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Note: If you are the domain administrator of more than one GoDaddy domain account, you may receive this notice multiple times.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3656975909

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -17-05-2020 13-44

17/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 42,43

 

 16.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

16. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -17-05-2020 13-44

17/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 42,43

--

42,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 17/05/2020 01:44:57 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

You qualify for 20% off any new order of Ł32.12 or more. *

Use promo code tff1964d5 at checkout.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810 Simon Cordell — Customer Number:37486337

Your domains are about to auto renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

Auto-renews on 22/05/2020 toosmoothentertainment.com

+ .COM

Domain Renewal Ł15.99 / 1 Year **

Auto-renews on 22/05/2020 toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

+ .UK (. CO.UK)

Domain Renewal Ł11.99 / 1 Year

UK domains need to be renewed 15 days before they cancel. Learn more >

We participate in account update services. As part of Visa® and MasterCard® programs, banks may notify us of updated credit card expiration date(s) and/or card number(s), which will automatically update your payment information in our system and allow us to attempt to renew your product(s) as scheduled. If paying with American Express, auto­renewal on an expired/re-assigned card may be automatically billed by American Express using the new expiration date and/or card number without notification to us. Similar services may be supported by other card brands. If attempts to bill your credit card are unsuccessful, your

43,

product(s) will expire. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

We will automatically renew the above product(s) on the renewal date and charge the credit card you have associated with each product. If the credit card associated with each product has expired or been closed, we cannot automatically renew the product and your product(s) will expire. We may be notified by banks of updates to your expiration date and/or card number, allowing for successful product renewal. Some card brands may automatically bill the new credit card without notification to us. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part.

If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

*Plus ICANN fee of Ł0.15 per domain name per year. Domains automatically renew at original registration length.

Prices are current as of 17/05/2020 and may be changed without notice. All domain name registrations and renewals are non-refundable and are subject to the terms and conditions of our Registration Agreement. Certain domains will be billed up to 30 days prior to the renewal date.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3665331102

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -19-05-2020 09-06

19/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 44,45   

 

 17.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

17. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -19-05-2020 09-06

19/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 44,45

--

44,

From: GoDaddy Blog <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 19/05/2020 09:06:09 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Uncertain times: Is your business adapting?

45,

Sales!

 

 

 

 

 

18.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-05-2020 18-37

22/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 46

 

 18.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

18. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-05-2020 18-37

22/05/2020

/ Page Numbers: 46

--

46,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 22/05/2020 06:37:33 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Renewal receipt for order #1689957128.

Customer #: 374

Thanks!

Your items have been renewed.

.UK (. CO.UK)          

1 Domain 1 Year Ł11.99

Domain Renewal

toosmoothentertainmen.co.uk

Subtotal: Ł11.99

Tax: Ł2.40

Total: Ł14.39

We have billed your PayPal agreement ending with the last two digits: 0V for the amount of Ł14.39. To review all your products and services, sign into your account.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part. If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Note: Our free product credit policy was updated — see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

19.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-01-06-2020 00-53

01/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 47

 

 19.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

19. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-01-06-2020 00-53

01/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 47

--

47,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 31/05/2020 11:53:23 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com. Don't recognise this account?

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

20.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-01-06-2020 02-16

01/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 48

 

 20.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

20. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-01-06-2020 02-16

01/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 48

--

48,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 01/06/2020 01:16:47 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com. Don't recognise this account?

Speed Uploader for Drive was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

21.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -16-06-2020 03-12

16/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 49,50

 

21.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

21. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -16-06-2020 03-12

16/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 49,50

--

49,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 16/06/2020 03:12:07 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your June account summary is inside.

Customer Number: 37486337

June Account Summary for Simon.

Pro tips, just for you:

What's your domain worth? Find out now.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

What's in your account:

50,

DOMAINS

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

toosmoothentertainment.com

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

toosmooth.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.com

Manage your domains »

GODADDY MOBILE APP

All the tools and help you need to succeed online — all on your phone.

Register a domain, build your website and manage your account on the fly.

Get recognized with .co. Available at Ł26.99 Ł9.99 Search now >

Ł12.10

Ł0.94*

Ł28.14

0-site

Ł0.99*

.shop

Ł36.03

Ł2.53*

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Note: If you are the domain administrator of more than one GoDaddy domain account, you may receive this notice multiple times.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3760342788

 

 

 

 

 

 

22.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-23-06-2020 20-01

23/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 51

 

 22.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

22. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-23-06-2020 20-01

23/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 51

--

51,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 23/06/2020 07:01:41 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com. Don't recognise this account?

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 2.

Letter regarding contact Enfield Council-24-06-2020 18-03

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 52,53

 

 23.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

23. 2.

Letter regarding contact Enfield Council-24-06-2020 18-03

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 52,53

--

52,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/06/2020 08:18:03 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

This is what I have asked her

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 20:09

To: ' complaints and information' <complamtsandmfonriation@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Karen Hale

I was wondering if you sent a copy of this to my son via his address. Or has it just been sent to me?

If you could also, please send me a list of dates and times my son has called for the past year I would be grateful.

Regards

Lorraine

From: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: 'Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk' <Lorraine32@bluevonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council. Yours sincerely

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient

53,

should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

24.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 1

Complaints and information act with Enfield Council [SEC

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 54,55,56,57,58

 

 24.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

24. 1. 1

Complaints and information act with Enfield Council [SEC

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 54,55,56,57,58

--

54,

From: complaints and information <complaintsandmformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Cordell letter 24.6.2020.pdf; Cordell letter 27.06.19.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council. Yours sincerely

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfieldgov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

55,

56,

57,

58,

 

 

 

 

 

25.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 59,60

 

 25.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

25. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 59,60

--

59,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 23:19

To: complaints and information

Subject: RE: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Dear Karen Hale

I was wondering if you sent a copy of this to my son via his home address and if so on what date? Or has it just been sent to me?

If you could also please send me a list of all dates and times my son has called and for what reason he has called for the past year, highlighting dates where you state he has been Vexatious and Unreasonable I would be most grateful.

Also I am sorry for the updated email the reason is due to me reading the letter fully what you have written, can you also please supply me with dates in the last year I have contracted the council for my son regarding the issues listed in the letter dated the 23/06/2020, again highlighting all dates and times you state I have been Vexatious and Unreasonable.

·         I believe I contracted the council named officer once after the letter dated 27/06/2020 which I had no reply to.

·         The other contract I had was due to an ongoing court cases, which most of the time my son’s solicitors was contracting the council towards the end of the case, I had to address the council directly as my son no longer had a solicitor acting for him.

·         The only other time I had contract was when the MP was addressing issues regarding a court order which the court made which the council did not comply with.

·         And the only other time I have had contact is due to repairs that needed doing to my sons flat.

Could you therefore supply me with the above information as soon as possible so this can be addressed in a timely manner.

Regards

Lorraine

From: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: 'Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk' <Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council.

Yours sincerely

60,

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

03/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 61,62,63

 

 26.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

26. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

03/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 61,62,63

--

61,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 03 July 2020 12:09

To: complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

Subject:          FW: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Dear Karen Hale

I have not had a reply from the below email dated the 24/06/2020, which I would like a reply to or at least a reply to state you will not reply to me.

My son has also tried to have contract with you, and you have not replied back to him, we have been given you as a single point of contact, yet there is no contract from you.

There is major issue with the letter that has been sent via Jeremy Chambers dated the 24/06/2020 and I am very concerned regarding its content.

We would also like to appeal against the decision to restrict contact dated the 24/06/2020, but before I can summit my appeal in full I need the information below as the letter states we have 28 days in which to appeal so if my request can be dealt with as soon as possible I would be grateful.

But I am making you aware an appeal is going to be submitted, there could you please reply.

Regards

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 23:19

To: 'complaints and information' <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

 Subject: RE: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Dear Karen Hale

I was wondering if you sent a copy of this to my son via his home address and if so on what date? Or has it just been sent to me?

If you could also please send me a list of all dates and times my son has called and for what reason he has called for the past year, highlighting dates where you state he has been Vexatious and Unreasonable I would be most grateful.

Also I am sorry for the updated email the reason is due to me reading the letter fully what you have written, can you also please supply me with dates in the last year I have contracted the council for my son regarding the issues listed in the letter dated the 23/06/2020, again highlighting all dates and times you state I have been Vexatious and Unreasonable.

·         I believe I contracted the council named officer once after the letter dated 27/06/2020 which I had no reply to.

·         The other contract I had was due to an ongoing court cases, which most of the time my son’s solicitors was contracting the council towards the end of the case, I had to address the council directly as my son no longer had a solicitor acting for him.

62,

·         The only other time I had contract was when the MP was addressing issues regarding a court order which the court made which the council did not comply with.

·         And the only other time I have had contact is due to repairs that needed doing to my sons flat.

Could you therefore supply me with the above information as soon as possible so this can be addressed in a timely manner.

Regards

Lorraine

From: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

 Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: 'Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk' <Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council. Yours sincerely

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government

63,

Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

27.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -11-07-2020 12-56

11/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 64,65,66,67,68

 

 27.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

27. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -11-07-2020 12-56

11/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 64,65,66,67,68

--

64,

Corrupt File!

65,

Corrupt File!

66,67,68,

 

 

 

 

 

 

28.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-07-2020 22-12

14/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 69,70

 

 28.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

28. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-07-2020 22-12

14/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 69,70

--

69,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 14/07/2020 10:12:40 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your July account summary is inside.

Customer Number: 37486337

July Account Summary for Simon.

Pro tips, just for you:

What's your domain worth? Find out now.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

Here's a sweet discount on your next new order.

What's in your account:

70,

DOMAINS

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

toosmooth.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.com

toosmoothentertainment.com

Manage your domains —»

GODADDY MOBILE APP

All the tools and help you need to succeed online — all on your phone.

Register a domain, build your website and manage your account on the fly.

Do good with a .org domain. Available at Ł26.00 Ł0.99 Search now >

store

Ł64.14

Ł2.50*

.VIP

Ł17.66

Ł5.72*

.place Ł16.07*

*See offer terms, conditions, and legal policies.

Note: If you are the domain administrator of more than one GoDaddy domain account, you may receive this notice multiple times.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3854773854

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -16-07-2020 10-06

16/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 71,72

 

 29.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

29. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -16-07-2020 10-06

16/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 71,72

--

71,

Does your website pass this Google test?

Find out why you should test your website with Google Lighthouse and what you should do if your site

Get business leads with Facebook.

Learn how you can drive more leads to your website using Facebook.

From: GoDaddy Blog <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 16/07/2020 10:06:36 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Could you attract more local customers? + 30% off GoDaddy products.

GoDaddy: 16/07/2020

Discover how to attract more local customers to your business with these simple tips.

72,

doesn't pass.

Will

GoDaddy UK Blog Editor

P.S. Grab a 30% discount* on GoDaddy products by using the code blogs mbuk at checkout when making your next purchase.

Open We Stand with small business.

During these tough times we have free resources to help you keep your business open, even if your doors are closed.

Get Free Resources

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3860943953

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

17/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 73,74,75

 

 30.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

30. 1. 1

lorraine32@blueyonderg contact with Enfield Council

17/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 73,74,75

--

73,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 17 July 2020 19:03

To: complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

Subject: RE: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Karen Hale

I have written the 2 below emails and had no reply I would like to appeal against the decision to restrict contact dated the 24/06/2020, you are the named contract by, yet I have not had one reply.

Can you please update to me what is going on.

If you cannot update me with anything can you, please confirm what level this is at so I can deal with this issue.

Regards

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 03 July 2020 12:09

To: complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk

<complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: FW: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

Dear Karen Hale

I have not had a reply from the below email dated the 24/06/2020, which I would like a reply to or at least a reply to state you will not reply to me.

My son has also tried to have contract with you, and you have not replied back to him, we have been given you as a single point of contact, yet there is no contract from you.

There is major issue with the letter that has been sent via Jeremy Chambers dated the 24/06/2020 and I am very concerned regarding its content.

We would also like to appeal against the decision to restrict contact dated the 24/06/2020, but before I can summit my appeal in full I need the information below as the letter states we have 28 days in which to appeal so if my request can be dealt with as soon as possible I would be grateful.

But I am making you aware an appeal is going to be submitted, there could you please reply.

Regards

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 23:19

To: 'complaints and information' <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Importance: High

74,

Dear Karen Hale

I was wondering if you sent a copy of this to my son via his home address and if so on what date? Or has it just been sent to me?

If you could also please send me a list of all dates and times my son has called and for what reason he has called for the past year, highlighting dates where you state he has been Vexatious and Unreasonable I would be most grateful.

Also I am sorry for the updated email the reason is due to me reading the letter fully what you have written, can you also please supply me with dates in the last year I have contracted the council for my son regarding the issues listed in the letter dated the 23/06/2020, again highlighting all dates and times you state I have been Vexatious and Unreasonable.

·         I believe I contracted the council named officer once after the letter dated 27/06/2020 which I had no reply to.

·         The other contract I had was due to an ongoing court cases, which most of the time my son’s solicitors was contracting the council towards the end of the case, I had to address the council directly as my son no longer had a solicitor acting for him.

·         The only other time I had contract was when the MP was addressing issues regarding a court order which the court made which the council did not comply with.

·         And the only other time I have had contact is due to repairs that needed doing to my sons flat.

Could you therefore supply me with the above information as soon as possible so this can be addressed in a timely manner.

Regards

Lorraine

From: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: 'Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk' <Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council. Yours sincerely

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

75,

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Follow us on Facebook Twitter www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

31.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-07-2020 09-06

22/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 76,77

 

 31.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

31. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-07-2020 09-06

22/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 76,77

--

76,

Does your website pass this Google test?

Why you should test your website with Google Lighthouse and what to do if your site doesn't pass.

Your WordPress maintenance checklist.

Keep your WordPress sites running smoothly by following this maintenance checklist.

From: GoDaddy Blog <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 22/07/2020 09:06:22 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject:          Get more leads with Facebook.

GoDaddy: 22/07/2020

77,

Will

GoDaddy UK Blog Editor

P.S. You can learn how to attract more clients in your local area here.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3878315084

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-25-07-2020 11-15

25/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 78        

 

 32.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

32. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-25-07-2020 11-15

25/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 78

--

78,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 25/07/2020 10:15:34 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

33.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-26-07-2020 09-59

26/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 79

 

 33.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

33. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-26-07-2020 09-59

26/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 79

--

79,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 26/07/2020 08:59:26 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

34.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

34. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-28-07-2020 21-11

28/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 80

 

 34.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-28-07-2020 21-11

28/07/2020

/ Page Numbers: 80

--

80,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 28/07/2020 08:11:19 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

35.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -07-08-2020 11-51

07/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 81,82

 

 35.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

35. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -07-08-2020 11-51

07/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 81,82

--

81,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 07/08/2020 11:51:25 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

You qualify for 20% off any new order of Ł29.84 or more. *

Use promo code tfg1964d30 at checkout.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810 Simon Cordell

Customer Number:374

Your domains are about to auto­ renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

Auto-renews on 06/09/2020

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

+ .UK (. CO.UK)

Domain Renewal: Ł11.99 / 1 Year

Auto-renews on 06/09/2020 t-s-enterprises.com

+ .COM

Domain Renewal: Ł15.99 / 1 Year **

UK domains need to be renewed 15 days before they cancel. Learn more >

We participate in account update services. As part of Visa® and MasterCard® programs, banks may notify us of updated credit card expiration date(s) and/or card number(s), which will automatically update your payment information in our system and allow us to attempt to renew your product(s) as scheduled. If paying with American Express, auto­renewal on an expired/re-assigned card may be automatically billed by American Express using the new expiration date and/or card number without notification to us. Similar services may be supported by other card brands. If attempts to bill your credit card are unsuccessful, your

82,

product(s) will expire. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

We will automatically renew the above product(s) on the renewal date and charge the credit card you have associated with each product. If the credit card associated with each product has expired or been closed, we cannot automatically renew the product and your product(s) will expire. We may be notified by banks of updates to your expiration date and/or card number, allowing for successful product renewal. Some card brands may automatically bill the new credit card without notification to us. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part.

If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

**Plus ICANN fee of Ł0.15 per domain name per year. Domains automatically renew at original registration length.

Prices are current as of 07/08/2020 and may be changed without notice. All domain name registrations and renewals are non-refundable and are subject to the terms and conditions of our Registration Agreement. Certain domains will be billed up to 30 days prior to the renewal date.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3930420781

 

 

 

 

 

 

36.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-09-08-2020 22-19

09/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 83

 

 36.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

36. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-09-08-2020 22-19

09/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 83

--

83,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 09/08/2020 09:19:25 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Fast.io was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

37.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -11-08-2020 09-06

11/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 84,85

 

 37.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

37. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -11-08-2020 09-06

11/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 84,85

--

84,

11/08/2020

Join our virtual roadshow.

The GoDaddy Back to Business virtual roadshow is packed full of

Get a social media strategy.

Discover why a strategy should be the foundation of your social media

From: GoDaddy Blog <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 11/08/2020 09:06:27 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: How are you getting back to business?

Getting back to business.

Ideas to help you get back to business.

Looking to get back to business? Here are some ideas to inspire you in the face of uncertainty.

85,

expert advice to help you succeed in 2020 and beyond. Take a look at the agenda then book your spot.

GoDaddy UK Blog Editor

Open We Stand with small business.

During these tough times we have free resources to help you keep your business open, even if your doors are closed.

Get Free Resources

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3940771762

 

 

 

 

 

38.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2.

Kay Osborne-11-08-2020 13-09

11/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 86,87

 

 38.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

38. 1. 2.

Kay Osborne-11-08-2020 13-09

11/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 86,87

--

86,

From: Kay Osborne <Kay.Osborne@Enfield.gov.uk>

Sent time: 11/08/2020 01:09:55 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: FW: Kay Osborne letter asked for [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Simon-Insurance-Letter-10-08-2020.pdf

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell

Many thanks for your attached letter.

Unfortunately as you are making a claim against the Council neither I or our Insurers are able to assist you in documenting your evidence against the Council.

In order that I can forward your claim to Insurers please confirm what you are claiming for and why you consider the Council to be at fault.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Kay Osborne Dip CII

Insurance Manager Audit & Risk Management London Borough of Enfield Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XF

insurance@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 3003

Kav.osborne@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 1476

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 10 August 2020 14:19

To: Insurance <insurance@enfield.gov.uk>; Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Kay Osborne letter asked for

Dear Kay Osborne

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me by phone last week please see attached letter you asked me to send to you.

Regards

Simon

Classification: OFFICIAL

87,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

www.enfeld.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

39.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 12-08-2020 17-36

12/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119

 

 39.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

39. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 12-08-2020 17-36

12/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 88,89,90

91,92,93,94,95,96

97,98,99,100,101,102

103,104,105,106,107,108

109,110,111,112,113,114

115,116,117,118,119

--

88,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/08/2020 05:36:14 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Take a look at this

Attachments:   Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

You should start to update it and I will keep working at the bottom end and you can use the diary to check the page numbers if you chose to

89,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

Mr Simon Cordell 109 Burncroft Ave Enfield Middlesex EN3 7JQ 07/08/2020

Objective 1: Complete Claim.

Objective 2: Be successful in accomplishing the claim.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this letter regarding a call that was made on the date of the 06/08/2020, I have been asked to send this letter over to explain that I have been preparing the official documentation that will be forwarded to the relevant departments as part of my claim against the Enfield Council / The Enfield Neighbourhood team including others E.g. Police and Doctors.

Due to the large amount of documentation that is involved to complete the listed objectives and myself being just one person this has taken a massive amount of my time and is still in possess.

To aid in a speedier claim I have invited the Enfield Council and Insurance companies involved to help me document my evidence on a numerous number of different days, which the lack of support from officials involved has led myself to completing the claim on my own as of so far.

My evidence does show case already the actions that have been taken against me wrongly and saving time is why I have tried to arrange prior meetings.

90,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

I would like this letter dated the 10/08/2020 to be registered as the start of my claim and would explain that I need further time form the date of this letter for my documents and evidence to be completed and put in order.

Once all my documents and evidence are completed, I am asking yet again if a meeting can be set up for the documents and evidence to be looked at due to the very large amount that will come with this claim, with my mother and myself present as I am the victim and would like to explain my evidence in person to another’s.

Yours faithfully

Mr Simon Cordell - 07/08/2020

This is not a conclusive summery

I Mr. Simon Cordell have gotten asked to clarify why I am lodging a claim against the listed.

Listed

1. The Enfield Council

2. The Enfield Neighbourhood team

3. Police

4. Doctors

The named and listed companies within this document have acted in joint circular thought the years of 2013 till date of this letter and must be able to be held legally liable to prosecution for their misplace actions and/or wrong doings.

I have sustained Personal and Property damage to no fault of my own as a result of failures caused by the Listed 1,2,3,4, running companies activities faults.

The Local Authority’s listed above have caused me to suffer by way of Negligence, Gross Misconduct and Criminal Offences and my sufferings have gotten caused by a failure of care on their part.

I can prove the Listed 1,2,3,4, companies’ staff have acted

1. Bios and unreasonable while taking on running companies’ activities in the public domain.

91,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

2. Them involved staff have caused and are causing a Poor reaction times to public concerns.

3. Negligence

4. Gross Misconduct

5. Criminal Offences

And in a knock-on effect their reckless behaviour has caused me to suffer by ways such as;

General damages = General damages relate to the impact on my life referring to such issues as:

1. Pain and suffering caused by the Listed 1,2,3,4,

2. Forced changes to my lifestyle.

3. Mental trauma.

Special damages = Special damages relate to the impact on my life referring to such issues as:

1. Loss of earnings.

2. My future loss of earnings.

3. Medical treatment.

4. Future medical treatment.

5. Transport expenses relating to forged court case

6. Changes to my living environment.

The listed local authorities have a legal duty of care to me and their other customers and have failed to maintain this duty of care for myself.

A legal liability can be established by the burden of evidence that I hold regarding these damages that does prove fault that has gotten caused by Negligence, Gross Misconduct and/or Criminal Activities with intent.

A) Asbo

The Asbo’s Important Details

1.      At no point of time did I organise any of the events in the Asbo

2.      The Asbo was created on the date of.

3.      And the sentence for the Asbo ended on the date of 04/08/220

4.      Total Time Served for the Asbo 7 years.

5.      The ASBO was a STAND ALONE Asbo and not a CBO Asbo

6.      The Asbo accused me of the organisation of Illegal Raves, yet I have never been arrested

7.      The Asbo contained a Curfew what is a form of punishment and a standalone Asbo cannot be a form of punishment

8.      The Maximum sentence if there was enough evidence for criminal conviction to which there was not is 6 months and the offender would have to do 3 months in prison with the chance of early release with tag.

92,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

·         The Asbo got created by Steve Elsmore who is / was Police Officer 206372 I am a police officer attached to the Anti- Social Behaviour Team as part of the Community Safety Unit, Based at Enfield Civic Centre. Dated 11/08/2014

·         Every page in the Asbo was created by Steven Elsmore at it is was his working company’s logging from the Enfield Council he used.

·         The Asbo got signed when getting created in the Enfield Civic centre as it had to be by law as stated on page 000 by the supported certificates

·         The Asbo contains 10 different incidents which out of the 8 incidents 1 of them equals to 2 incidents “Progress Way / Crown Rd.”

Crown Road must not be in the Asbo application.

Date Order

1. Canary Wharf 12/01/2013

2. Sunday Going Out on Motor Bikes 07/04/2013

3. Hyde Park, Alan Browne 20/04/2014

4. Ponders End Police Station Christopher Jackson Ye 24/05/2014

5. White Hart Lane Steve Hoodless 25/05/2014

6. Progress Way 07/06/2014

7. 1 Falcon Park Pc Haworth 20/06/2014

8. Carpet right 19/07/2014

9. Alma Road 24/07/2014

10. Mill Marsh lane 1 27/07/2014

12.11.

URN Order

37

CRIMINT report

PKRT00056539

Hyde Park Alan Browne

Event

Date:

20/04/2014

Created:

27/04/2014

Updated:

28/04/2014

Event

Date:

688

Created:

695

Updated

696

Mag 2 -136,137,138

Mag 1) Response: 101,102,103

Appeal - 124,125,126

N/a

36

CRIMINT report YERT00323197 White Hart Lane Steve Hoodless (YR)

CAD9720/25May14

Event

Date:

25/05/2014

Created:

26/05/2014

Updated:

19/06/2014

Event

Date:

723

Created:

724

Updated

748

Mag 2 -133,134,135 Mag 1) Response: 98,99,100 Appeal - 121,122,123

CAD 9720 / 25May14

 

93,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

38

CRIMINT report YERT00360430 Ponders End Police Station Christopher Jackson Ye

Event

Date:

24/05/2014

Created:

24/05/2014

Updated:

03/06/2014

Event

Date:

722

Created:

722

Updated

732

Mag 2 -139,140,141,142

Mag 1) Response: 104,105,106,107

Appeal - 127,128,129,130

N/a

35

CRIMINT report YERT00374531 Enfield Southbury Road Cad 1047/07/14 Not Progress Way Really Crown road

Cad 1047/07/14

Event

Date:

07/06/2014

Created:

07/06/2014

Updated:

10/06/2014

Event

Date:

736

Created:

736

Updated

737

Mag 2 - 130,131,132 Mag 1) Response: 95,96,97 Appeal -118,119,120

Cad 1047 /07 Jun 14

 

 

 

CRIMINT report YERT00376024 Southbury Doug Skinner (RG)

Event Date:

19/07/2014

Created:

21/07/2014

Updated:

22/07/2014

Event

Date:

778

Created:

780

Updated

781

Mag 2 - 108,109,110 Mag 1) Response: 74,75,76: Appeal - 99,100,101

Cad 10635 /19 July 14

 

 

31

CRIMINT report YERT00376227 Mill Marsh Lane Richard Chandler Ye

Event

Date:

27/07/2014

Created:

27/07/2014

Updated:

27/07/2014

Event

Date:

786

Created:

786

Updated

786

Mag 2 -101,102,103,104 Mag 1) Response: 67,68,69,70 Appeal - 92,93,94,95

 

 

 

 

CRIMINT report YERT00376229 Jamie Edgoose Ye Alma Rd

Event

Date:

24/07/2014

Created:

27/07/2014

Updated:

31/07/2014

Event

Date:

783

Created:

786

Updated

790

Mag 2 - 105,106,107 Mag 1) Response:71,72,73, Appeal - 96,97,98

 

94,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

30

CRIMINT report YERT00376728 Mill Marsh Lane Aaron King

Event

Date:

27/07/2014

Created:

10/08/2014

Updated:

12/08/2014

Event

Date:

786

Created:

800

Updated

802

Mag 2 - 97,98,99,100 Mag 1) Response: 63,64,65,66 Appeal - 88,89,90,91

 

 

Steven Elesmore Crimint HTR00376798 Event Date 12/01/13 Created 16/01/13

Update 18/01/13 Canary Wharf 1st”

Event Date

12/01/13

Created

16/01/13

Update

18/01/13

 

Mag 2 - 175,176,177

Mag 1) Response: 137,138,139

Appeal - 161,162,163

N/a

--

13.  The organisation of Illegal Raves

A.    The Asbo’s Simulated History

Just to stipulate a small part of what I can prove has taken place to myself due to no fault of my own is:

1.      When the Asbo got created it was after the date of 00/00/2014 the day after an accused incident took place on a second occasion at Mill Mash Lane.

2.      Just prior to Mill Mash Lane Another Incident is accused to have taken place at Progress way Enfield on the dates of the 06&07&08/06/2014

What can be proved about Progress Way in relation to my claim is.

I had been on police curfew alongside other harsh bail conditions at my home address from the dates of 00/00/2013 till I won the case on the 00/00/2014.

The Metropolitan Police Force and my local Council both understood about my bail conditions, as I had been working with them both doing local events in my surrounding parks, while I had taken on the keys from my local community hall and was managing

95,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

the local community’s & facility’s, The Enfield Council and police both attended while I was at work.

At the same time, I had been working with other charity’s and committing my time to my own dreams of building g a large-scale event.

On the dates of 06&07&08/06/2014, another person named as (A) who I had not seen for over a year prior due to the police curfew and other bail conditions that I had been placed on had gotten spoken to by a police officer named (B) about not putting on an event in Hertfordshire.

police officer named (B) served a dispersal order / notice on person named as (A) while also informing Metropolitan police of the possibility of a after event taking place in London. I was aware of none of the following until after served the Asbo application and requesting such information.

In the early hours of the morning of the 07/06/2014 at the time of around 1300 hours I received a phone call of a young male friend named as (C), at the time I had been having a family drink in the pub/hall with my cousin as it was his leaving party.

My friend named as (C), invited me to come and visit them at where they were residing what was close to my location in my local borough as they were having a celebration. This was the first point of time when I understood that my friends were next to where I live. I agreed to go and visit this friend for the first time in other 1 year.

I drove my car to go and see my friends and took my partner of the time with me.

When we arrived at the secured premises, the police were present at the gates and asked me if I had organised any of the then and there present. Me and my partner both explained no and gave our reason for attendance Progress way and that was to see friends, and this was allowed.

On the same industry site as progress way, in fact next doors to progress way was a new building that I did not know was a police patrol centre that had just been built.

What can get proved from the Asbo application is on the 07/06/2014 the first cad of the day is missing CAD 943, and this is Crown road Cad 1012 was next

Cad 1047 is the 3rd call made to Bow call centre “MetCCC.” The person who made this telephone call to the emergency services was a police officer with name of Pc Shinick while on duty and this cad becomes the main cad linked to Progress Way.

Bow call centre “MetCCC” arranges for police officers to attend the location after the time of 01:59, while asking Pc Shinick while on duty if he has contacted the Enfield Civic Centre regarding this matter. All communication after this was done by way of text.

Police Officer 206372 a Steve Elsmore who was attached to the Anti- Social Behaviour Team as part of the Community Safety Unit, Based at Enfield Civic Centre. Had prior to these dates of the 06&07&08/06/2014 Progress Way had been receiving a lot of phone call as so had the Metropolitan police about other premises that they oversaw named as the Man Building on Southbury rd.

 

96,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

My mother also put a subject access request into the council in purist of information about the Man Building on Southbury rd.

As noted in the Asbo CAD 0000 the Man Building had a fragile roof, meaning that the police and the Enfield Council could not go into the building in all the moths that it had been squatted due to health and safety reasons and this took place while I was on curfew.

Eventually, I have gone home and had no problems with the police and /or the council on the 07/

A) The Man Building on Southbury rd.

1

My 1st Asbo Response Bundle/ pub Book Issue: 1!

MEDIA ARTICLES RE COMPLAINTS AT CROWN ROAD/

Page Numbers: 297,298,299,300,301,302

1

My 1st Asbo Response Bundle/ pub Book Issue: 1!

MEDIA ARTICLES RE COMPLAINTS AT CROWN ROAD/

Page Numbers: 297,298,299,300,301,302

Enfield INDEPENDENT

Enfield Neighbours’ anger over 15-hour rave in Southbury Road

Charlie Peat / Friday 25April 2014 / News Follow @ Enfield Andy Chaz

Ravers took over abandoned business building for more than 15 hours,

The former HAN building in Crown Road, on the junction with Southbury Road, was the venue for an illegal party that began on Saturday night.

According to residents in Anglesey Road, adjacent to crown road, the loud noise and disturbance continued until 3pm the next day.

One resident, who wanted to remain anonymous, said that the 15-hour rave was "ridiculously loud/'

He said: "It was so loud the whole house was shaking like an earthquake was happening. There are no clubs or bars near us, so this was quite a shock. We understand that sometimes it could be loud late at night but for it to continue until 3pm the next day Is not right. "I walked along to check out what was going on, it was ridiculously loud. Things were getting smashed up in the building and people were spray painting everywhere." Police say they attended late on Saturday evening and returned the following day and music was still being played.

TOTAL POLICING COME AND TALK TO THE COMMISSIONER WHAT WOULD YOU ASK? We are inviting you to meet the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe.

DATE: Wednesday 14th October 2015

TIME: 6.30pm -7.30pm

(doors open at 6.00pm for refreshments! LOCATION: Aylward Academy, Windmill

Road.

298,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

10/9/2015

Enfield INDEPENDENT

Rave in disused office went on for 15 hours (From Enfield Independent) experience.

Kate Laird, also of Anglesey Road said: We are furious that nothing was done at the time, I have children and we couldn't sleep all night. 0ne of our neighbours saw police show up but they did not do anything.

299,

09/09/2014

Enfield INDEPENDENT

The Man Building, Enfield, wrecked by graffiti

300,

Anna Slater, Chief Reporter - north London / Tuesday 9 September 2014/ News Follow @AnnaTimesSeries 1,663 followers

301,

Listed building ’wrecked' by graffiti (From Enfield Independent)

Vandals have “completely wrecked” an abandoned building by painting graffiti on the front and squatting inside.

The NAN building, in Crown Road, on the junction with Southbury Road, Enfield, has also been used for illegal raves and parties in the last few months.

Formerly used as a car factory, the Grade II listed building closed down more than a year ago and Enfield Borough Council is now looking for a new owner.

David Cockle, the chairman of the Enfield Society, has been left concerned by the way the way the building has fallen into disrepair.

He said: ‘It once had a very nice, manicured garden - but now it’s just been completely wrecked. It’s a huge shame.

“I recently discovered that squatters have been on site and It’s generally in a deplorable state, ft doesn’t give a good impression to people visiting the area for the first time.

“It’s such a high-profile site and one we should be proud of, but now it just looks awful.1’

Earlier this year, people in nearby Anglesey Road, said their houses were “shaking like an

The party included loud music and continued until 3pm the next afternoon - a total of 15 hours.

Graffiti tags have now been emblazoned on the front of the building, which has been boarded up.

Mr.      | added: “For a listed building to be left like that, it's terrible

“The plants and shrubs are overgrown too - it’s sad to see it so run down.

“It used to be such an attractive building. 1M

The Enfield Independent is awaiting comment from Enfield Borough Council 302

“Na Page”

1) As prior mentioned when the Asbo got created it was after the date of 00/00/2014 the day after an accused incident took place, on a second occasion at Mill Mash Lane.

 

97,

Si-Email-insurance-2020 (1).doc

Police Officer 206372 Steve Elsmore created the Asbo application on the date of the 00/00/2014 and when he done this in the police NPCADS that is in connection to the council’s neighbourhood team and themselves.

He got a Unic reference number for the second incident in the Asbo that is accused to have taken place at Mill Marsh Lane.

Steve Elsmore continued to search the NCS and went to the year of 2010. He found two pieces of police intelligence that had been No Further Actioned, in fact I have never been arrested for any of the following two Crimit/Cads/Reports.

Crimit/Cads/Reports

1. 12.1. Canary Wharf 12/01/2013

Crimit/Cads/Reports

2. Rays Nightclub 2010

Because Steven Elsmore understood what he was going to do when creating the Asbo application that got put against me was a criminal activity, he took caution in covering up his tracks.

He took the information / context out of the Crimit of Crimit/Cads/Reports

63.  Cannery Wolf 2010

and placed in into a fresh unicq Crimit that he took out of the national police computed aid dispatch system 50 after creating Mill Mash Lanes Cad that he used to create the Asbo and he also changed the police officers name and other related details to names of his pleasure.

The reasons for him to do this was to protect the original police officers who are not attached to the boroughs of North London and to keep these illegal activities to a minimum of people involved.

The Crimit/Cads/Reports

64.  Rays Nightclub 2010

Was never used in the Asbo application.

The illegal activities never stopped at this point, Steven Elsmore continued to search the NPCADS for more intelligence that he could manipulate to his and his colleague’s own advantages. Steven Elsmore continued his frenzy of eager sensation

He imputed into the Asbo application out of the police national computer aid dispatch system some of the cads related to the prior week of Progress Way that were in relation to

1. Illegal Raves

2. The Man Building that is on Crown Road. This can be checked by going to the last cad on the 07/06/2014 and checking the Linked Cads on the First and second pages as showed below.

98,

All Cad numbers got taken from Cad 10967 07/06/2014

Linked:  explicitly to:

Linked:  implicitly to:

943:07JUN14

2649:01JUN14  

3274:01JUN14  

1081:03JUN14

2141:07JUN14 

2456:07JUN14

2672:07JUN14

2906:07JUN14

3326:07JUN14

4015:07JUN14

4809:07JUN14

8931:07JUN14

10471:07JUN14

10844:07JUN14

10742:07JUN14

340:08JUN14

930:08JUN14

1646:08J0N14

2456:08JUN14

2766:08JUN14

2904:08JUN14

3151:08JUN14

3319:08JUN14

2989:01JUN14  

1571:07JU14  

8528:01JUN14  

2255:07JUN14

2525:07JUN14

2757:07JUN14

3005:07JUN14

3436:07JUN14

4322:07JUN14

5206:07JUN14

10311:07JUN14

10481:07JUN14

10967:07JUN14

10506:07JUN14

625:08JUN14

1667:08JUN14

2608:08JUN14

2796:08JUN14

2942:08JUN14

3179:08JUN14

3350:08JUN14

3515:08JUN14

3946:08JUN14

5586:01JUN14  

3190:01JUN14  

6851:02JUN14

1047:07JUN14  

1608:07JUN14     

1380:07JUN14  

2271:07JUN14

2601:07JUN14

2354:07JUN14

3037:07JUN14

3838:07JUN14

4323.07JUN14

5571:07JUN14

10393:07JUN14

47:08JUN14

749:08JUN14

1206:08JUN14

1768:08JUN14

2654:08JUN14

2845:08JUN14

2948:08JUN14

3194:08JUN14

5644:08JUN14

 

7983:01JUN14  

3754:01JUN14  

5897:03JUN14

1722:07JUN14  

1816:07JUN14

2291:07JUN14

1323:07JUN14  

2637:07JUN14

2904:07JUN14

3252:07JUN14

3986:07JUN14

4598:07JUN14

8841:07JUN14

10462:07JUN14

169:08JUN14

793:08JUN14

1631:08JUN14

2410:08JUN14

2764:08JUN14

2890:08JUN14

3132:08JUN14

3260:08JUN14

1341:09JUN14

 

99,

 

100,

 

101,

All CAD’s For 1st June 2014

All Cad numbers got taken from Cad 10967 07/06/2014

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

2649

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 2 of the day

2989

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 3 of the day

3190

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 4 of the day

3274

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 5 of the day

3754

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 6 of the day

5586

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 7 of the day

7983

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 8 of the day

8528

Missing CAD

 

01/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

 

102,

  1. All CAD’s For 2nd June 2014
  2. All Cad numbers got taken from Cad 10967 07/06/2014

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

 

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

6851

Missing CAD

 

02/06/2014

 

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

 

All CAD’s For 3rd June 2014

All Cad numbers got taken from Cad 10967 07/06/2014

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

1081

Missing CAD

 

03/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 2 of the day

5897

 

 

03/06/2014

 

Page Mag 2 –

 

  1. All CAD’s For 7th June 2014

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

943

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 2 of the day

1012

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

01:53

Page Mag 2 – 178,179,180,181

CAD

Cad 3 of the day

1047

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513 main cad police Insp Hillmill sent to location progress

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

01:59

Page Mag 2 – 209,210,211,212,213

CAD

Cad 4 of the day

1323

(Lincoln Way grid 534657,195453)

Lincoln Rd Lumina Way Enfield /

07/06/2014

02:41

Page Mag 2 – 182,183,184,185,186

CAD

Cad 5 of the day

1380

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 6 of the day

1571

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 7 of the day

1608

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way Great Cambridge

07/06/2014

03:34

Page Mag 2 – 219,220,221

CAD

Cad 8 of the day

1722

(Orchard Terrance Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Blocked Out /

07/06/2014

03:58

Page Mag 2 – 187,188,189

CAD

Cad 9 of the day

1816

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

04:15

Page Mag 2 – 190,191,192,193,194

CAD

Cad 10 of the day

2141

(Hardy Way Grid Ref 531438, 197711 miles away Gorden Hill)

Hardy Way

07/06/2014

05:50

Page Mag 2 – 195,196,197,198,199

 

103,

CAD

Cad 11 of the day

2255

(Leighton Road Grid Ref 534144,195627 Bush Hill Park)

Leighton Rd Bush Hill Park /

07/06/2014

06:24

Page Mag 2 – 200,201,202,

203,204

CAD

Cad 12 of the day

2291

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 13 of the day

2271

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

06:27

Page Mag 2 – 205,206,207,

208

CAD

Cad 14 of the day

2456

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 15 of the day

2525

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 16 of the day

2601

(Ayley Croft Grid Ref 534219,195697)

Great Cambridge Rd /Aley Croft /

07/06/2014

08:09

Page Mag 2 – 222,223,224,

225

CAD

Cad 17 of the day

2637

(1st Time Laps 08:18) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

08:18

Page Mag 2 – 226,227,228,

229,230

CAD

Cad 18 of the day

2672

(1st Time Laps 08:16) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

08:16

Page Mag 2 – 231,232,233

CAD

Cad 19 of the day

2757

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 20 of the day

2854

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

08:56

Page Mag 2 – 234,235,236,

237

CAD

Cad 21 of the day

2904

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 22 of the day

2906

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 23 of the day

3005

(2nd Time Laps 09:22) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

09:22

Page Mag 2 – 238,239,240

CAD

Cad 24 of the day

3037

(2nd Time Laps 09:20) (Tynemouth Drive miles away Grid Ref 534375,198125)

Enfield Safe Store

07/06/2014

09:20

Page Mag 2 – 214,215,216,

217,218

CAD

Cad 25 of the day

3252

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

10:07

Page Mag 2 – 241,242,243,

244

 

104,

CAD

Cad 26 of the day

3326

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 27 of the day

3436

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 28 of the day

3838

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 29 of the day

3986

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

11:47

Page Mag 2 – 245,246,247,248

CAD

Cad 30 of the day

4015

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 31 of the day

4322

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 32 of the day

4323

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

12:25

Page Mag 2 – 249,250,251,252

CAD

Cad 33 of the day

4598

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 34 of the day

4809

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 35 of the day

5206

(no grid or Att location)

Blocked Out /

07/06/2014

13:57

Page Mag 2 – 253,254,255

CAD

Cad 36 of the day

5571

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 37 of the day

8841

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

20:07

Page Mag 2 – 256,257,258,259

CAD

Cad 38 of the day

8931

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 39 of the day

10311

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 40 of the day

10393

(Great Cambridge road miles away Grid Ref 534396, 197692 Carter hatch Lane but states behind tops tiles)

Great Cambridge Rd / Tops Tiles /

07/06/2014

22:38

Page Mag 2 – 260,261,262,263,

264,265,266

 

105,

CAD

Cad 41 of the day

10462

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 42 of the day

10471

              (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

22:45

Page Mag 2 – 277,278,279,280

Statement off: Eric Baker

Police Officer 219382

Dated 19/08/2014

He is a police officer in London Borough of Enfield and has been tasked to contact residents of the Borough who had called police to inform them of an illegal rave that took place over Friday 7th June 2014 and Saturday 8th June 2014, in a warehouse in

Progress Way Enfield

On Tuesday 19th August 2014 I contacted the caller of the CAD 10471/07June 2014 by telephone that was happy to give an impact statement regarding how illegal rave affected her and her husband over the above dates mentioned.

The caller wishes to remain anonymous. I will refer to her as complainant "A" The original notes taken from the below statement are present in my pocketbook serial 370/14, page 1.

Complainant "a" said it was a warm evening and we had to keep the windows shut because of the noise. The next day we could not even go out into the garden because of the noise. It kept me and my husband up all night and made us very anxious the next day. The illegal rave totally ruined our weakened" This concluded what complainant 'A" said regarding this matter.

 

Mr Simon Cordell will state; “that at no point did he take part in any form of Anti

Social behaviour and he did not organize or hire any equipment to this private house party neither was he attending a rave on the 6th 7th 8th June 2014th.

 

 

Witness Statement

A/Inspector Hamill 201566

Friday 6th June 2014 Progress Way

A/Insp Hamill 201566 states; "I have had a CAD created reference 10471 7June dispatched officers to the location to access numbers, crowd dynamics and gather information around times the event is likely to run until ----and also to make contact or identify the potential organiser. Officers have reported back that Tyrone Benjamin and Simon Cordell where at location and to be the believed the event organisers, there were approximately 200 people in attendance, the event was covered by security officers who had stated that they were volunteers and not licensed through SIA. Officers have spoken with staff to confirm that all fire escapes where clear, that there were sufficient fire extinguishers in place and that there were first aid kits available."

 

CAD

Cad 43 of the day

10481

(3rd Time Laps 22:47 to 22:44) (Wood stock Cres grid Ref 534657,195453)

Blocked Out /

07/06/2014

22:47

Page Mag 2 – 268,269,270,271,272

CAD

Cad 44 of the day

10506

(3rd Time Laps 22:47 to 22:44) (In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513)

Progress Way /

07/06/2014

22:44

Page Mag 2 – 273,274,275,276

CAD

Cad 45 of the day

10742

(Lincoln Way grid 534657,195453)

Lincoln Rd /

07/06/2014

23:01

Page Mag 2 – 281,282,283,284

 

106,

CAD

Cad 46 of the day

10844

Missing CAD

 

07/06/2014

Missing CAD

 

CAD

Cad 47 of the day

10967

(In Albury Walk Miles Away grid ref 535375. 202125 Cheshunt)

https://gridreferencefinder.com/ 

A10 Great Cambridge Rd /

07/06/2014

23:25

Page Mag 2 – 285,286,287,288,289

 

 

 

All CAD’s For 8th June 2014

There are 37 CAD/ Incident numbers for the 8th June 2014, to which there is only 7 in the ASBO application and only Cad Number 47 represents Progress Way, the rest represent 32 Crown RD other premises being occupied under section 144 lazppo 10 minutes away from progress way.

By the statistics, the call centre receives on the 8th June 2014, 300 people call per hour.

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

47

(In Progress Way grid ref 534380,195513) 

Progress Way Enfield /Safe Hal Unit /

08/06/2014

00:00

Page Mag 2 – 290,291,292,293,294

CAD

Cad 2 of the day

167

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 3 of the day

340

Blocked Out Page

Blocked Out /

08/06/2014

00:29

Page Mag 2 – 295,296,297,298

CAD

Cad 4 of the day

625

Lincoln Road, Bush Hill Park, Southbury, London Borough of Enfield, London,

534152,195940

To Far

Lincoln Rd /

08/06/2014

00:54

Page Mag 2 -56,57,58,59

CAD

Cad 5 of the day

749

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 6 of the day

793

Reason 1

Is Crown Rd and this can get proved because of

the Linked in cad on page 3 at the top line “Re Linked cad 1380”

What must be the 07/06/2014 due to their only being 793 calls as of this Cad?

Cad 1380 would be the 5th cad inputted inside of the Asbo folder for the 7th and it was given this place meant because only Pc Shnick call while on duty was above other than cads 943 &

1012, Cad 943 was never place fully inside of the Asbo and belongs to Crown Rd. While Cad 1012 got linked to cad 943 allowing all calls regarding crown rd. to get blamed on Progress Way.

Reason 2

Another piece of evidence is that in Cad 793 on page 1 at the bottom and page 2 at the top there is a list of Linked:  explicitly to: &

Linked:  implicitly to: Cads and if you take note to the “Linked:  explicitly to:”

you will notice cad 2456

 

and if you look at the “Linked:  implicitly to:” and take a note of cads

2649:01Jun14

2989:01Jun14

3274:01Jun14

3754:01Jun14

Page 2

5586:01Jun14

7983:01Jun14

8190:01Jun14

8528:01Jun14

6851:02Jun14

 

 

Reason 3

Time Laps

If Cads 793 is the seven hundred and nighty third call of the day at the time of

 

And Cads 2410 is the

 

 Also, Cad 3151 is the

 

Cad 2410

 

Cad 3151 Caller is 3 HOURS: 25 Minutes,

 

 

 

should equal 741 callers

 

the same as Cads 793 to

 

 

On average there would have been 168 999 emergency 999 calls made to the call centre.

 

Blocked Out /

08/06/2014

01:10

Page Mag 2 -60,61,62,63,64

 

107,

CAD

Cad 7 of the day

930

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 8 of the day

1081

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 9 of the day

1206

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 10 of the day

1631

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 11 of the day

1646

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 12 of the day

1667

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 13 of the day

1768

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 14 of the day

2410

Blocked out

4-page top line = A&J cars Crown Road

Blocked Out /

08/06/2014

05:35

Page Mag 2 – 65,66,67,68,69

CAD

Cad 15 of the day

2456

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 16 of the day

2608

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 17 of the day

2654

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 18 of the day

2764

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

 

108,

CAD

Cad 19 of the day

2766

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 20 of the day

2796

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 21 of the day

2845

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 22 of the day

2890

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 23 of the day

2904

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 24 of the day

2942

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 25 of the day

2948

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 26 of the day

3132

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 27 of the day

3151

(In Crown Road grid ref 534960,196240

Southbury Rd / Crown Rd /

08/06/2014

09:08

Page Mag 2 – 70,71,72,73,74

CAD

Cad 28 of the day

3179

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 29 of the day

3194

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 30 of the day

3260

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 31 of the day

3319

(In Crown Road grid ref 534960,196240

Southbury Rd / Crown Rd /

08/06/2014

09:39

Page Mag 2 – 75,76,77,78

CAD

Cad 32 of the day

3350

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 33 of the day

3515

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

 

109,

CAD

Cad 34 of the day

3946

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 35 of the day

5644

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

CAD

Cad 36 of the day

5897

Missing CAD

 

08/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

 

All CAD’s For 9th June 2014

 

CAD

 

Num

 

 

Date

Time

Page

CAD

Cad 1 of the day

1341

Missing CAD

 

09/06/2014

Missing CAD

Page Mag 2 –

                                                         

He imputed into the Asbo application out of the police national computer aid dispatch system some of the cads related to the prior week of Progress Way that were in relation to

  1. Illegal Raves
  2. The Man Building that is on Crown Road. This can be checked by going to the last cad on the 07/06/2014 and checking the Linked Cads on the First and second pages as showed below.

 

Made Progress Way cads up and got the time stamps wrong when imputing the forged paperwork into the Asbo application that he was the developer of.

CAD

Number

Date

Time

Mag 1 Page

 

CAD

2637

07/06/2014

08:18

Page 191 to 195

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

CAD 2637 7JUN Progress Way /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 226,227,228,229.230

Mag 1) Response: 191,192,193,194,195

Appeal - 212,213,214,215,216

07/06/2014

CAD

2672

07/06/2014

08:16

Page 196 to 198

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

CAD 2672 7JUN Progress Way /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 231,232,233

Mag 1) Response: 196,197,198

Appeal - 217,218,219

07/06/2014

CAD

3005

07/06/2014

09:22

Page 203 to 205

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

CAD 3005 7JUN Progress Way /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 238,239,240

Mag 1) Response: 203,204,205

Appeal - 224,225,226

07/06/2014

CAD

3037

07/06/2014

09:20

Page 179 to 183

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

CAD 3037 7JUN Enfield Safe Store /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 214,215,216,217,218

Mag 1) Response: 179,180,181,182,183

Appeal - 200,201,202,203,204

07/06/2014

CAD

10481

07/06/2014

22:47

Page 233 to 237

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

AD 10481 7JUN Blocked Out /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 268,269,270,271,272

Mag 1) Response: 233,234,235,236,237

Appeal – 254,255,256,257,258

07/06/2014

CAD

10506

07/06/2014

22:44

Page 238 to 241

The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

CAD 10506 7JUN Progress Way /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 273,274,275,276

Mag 1) Response: 238,239,240,241

Appeal - 259,260,261,262

07/06/2014

 

 

 

Steven was not remorseful in his actions and knew that he would need witness statements to make the Asbo application look correctly intact.

 

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: - PC McMillan /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 26

Appeal – 59

14/08/2014

 

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: - PC McMillan /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 27

Appeal – 60

14/08/2014

 

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: -

PC Donald McMillan /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 37,38

Appeal – 61,62

19/08/2014

 

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: -

PC John Anderson /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 39

Appeal -64

20/08/2014

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: -

PC John Anderson /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 40

Appeal – 65

19/08/2014

 

·         The 1st Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: -

PC Eric Barker /

Page Numbers: Mag 2 – 41

Appeal - 63

20/08/2014

 

 

The Distance in latitude

 

12.2. Sunday Going Out on Motor Bikes 07/04/2013

 

12.3. Hyde Park, Alan Browne 20/04/2014

 

12.4. Ponders End Police Station Christopher Jackson Ye 24/05/2014

 

12.5. White Hart Lane Steve Hoodless 25/05/2014

 

12.6. Progress Way 07/06/2014

 

12.7. 1 Falcon Park Pc Haworth 20/06/2014

 

12.8. Carpet right 19/07/2014

 

12.9. Alma Road 24/07/2014

 

110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,

12.10. Mill Marsh lane 1. 27/07/2014

12.11. Mill Marsh lane 2.

A)    The Asbo folders context shows that;

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Anti-social behaviour order on application, Threats Made out of my Asbo Condition’s in page 18 2nd Folder by Police!

Page Numbers: 18

04/08/2015

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

WITNESS STATEMENT of hearsay evidence, I have spoken to A/DS Val TANNER

Page Numbers: 37,38

26/06/2015

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

WITNESS STATEMENT, Every Decibel Matters

Page Numbers: 39,40

04/03/2015

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 


 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

PC Sophie Theodoulou Police Officer who Lied and said that she Served me the First Asbo Folder!

Page Numbers: 57,58

12/09/2014

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Fake: Resident Statements of: - PC McMillan

Page Numbers: 65,66

21/08/2014

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Anonymous witness statement, who is unable to attend court to give live evidence because the witness is fearful of reprisals should he/she attend court to give evidence

Page Numbers: 72,73,74

21/08/2014

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Witness Statement of Steve Elsmore dated 11/08/2016 and Canary Wharf Group Incident Report No. 74507

Page Numbers: 326,327,328,329,330,331,332

11/08/2016

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Witness Statement of Steve Elsmore

Page Numbers: 336,337

24/09/2016

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files!

 

 

·         The 2nd Asbo Folder / pub Book Issue: 1!

Interim Anti-Social Behaviour Order upon complaint, section 1D Crime and Disorder Act 1998, ON THE COMPLAINT of PC Steve Elsmore on behalf of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Page Numbers: 16,17

05/11/2014

Extra in Second Asbo Folder 1 of 8 Files! = 9

 

A)    The Asbo’s Regulation’s, Standard’s, Guidance and Laws that have gotten breached

 

 

Lead up to other applications

Old Ruff notes need to check for use

 

First contact from neighbours to council about me.

06/07/2016 Stain “Corridor situation”

 

27 days later I started my motor bike up case happened with Carron Dunno and also

Lemmy started to work for Enfield council 1 month after

 

 

01/08/2016

August 2016 Lemmy started work for Enfield council

 

Mother was sending emails to Dawn Allan and team at the time Lemmy started work and beforehand.

Her first email is dated:

FW Issue I am having

17/04/2015

 

 

What is 16 months before Lemmy started work for the company

 

 

12/08/2016

I started my bike up and Carron got abusive towards me from out of her window                         

 

2 days after I stared my bike

 

14/08/2016

I got arrested because of Carron case that got made up with stain

Taken to st Ann’s hospital “not interviewed at police station or told claimants name”

 

 

 

28/08/2016

I got released from st Ann’s Hospital

 

Went home to 109 burn croft Ave waiting for bail

 

 

05/10/2016

Re bailed to go back to the police station Carron and Stain setting me up

 

Date of bail 05/10/2016 but George set me up on stead in the morning banging at me when I was in the Barth

Accused Motor bike incident interviewed for both cases first time I found out about who said I threatened children was this day in interview “Carron”

 

 

Bailed to Stay at my Mothers 0

4/10/2016

Till

17/11/2016

But never went back to Burncroft Avenue till

03/12/2016

 

 

 

17/10/2016 Council received a letter of Mathiyalagans backdated till the 06/08/2016

 

Sarah Fleches

Sarah Fletchers meeting dated 11/11/2016

 

 

Sarah Fletchers “Tel-Call” dated 22/11/2016

 

Mathiyalagans

 

 

On the 02/02/2017 a total of 7 Months after Lemmy started work he got involved in my case

And started to Force a meeting in regard to satins case dated the 06/07/2016

Which Stains alleged case happened 1 month before Lemmy even worked for the company and I won the case against stain at court of the date of:

 

Evidence

Meeting stage at civic centre

Lemmy first contact#

 

75

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell

02/02/2017

10:45

1709

 

5 months 17 days latter

Of no meeting at the civic centre over Sarah Flechers forged work that Lemmy had been case handler to afterwards so, Lemmy got upset and put a possession order in against me.

 

And copied and pasted 31 incidents into it.

 

Contents

Stains case

 

Georges Case

 

Carron’s Case

 

Sarah Fletchers meeting dated 11/11/2016

When I was staying at my mother house

93

NOSP - Simon Cordell

19/07/2017

N/a

1846

 

94

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

19/07/2017

16:46

1846

 

 

 

3 months

I wanted the statements of the so-called victims

So Lemmy created an injunction order

He met Mathiyalagans for the 1st time

 

 

02/08/2017

Math met him

 

 

8 Day’s latter

 

Injunction Order

10/08/2017

Said to have got served the Lemmy 1st Injunction Order

 

The only reason that this website is up (Live Now) is because the doctors tried to take me away again under the Mental Health Act, when I never done anything wrong or in other words, I showed no signs of a Mental Illness. “I had to put the website up while being detained in Chase Farm Hospital.”

I am free now and still without any illness.

The Website is still in deep development and will be completed soon!

 

1)      I have built this website while only on my mobile phone’s internet.

2)      This website has been built while I have been held against my free will, on a curfew because of fraudulent claims and attacked by members of the public and official public servants.

3)       

 

 

One set of notes prior now 2nd set

 

Si Note:

 

Lemmy started work 10th 2016

 

RE: Formal Complaint dated 24/11 /2016

Both cases for the 14/08/2016 and the 04/10/2016 were dropped by the CPS this was done on the

15/11/2016 with no case to answer towards my son, yet my son was victimised and had false accusations put against his name and arrested.

My son is scared to go home due to what the neighbours are doing and saying and putting false allegations into the police, it seems they really don't want him to live there and will do anything they can to get him out.

 

 

From: Geoffrey Mann [Geoffrey.Mann@enfield.gov.uk]

Sent: 22/12/2016 - 17:45

We note your comment that your son has been a tenant for many years and that there have been no complaints about him until the publication of the ASBO against him on 4th August 2015. However, our records show that since your son’s tenancy began on 14th August 2006, there has been at least one previous complaint against your son from another neighbour prior to the ASBO.

---

 

 

Sent: 06/02/2017

I have asked for the dates these complaints were put in and yet have had nothing about the dates and times.

Could you please forward me a list of dates and times these complaints were put in, and list them in an order like this so we know if more complaints have been put in by one person.

Complaint from A on d

 

 

Mothers subject access request got on the:

 

 

Sent: 10/02/2017 - 16:01

To: 'Mother' lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Subject: RE: Anti-Social Behaviour Allegations against Mr Simon Cordell [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please see below as requested the details of recent allegations made against Mr Simon Cordell. I have listed the complainants as Complainant A, B and C.

 

Sent: 10/02/2017 - 16:01

 

On 11/11/2016 the Neighbourhood Officer met with Complainant A to discuss his allegations against Mr Cordell. He stated that some of the recent incidents happened on 6/8/16 at 6pm, 27 /9/16 at 11.45pm and 28/9/16 at 5.30pm. He stated that the incidents include, threatening behaviour, intimidation and aggressively demanding money. He alleged that Mr Cordell has physically threatened him in the past with a piece of wood. He also alleged that Mr Cordell has a big dog that always barks when someone comes into the block. He complained that Mr Cordell has a camera in the internal communal door facing the main entrance door to the block. He stated that he believes that Mr Cordell is using the camera to monitor when people come in or out of the block and that it makes him very uncomfortable and requested for the camera to be removed.

 

On 06/08/2016 Complainant A reported that Simon Cordell, his neighbour at flat 109 is threatening him and his wife and aggressively demanding money from him. He alleged that Mr Cordell called his wife 'a bitch' and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat. He also alleged that in July 2016, someone used a knife to puncture his tyres, all 4 of them, that he believes that the tyres were slashed by Simon, that although he did not see Simon do it but he was quite certain that it was him. He also alleged that Mr Cordell damaged the lock to his electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity.

 

On 08/12/2016 Complainant A reported that Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door, shouted abuse and threats at him and accused him of making noise.

 

On 23/12/2016 Complainant A reported that his wife was at home alone with their child between 3.45pm when Mr Cordell came and knocked on his front door, started to shout abuse and asked his wife to go in the bathroom and turn off the tap. He also alleged that Mr Cordell later removed his electricity fuse thereby cutting their power supply.

 

On 10/01/2017 Complainant A telephoned to report that on 26/12/2016 at about 12 to l pm he was going out with his family when Mr Cordell ran up the stairs with a towel round his waist and started shouting abuse and threats at him and his wife. He alleged that Mr Cordell accused him of tampering with his water supply and tried to stop them from leaving the block. He also stated that on 03/01/2017 at 10.47pm, he was coming back from a family outing and as soon as they entered the block, Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse and threats at him.

 

On 23/01/2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 6.24pm on 21/1/17. He alleged that his wife was at home with their child when Mr Cordell come and started banging on his front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused them of making noise.

 

On 15/02/2017 Complainant A reported an incident that occurred at 5:10pm on 31/1/17.

He alleged that his wife was alone with his child at home when Mr Cordell came and banged on his door and started shouting abuse and threats and accused them of banging on the floor.

 

Foi mum

 

 

O.1

10/01/2017: Copy of the letter sent to Mr Cordell giving him until 25/11/2016 to remove the CCTV he installed on the internal communal door attached.

P.1

10/01/2017: Joint home visit conducted with Lemmy. Mr Curtis said that he has had no further problems from

 

Sent: 10/02/2017 - 16:01

 

 

On 05/10/2016 Complainant B reported that Mr Cordell has been harassing him for a while in relation to alleged noise disturbances from his flat. He alleged that the previous day

on 04/10/2016 Simon was banging on his ceiling and later came upstairs and started kicking his door and shouting aggressively. He alleged that Simon then went downstairs dragged his motorbike from where he parked it and started smashing it up. He then called the police. He also stated that Mr Cordell had previously slashed his motorbike tyres with a knife, that he did not report it as he did not see him do it.

On 12/01/2016 Complainant B reported that on 11/12/16, Mr Cordell came and banged on his front door on three different occasions and accused him of banging on the pipes. He alleged that he also shouted abuse and threats at him.

 

Sent: 10/02/2017 - 16:01

On 31/10/2016 telephone call received from another resident on behalf of Complainant C. He alleged that Complainant C's neighbour, Simon was using threatening, abusive and insulting words towards Complainant C. He stated that he witnessed an incident that happened in September 2016 outside the block when Simon shouted abuse at Complainant C and made threats towards him.

 

 

On 04/11/2016 met with Complainant C to discuss his concerns following the report from another resident. He stated the first incident happened sometime in July 2016, that he cannot remember the exact date. He alleged that he was approached by Mr Cordell as he came out of his front door and he started shouting abuse at him and threatened to burn down his flat. He alleged that the second incident happened in September 2016.

He stated that he was on his way to meet a friend when Mr Cordell came at him 'ranting and raving' and said to him 'I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk'. He stated that two other neighbours witnessed the incident and that one of them told Mr Cordell to leave him alone. Complainant C also complained that Mr Cordell have installed a CCTV on the internal communal door and that he believes that he is monitoring his every move. He asked that the camera be removed as it is making him to feel very nervous, vulnerable and uncomfortable and is an invasion of his privacy.

On 14/12/2016 Complainant C reported that one of his neighbours visited him and as she rang his doorbell Mr Cordell came out of his flat and started shouting abuse at her. He also alleged that Mr Cordell shouted that he would take some action when his ASBO expires.

 

 

Sent: 10/02/2017 - 16:01

I will write to Mr Cordell next week to arrange for him to meet with me and another colleague at the Civic Centre to discuss the allegations made against him.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

ENl 3XA

Tel: 020 8379 5354

 

16/02/2017 -

 

Date: 19/07/2017

Dear Mr Cordell,

Notice of Seeking Possession - without prejudice

 

------

 

 

Q.        03/08/2017 stain Q

03/08/2017: “Blank Space” did have it scheduled for Witness Service Citizens Advice 0300 332 1000

contactcentre@citizensadvice.orq.uk

 

In relation to the above matter, please find a copy of the injunction application and court order
dated 09/08/2017

Hearing on 21/08/2017 at Edmonton County Court

 

 

·         Since:

09/08/2017 (1st injunction order)

The Defendant’s anti-social behaviour has ceased towards the neighbors and no complaints have not been received from them. Stated by council solicitor on the:

03/01/2018

 

Si Note:

·         Since:

09/08/2017

The Defendant’s anti-social behaviour has ceased towards the neighbors and no complaints have not been received from them. Stated by council solicitor on the:

03/01/2018

 

In Report 09/01/2018      x2

 

12/01/2018 email to mother and solicitor

 

 

In Diary

19/09/2018     

neighbours from 117 called police to report the subject for knocking on their door repeatedly

 

16/10/2018    = report to 44 from 31 + 31’s are different

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B)    Possession Order 1

 

93

NOSP - Simon Cordell

19/06/2017

N/a

1846

 

94

Lemmy Nwabuisi Re Notice of Seeking Possession

19/06/2017

16:46

1846

 

95

Mother RE Mr Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession

26/06/2017

00:49

1853

 

96

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Simon Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession

28/07/2017

13:53

1885

 

97

Lemmy Nwabuisi RE Simon Cordell Notice of Seeking Possession

28/07/2017

15:42

1885

 

 

From Council History

19/07/2017

NOSP

served on Mr. Cordell today at 4.05pm with Enfield Highway DWOs, copy attachment

 

 

 

ENFIELD COUNCIL

V

Mr. Simon Cordell

 

The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:  04

NOSP - Simon Cordell

/ Page Numbers: 3279,3280,

 

I never got told: --

I did ask my mother to write to the council.

The reason that I asked my mother to write to the Enfield Council was due to members of my neighbours attacking me while I illegally get held in my flat by the Enfield Council and the Edmonton Police officials on a curfew and to me this is getting tortured against my own free will Even low I had asked my mother to help me stop theses illegal attacks against my person, I never did get told by my mother that she was sending emails

And this was while I was on Bail conditions not to go back to my own home!

This copy of the possession order against me has 25 incidents that I got accused of, but there was also another copy that did get served and processed on the same day which is contained in the email book at page numbers:

New Email Book:

Old Email Book: 944

And this accounts for 31 incidents that I am getting accused off.

Anti‐Social Behaviour Team

Community Safety Unit

Environmental & Community Safety

B Block North

Civic Centre

Enfield

EN1 3XA

Lemmy Nwabuisi

Anti‐Social Behaviour Team

Tel: 020 8379 5354

Mob: 07583115576

Mr. Simon Cordell

Home address:

109 Burncroft Avenue

Enfield

Post Code

EN3 7JQ

Dear Ms Cordell,

Please find attached copy of a Notice of Seeking Possession that was posted through Mr Cordell’s letterbox

this afternoon at 4.05pm. The notice is served as a result of reports of anti‐social behaviour made against Mr

Cordell by some of his neighbours and Enfield Council members of staff. We will advise Mr Cordell to seek independent legal advice from a solicitor or the Citizens Advice Bureau in respect of this notice.

Kind Regards

Lemmy Nwabuisi

The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue:

NOSP - Simon Cordell Possession

/ Page Numbers: 3267,3268,3269,3270,3271,3272,3273,3274,3275,3276,3277,3278,

ENFIELD

Council

If you need this document in another language or format, contact the service using the details above.

Ian Davis Chief Executive

Enfield Council

Civic Centre, Silver Street Enfield EN13XY

Website: www.enfield.gov.uk

EQUALITY FRAMEWORK FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXCELLENT

Mr Simon Cordell Please reply to: Lemmy Nwabuisi

109 Burncroft Avenue Anti-Social Behaviour Team

Enfield Community Safety Unit

EN3 7Jq B Block North

Civic centre

Enfield EN1 3XA

E-mail: lemmy.nwabuisi@enfield.gov.uk

My Ref:

Your Ref:

Date: 19th July 2017

Dear Mr Cordell,

Notice of Seeking Possession - without prejudice        

It has come to our attention that you have breached several terms and conditions of your tenancy by causing nuisance, harassment and anti-social behaviour to your neighbours and Enfield Council employees.

Enfield Council takes all acts of anti-social behaviour very seriously. Consequently, we have no alternative but to serve you with the enclosed Notice of Seeking Possession.

You have breached your tenancy agreement by committing an act of anti-social behaviour.

The Notice is the first step towards repossessing your home. It is valid for twelve months and Enfield Council will commence legal action to repossess your home any time within this period if further substantiated allegation of breach of your tenancy conditions is made against you.

You may wish to seek legal advice from a solicitor or your local Citizens Advice Bureau for free and confidential advice from an organisation that is completely independent from Enfield Council.

ENFIELD

Connected

Please contact me on that above telephone number if you wish to discuss this further.

Yours Sincerely

Lemmy Nwabuisi ASB Team

IMPORTANT - Enfield residents should register for an online Enfield Connected account. Enfield Connected puts many Council services in one place, speeds up your payments and saves you time - to set up your account today go to www.enfield.gov.uk/connected

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION

HOUSING ACT 1985 - SECTION 83

THIS NOTICE IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS REQUIRING YOU TO GIVE UP

POSSESSION OF YOUR DWELLING. YOU SHOULD READ IT AND ALL THE

NOTES VERY CAREFULLY.

Housing Department P O. Box No. 60, Civic Centre, Enfield

1.      To: Mr. Simon Cordell

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 1

If you need advice about this Notice, and what you should do about it, take it as quickly as possible to a Citizens’ Advice Bureau, a Housing Aid Centre, or a Law Centre, or to a Solicitor. You may be able to receive Legal Aid, but this will depend on your personal circumstances.

The Landlord, the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Enfield intends to apply to the Court for an order requiring you to give up possession of:

109 Burncroft Avenue, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7JQ

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 2

If you are a secure tenant under the Housing Act 1985, you can only be required to leave your dwelling if your landlord obtains an order for possession from the Court. The order must be based on one of the Grounds, which are set out in the 1985 Act (see paragraphs 3 and 4 below).

1

If you are willing to give up possession without a Court order, you should notify the person who signed this Notice as soon as possible and say when you would leave.

Possession will be sought on Grounds 1 & 2 of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1985, which read:

POSSESSTION ORDER - GROUNDS

Num

Grounds for the Decision

RESPONSE

1

Ground 1

Rent lawfully due from the tenant has no? been paid or an obligation of the tenancy has been broken or not performed.

1. Ground 1

Reply:

 

Num

Grounds for the Decision

RESPONSE

2

Ground 2

The tenant or a person residing in or visiting the dwelling-house has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a person residing, visiting or otherwise engaging in unlawful activity in the locality, or

(aa) has been guilty of conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to the landlord of the dwelling-house, or a person employed (whether or not by the landlord) in connection with the landlord’s housing management functions, and that is directly or indirectly related to or affects those functions, or

has been convicted of—

using the dwelling-house or allowing it to be used for immoral or illegal purposes, or

an indictable offence committed in, or in the locality of, the dwelling-house.

1. Ground 2

Reply:

 

2.  Ground 2

Reply:

 

3.  Ground 2

Reply:

 

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 3

Whatever Grounds for possession are set out in paragraph 3 of this Notice, the Court may allow any of the other Grounds to be added at a later stage. If this is done, you will be told about it so you can argue at the hearing in Court about the new Ground, as well as the Grounds set out in paragraph 3, if you want to.

Reasons

4. The reasons for taking this action are: -

You have failed to comply with the following obligations of your tenancy agreement which commenced on 14th August 2006.

The relevant conditions of the tenancy agreement are as follows:

 

As to Ground 2

Condition 9

You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in or visiting your home. This means That you must ensure that they must not act in breach of any of these conditions Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in the property, in communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and

or/ anywhere within Enfield borough.”

1. Condition 9

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 9

Reply:

 

3.  Condition 9

Reply:

 

 

Condition 10

“You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely k) cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

 

1. Condition 10

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 10

Reply:

 

3.  Condition 10

Reply:

 

 

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of our officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

 

1. Condition 21

 

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 21

Reply:

 

As to Ground 1

 

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

 

1. Condition 31

Reply:

 

 

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order."

 

1. Condition 33

Reply:

 

 

 

Condition 34

“You must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items. inappropriately).”

 

1. Condition 34

Reply:

 

 

 

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, Improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

 

1. Condition 44

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 44

Reply:

 

 

 

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good

repair during the tenancy.”

 

1. Condition 53

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 53

Reply:

 

 

Condition 57

“You must allow our employees, representatives and contractors to come into your property to service any electrical and gas supplies and appliance, that we are responsible for maintaining.”

 

1. Condition 57

Reply:

 

 

 

 

Condition 69

“You must not interfere with the electric or gas supply.”

 

1. Condition 69

Reply:

 

 

Condition 76

“You have the right to keep one pet, or animal such as a cat, a dog, small bird, fish, non-poisonous insect, spider, small snake or lizard, rabbit hamster, guinea pig, mouse, gerbil or domestic rat as long as they do not cause damage to the property, or nuisance or annoyance to anyone in your locality.”

 

1. Condition 76

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 76

Reply:

 

 

Condition 79

“You must always keep your dog{s) on a lead in communal areas and on our land.”

 

1. Condition 79

Reply:

 

 

Particulars of Breaches

 

(1)

We received a report that on 6th July 2016 you approached an elderly neighbour as he came out of his flat and started to shout abuse and swear at him and threatened to burn down his flat.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (1)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (1)

Reply:

The 1st Injunction Order

Stain Curtis

Council History

Page Numbers:

46,

47,

48,

49,

50,

51,

52,

Complaint Made

A: 06/07/2016

An Associate of Stains call for a free cab to take stain to court

Updated

B: 31/10/2016

Case dropped Info

C: 16/11/2016

 

3.  Particulars of Breaches (1)

Reply:

 

 

(2)

We received a report that sometime in July 2016 you damaged the lock of a neighbour’s electric cupboard and removed his fuse box resulting in no electricity to his flat.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (2)

Reply:

 

2. Particulars of Breaches (2)

Reply:

The 1st Injunction Order

Waltham Forest states no prior info dated 17 /10/2016!

Page Numbers:

40,

41,

42,

43,

44,

45,

 

3. Particulars of Breaches (2)

Reply:

 

 

(3)

We received a report that on 6th August 2016 you threatened one of your neighbours and his wife and aggressively demanded money from him. It is also alleged that you repeatedly swore and shouted abuse at him and his wife and called his wife a ‘bitch’ and tried to stop him from going up the stairs to his flat by standing in front of him.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (3)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (3)

Reply:

The 1st Injunction Order

Page Numbers:

40,

41,

42,

43,

44,

45,

 

3. Particulars of Breaches (3)

Reply:

“My Note: This lie got made up as a fake / forged allegation against myself while I was staying at my mother’s house due to police & court bail conditions

A letter first got sent by the Mathiyalagan family to the Enfield Council a whole 2 weeks after I got placed on bail “first complaint stating that I was a drug addict, then on afterwards followed by 3 times telephone calls made to the council. Soon afterwards a meeting got held at the civic centre including Miss Sarah Flexure.

  • The 1st by letter sent to the Enfield Council received on the 17/10/2016
  • 1st phone call:
  • 2nd phone call.
  • 3rd phone call;

and then after a meeting between Sarah Fletcher and the Mathiyalagans took place on the 11/11/2016” While I was staying at my mother’s on bail conditions.

None of the names mentioned realised that I was on bail conditions until the 22/11/2016 when I made a phone call to Miss Sarah Flexure from my mother’s house.

 

 

(4)

Sometime in September 2016 it is alleged that you confronted an elderly neighbour outside your block of flats, 109-119 Burncroft Avenue as he was going to the local park with another resident and started to shout abuse and threats at him and said to him ‘I can get you over at the park, I know you go for a walk’.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (4)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (4)

Reply:

The 1st Injunction Order

Stain Curtis

Council History

Page Numbers: 46,

47,

48,

49,

50,

51,

52,

Complaint Made

A: 06/07/2016

An Associate of Stains call for a free cab to take stain to court

Updated

B: 31/10/2016

Case dropped Info

C: 16/11/2016

X 2 This is the same as the Stain Case dated 06/07/2016 but with a different date!

 

 

(5)

We received a report that on 27th September 2016 you confronted one your neighbours as I was returned to his flat with his family arc* threatened and swore a! him and demanded money from-him. It is also alleged that you later banged on his door, shouted further abuse and - swear words at him and accused him of making noise inside his flat. –

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (5)

Reply:

“My Note: This was said in the meeting between Sarah Fletcher and the Mathiyalagans on the 11/11/2016

While I was staying at my mother’s on bail conditions.

There are three times dates that never got included in the possession Order dated the 17/07/2016, created by Lemmy Nwabusi and the reason for this is that were they were all made up on the 11/11/2016 in a meeting with Sarah Fletcher, before Lemmy was a case handler for these on goings.

The three missing dates make the fact of malicious prosses more obvious!

Missing dates are

E4: 08/08/2016: I believe this date was too close to the 06/08/2016 & the 12/08/2016 to look real!

E5: 16/10/2016: on this date I was at my mother’s house on bail and could not have done as accused! Bail from the 04/10/2016 till the 03/12/2016!

E6: 12/08/2016: I believe this date was too close to the 06/08/2016 & the 08/08/2016 to look real!

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (5)

Reply:

 

 

(6)

We received a report that on 28th September 2016 you aggressively- banged on a neighbour’s door and threatened and shouted verbal abuse ' and swear words at L.dm. It is also alleged that you aggressively demanded money from him.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (6)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (6)

Reply:

“My Note: This was said in the meeting between Sarah Fletcher and the Mathiyalagans on the 11/11/2016

While I was staying at my mother’s on bail conditions.

 

 

(7)

We received a report that on 4th October 2016 you aggressively banged on your ceiling and accused one of your neighbours of making noise, it is - alleged that you then went to your neighbour’s flat and started kicking and ' banging on his front door aggressively, accused him of banging on the floor and was swearing and shouting abuse at him. It is also alleged that you later went downstairs, dragged your neighbour’s motorbike from where it was parked and started to hit it with a piece of wood thereby causing some damage to the motorbike.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (7)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (7)

Reply:

The 1st Injunction Order

Page Number: 223

Claim Number: D02ED073 –

“WITNESS STATEMENT OF MR LEMMY NWABUISI” – Dated: 07/08/2017

 

The Enfield Gov / Email’s Issue: 04

Page Numbers: 702,703,704,705

RE: Formal Complaint dated 24/11 /2016

To Whom It May Concern:

 

And my diary

 

Re bailed to find out the truth Carron Dunno!

Arrest

Arrest/Summons Ref: 16/01YE/01/3890G

Name Charged: CORDELL, SIMON

Date of Birth: 26/01/81

Fingerprint Status: CONFIRMED 01FP 05/10/16

DNA Status: NOT TAKEN

Process Stage: ARRESTED ON 04/10/16 13:07

Arresting Officer: 01YE 05/10/16 / CAMPBELL/PC/205732

Report Owner: 01 (METROPOLITAN POLICE)

Prosecuting Agent: CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE (CPS)

Last Updated: N/a

Description: REMANDED ON BAIL ON 05/10/16

At: AT NORTH LONDON MAGISTRATES

To Appear At: NEXT APPEARING ON 17/11/16

At: AT NORTH LONDON MAGISTRATES

Owner: 01 (METROPOLITAN POLICE)

Bail Address: BAIL ADDRESS: 23 BYRON TERRACE LONDON    N9 7DG

Last Updated: N/a

Condition 1: NOT TO CONTACT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY Carron Dunno OR Burncroft Avenue Tenants

Condition 2: EXCLUSION: NOT TO ENTER BURNCROFT AVENUE EN3

Condition 3: RESIDENCE: LIVE AND SLEEP EACH NIGHT AT 23 BYRON TERRACE N9 7DG

04/10/16: Arrested!
05/10/16:
Police station!

17/11/16: Court won the case!

 

 

(8)

On 22nd November 2016 during a telephone conversation between you, Mrs Cordell your mother and Ms Sarah Fletcher, neighbourhood officer, Ms. Fletcher reported that she overheard you threaten her by saying ‘I’m goanna do her over’ and then ‘I’m goanna take her job just for fun’.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (8)

Reply:

 

 

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (8)

Reply:

Sarah Fletcher neighbourhood officer from the council claims that on

22nd November 2016

during a telephone conversation between her, myself and mother that she overheard me threaten her by saying 'I'm going to do her over' and then 'I'm going to take her job just for fun'.

This is not true

The reason that it is not true is because what has now been stated to have occurred is more than just misinterpreted information of the so called Mid – day event.

The Council’s memo of a telephone call on that day:

Is forged and therefore incorrect and is not supported by self and mother to be true facts that have been documented with a fair prosses by the statement maker. The context contained within side the statement had been fabricated so to support the claimants claim.

While also set out to avoid displinary action for the statement makers and hardworking colleague’s incompetence leading to negligence and gross misconduct, set out against myself and then on afterwards having a negative effect also within my loved one’s life’s.

All what has been achieved by the Enfield Council since the start of my official complaint to themselves has gotten managed with criminal intention to put I in harm’s way

From the of start of themselves handling my case load of an official workload.

Sarah Fletcher as mentioned whom once was a neighbourhood officer who did work in collaboration with the Enfield Council, states that she received a call from Mr. Simon Paul Cordell

Whom is an Enfield secure resident within his housing tenancy that is attached to the address of 109 Burncroft Avenue at around the time of Mid – Day: 01:20Pm?

The time that Sarah Fletcher states she received the phone call is incorrect but not by far even low it is still 100% incorrect. I and my Mother am sure of this as we cared very much so when deciding to make the phone call to my housing officer that we both documented down all relevant information accurately.

When doing so we noted down the precise time of 01:04Pm

I did get transferred by customer services when making the phone call to my housing officer about the way I was getting victimised, this did not take too long.

Once on the phone to Sarah Fletcher I started to explain to her a shorted down list of emergency issues that I was having wile renting my home.

1.  That my mother had been contacting her and her team, while also contacting other official persons with relevance since the date of

00/00/2015

And this had continued up a till date and without any fair follow up’s as company protocol states is mandatory.

And due to this lack of concern I had continued to suffer for a much further time frame than ever would have been if her and other persons jobs were followed correctly.

2.

3.

4.

5.

. 1.20pm.

The call was transferred by the customer services team informing me that Mr. Cordell wished to discuss his housing option show to move.

I took the call- he sounded agitated and said that he had a few things that he wished to discuss with me.

He said he was calling in response to a letter that I had sent him requesting the removal of a CCTV camera that he had installed on the inner communal/fire door on the ground floor of the block.

He informed me that he would not be removing the camera as he believed he was legally allowed to have the camera as the communal area was his.

I explained that he was in breach of his tenancy conditions as permission had not been sought or granted for the installation and he could not install anything in the communal area as these belonged to the Council.

He maintained that his neighbour in another block had a camera and had taken the Council to court about it and won the case, I responded that I could not comment on other cases,

but my position remains as per the letter I sent: That the camera was in breach of tenancy conditions, was invasive of the privacy of other residents in the block as it points at the outer communal door and should be removed by Friday 25th November or the Council will remove it and charge him for the cost of doing so.

He then said that the camera was fake, so it didn't need to be removed.

I responded that it did still need to be removed.

His voice was raised throughout the exchange and I had to ask him to calm down and lower his voice more than once.

He then said that he wanted to move on to finding out about moving to another address.

He proceeded to give me a full history of his experiences with the police and previous housing management and alleged that 'Jackie', who had previously lived above him and 'Stan', his immediate neighbour on the ground floor, had victimised him over a long period of time and that he had done nothing wrong. This history was very full, and it was difficult to get a word in because he was so worked up so, I let him relay the information to me as it seemed like he wanted to get it off of his chest.

He was very derogatory about the police and previous housing staff who had signed a request for an Asbo application against him.

I told him that I could not comment about the previous action taken.

He then came on to more recent events and stated that there had been an incident between him and another resident where she had shouted at him out of her window because of him starting up a scrambler bike in his garden.

He maintained that he was courteous during the exchange, but the police came and arrested him because she told them that he had threatened to kill her and that he had been put in the mental hospital, had won his case in court and was able to go home as of today.

He said that he wanted me to give him 'points' so that he could move.

I explained that his best means of moving would be through a mutual exchange, but he was adamant that he did not want to do this and wanted to be moved in the same way that he moved into this property 1 l yrs. ago by being given points.

I explained that a transfer was unlikely based on what he had told me so far but that I could look into the position for him.

He said a lot about his perceived victimisation by his neighbours and expressed that he felt that I should I have a duty to protect him.

I explained that I had a responsibility to all residents living at Burncroft Avenue and took the opportunity to mention that I had received some reports about antisocial behaviour by him that I would need to discuss with him but suggested that we leave that for today.

He then put his mother on the line (she had been trying to interject throughout the conversation) who said she wanted to know why I had not responded to her messages to call her.

I apologised for this and explained that I have been very busy, but that I needed to know whether we had written permission from Mr. Cordell for us to speak to her - she said that there was a written note recorded on our files in

2015

Mr. Cordell asked her what I was asking her and when she replied that I was querying permission I clearly heard Mr. Cordell say angrily and aggressively "I am goanna do her over" and then "I am goanna take her job just for fun".

I informed Mrs Cordell that I had overheard these remarks and that I was ending the call.

She said that her son had now left the room and she was talking to me.

I repeated that I would be ending the call and that she should put what she wanted to say in writing to me.

Sarah Fletcher Neighbourhood Officer.

 

(9)

We received a report that on 8th December 2016 you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse and threats and accused him of making noise.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (9)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (9)

Reply:

 

 

(10)

We received a report that on 11th December 2016 you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door several times and accused them of banging on pipes. It is also alleged that you shouted abuse and threats at them.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (10)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (10)

Reply:

 

(11)

We received a report that on 14th December 2016 you were verbally abusive towards a woman who was visiting one of your neighbours as she knocked on your neighbour’s door.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (11)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (11)

Reply:

 

 

(12)

We received a report that on 23rd December 201 you banged on a neighbour’s front door, shouted abuse at them and asked them to turn their tap off. It is also alleged that you then removed their electricity fuse thereby cutting off their power supply

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (12)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (12)

Reply:

 

 

(13)

We received a report that on 26th December 2016 you ran up the communal stairs to the first floor and confronted one of your neighbours as he was going out with his family and started to shout abuse and threats at him and his wife and accused him of tampering with your water supply, you also attempted to stop him from leaving the block.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (13)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (13)

Reply:

 

(14)

We received a report that on 3rd January 2017 you confronted one of your neighbours as he returned to the block with his wife and two-year-old daughter and started shouting abuse and threats at them.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (14)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (14)

Reply:

 

 

(15)

We received a report that on 21st January 2017 you aggressively banged on your neighbour’s door, swore and shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of making noise.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (15)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (15)

Reply:

 

 

(16)

We received a report that on 31st January 2017 you aggressively banged on one of your neighbour’s door, shouted abuse and threats at them and accused them of banging on the floor.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (16)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (16)

Reply:

 

 

(17)

We received a report that on 7th February 2017 you approached the leaseholder of 117 Burncroft Avenue and his plumber outside the block as they were attempting to resolve the problem causing low water pressure in the flat. You said to the leaseholder that there were problems between you and his tenants but did not give any specific details. The leaseholder explained to you that his tenants were experiencing low water pressure in the flat and you said to him ‘you will not solve the problem as I am restricting their water supply’. The leaseholder later knocked on your door and asked whether you would increase the water pressure and you stated ‘I cannot do anything at the moment, I will sort it out later’.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (17)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (17)

Reply:

 

 

(18)

On 24th February 2017 Sarah Fletcher (Neighbourhood Officer) and Steve, Stirk (Maintenance Surveyor) attended your property at flat 109 Burncroft Avenue to inspect the property following reports of low water pressure from flats 113 and 117 Burncroft Avenue. While inside your flat, they observed that you have installed an iron security gate inside your front door. It also appeared to them that the wall between your kitchen and living room seemed to have been removed thereby creating an open plan effect. Much of the property was taken up industrial type printers, boxes and folders and there were dog faeces in your back garden.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (18)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (18)

Reply:

 

You, the tenant, are responsible for the behaviour of anyone, including your children, living in or visiting your home. This means That you must ensure that they must not act in breach of any of these conditions Also, you must not encourage them to act in such a way. This applies in the property, in communal and surrounding areas, any property belonging to the council and or/ anywhere within Enfield borough.”

 

Condition 10

“You must not act in any way which causes, or is likely k) cause, a nuisance or annoyance or is anti-social.”

 

1. Condition 10

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 10

Reply:

 

 

Condition 21

“You must not abuse, harass, make offensive comments and/or malicious allegations, use or threaten to use violence against any of our officers or agents, or against a councillor. This applies at any time and in any place. We may report the matter to the Police.”

 

1. Condition 21

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 21

Reply:

 

As to Ground 1

 

Condition 31

“You must take care not to cause damage to your property or the property of your neighbours.”

 

1. Condition 31

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 31

Reply:

 

 

Condition 33

“You must keep the inside of your property clean and in reasonable decorative order."

 

1. Condition 33

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 33

Reply:

 

 

Condition 34

“You must not use the property in any way that may cause a health or safety hazard or encourage vermin and/or pests (for example, by hoarding items. inappropriately).”

 

1. Condition 34

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 34

Reply:

 

 

Condition 44

“You must obtain our prior written permission before carrying out any alterations, Improvements or structural work to the property. You may need to obtain other permissions such as planning permission or building regulations approval.”

 

1. Condition 44

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 44

Reply:

 

 

Condition 53

“You must keep the inside of the property, the fixtures and fittings and all glass in the property in good repair during the tenancy.”

 

1. Condition 53

Reply:

 

2.  Condition 53

Reply:

 

Particulars of Breaches

 

(19)

On 16th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is reported that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to our building and said to her that you had her bank details and personal details such as date of birth and said to her that you wanted her and her husband to pay you some money.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (19)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (19)

Reply:

 

(20)

On 18th June 2017 at 11:55hrs it is reported that you confronted one of your neighbours as she was exiting the main entrance to your building and said to her that you knew what time she went out and what time she returned and to tell her husband that you would like to speak to him.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (20)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (20)

Reply:

 

 

(21)

On 23rd June 2017 at 23:35hrs it is reported that you came out of your flat with your dog without a lead and attacked one of your neighbours as he returned from work by punching him twice on the chest. You tried to push him out of the block and snatched his phone as he brought took it out of his pocket to record the incident.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (21)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (21)

Reply:

 

 

(22)

On 28th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is reported that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block. You swore and shouted abuse at her and accused her of making noise inside her flat. You told her that you know all her personal details and that of her husband including their full names, phone numbers, date of birth and banking details. You demanded that they pay you some money and asked her to tell her husband to come and see you.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (22)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (22)

Reply:

 

 

(23)

On 30th June 2017 at 11:45hrs it is reported that you confronted your neighbour as she was leaving the block and accused her of slamming the door. She denied slamming the door and called her a liar and proceeded to swear and shout abuse at her.

 

1. Particulars of Breaches (23)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (23)

Reply:

 

 

(24)

On 2nd July 2017 at 17:18hrs it is reported that you confronted your neighbour as he was going out with his family with your dog barking and without a lead and asked him when he was going to hand over the money. It is also alleged that as they left the block, you ran after them swearing and shouting abuse at your neighbour and demanding that he must pay you some money if he wants you to leave him alone. You also said to him that you have all their personal details including their dates of birth and bank details.

1. Particulars of Breaches (24)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (24)

Reply:

 

 

(25)

On 12th July 2017 an Enfield Council Surveyor attended your flat to investigate reports of low water pressure to flats above yours but you refused him access the Surveyor attended your flat again in the evening of the same day following further reports that the water supply to die affected flats had completely ceased and you refused him access. You then followed him to his car swearing and shouting abuse at him and prevented him from driving his car. He then called the police.

1. Particulars of Breaches (25)

Reply:

 

2.  Particulars of Breaches (25)

Reply:

 

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 4.

Before the Court will grant-an order on any of the Grounds 1 to 8 or 12 to 16, it must be satisfied that it is reasonable to require you to leave. This means that, if one of these Grounds is set out in paragraph 3 to this Notice, you will be able to argue at the hearing in Court that it is not reasonable that you should have to leave, even if you accept that the Ground applies.

Before the court grants an order on any of the Grounds 9 to 16, it must be satisfied that there will be suitable alternative accommodation for you when you have to leave. This means that the Court will have to decide that, in its opinion, there will be other accommodation which is reasonably suitable for the needs of you and your family, taking into particular account various factors such as the nearness of your place of work, and the sort of housing that other people with similar needs are offered. Your new home will have to be let to you on another secure tenancy or a private tenancy under the Rent Act of a kind that will give you similar security.

There is no requirement for suitable alternative accommodation where Grounds 1 to 8 apply.

If your landlord is not a local authority, and the local authority gives a certificate that it will provide you with suitable accommodation, the Court has to accept the certificate.

One of the requirements of Ground 10A is that the landlord must have approval for the redevelopment scheme from the Secretary of State (or, in the case of a housing association landlord, the Housing Corporation). The landlord must have consulted all secure tenants affected by the proposed redevelopment scheme.

5. Court proceedings for possession of the dwelling-house can be begun immediately. The date by which the tenant is to give up possession of the dwelling-house is Monday the 24th of August 2017.

NOTES TO PARAGRAPH 5

Court proceedings cannot be begun until after this date, which cannot he earlier than the date when your tenancy or license could have been brought to an end.

This means that if you have a weekly or Fortnightly tenancy, there should at least 4 weeks between the date this Notice is given and the date in this paragraph.

After this date, court proceedings may be begun at once or at any time during the following twelve months. Once the twelve months are up this Notice will lapse, and a new Notice must be served before possession can be sought.

Signed

Anti-Social Behaviour Manager

Date

On behalf of Enfield Council Housing Address: The Edmonton Centre, 36-44 South Mall London N9 0TN

End:

--

C)    Injunction Order 1

--

100

Lemmy first Injunction Order 09_08_2017-page 1

09/08/2017

N/a

--

D)    Injunction Order 2

--

E)    Possession Order 2

--

F)     Allowed their clients to make fake allegations against my person

--

G)   Allowed their clients to attack myself home and possessions

--

A large list of criminal offences has taken place against me since the year of 2013 till date by members of the public who are Enfield councils Clients and that also of Enfield Councils Employees

I have contacted the Metropolitan Police and the Enfield Council who are my local authority’s in respect of dealing with the criminal offences that I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 12-08-2020 21-06

12/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 120

 

 40.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

40. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 12-08-2020 21-06

12/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 120

--

120,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 12/08/2020 09:06:15 PM

To: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Mother this is an update of parts that can be used and memorable bits

Attachments: UTF-8bU2ktRW1haWwtaW5zdXJhbmNlLTIwMjAgKDEpLmRvYw=

 

 

 

 

 

41.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41.1 1. 2.

Kay Osborne letter- 13-08-2020 13-18

13/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128

 

 41.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

41.1 1. 2.

Kay Osborne letter- 13-08-2020 13-18

13/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128

--

121,

From: Kay Osborne <Kay.Osborne@Enfield.gov.uk>

Sent time: 13/08/2020 01:41:45 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Kay Osborne letter asked for [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell

Many thanks for your email.

I note the contents and look forward to receiving a letter/email from you as what you are claiming for and why you consider the Council to be at fault.

Kind regards

Kay Osborne Dip CII

Insurance Manager Audit & Risk Management London Borough of Enfield Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XF

insurance@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 3003

Kay.osborne@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 1476

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 13 August 2020 13:18

To: Kay Osborne <Kay.Osborne@Enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: Kay Osborne letter asked for [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Dear Kay Osborne

Thank you for the reply to my letter.

You have asked me for more information, which at this time I am dealing with, but may take me around a week in order to get the information you are asking for.

Regards

Simon

On Tuesday, 11 August 2020, 13:10:02 BST, Kay Osborne <kay.osborne@.enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell

Many thanks for your attached letter.

122,

Unfortunately as you are making a claim against the Council neither I or our Insurers are able to assist you in documenting your evidence against the Council.

In order that I can forward your claim to Insurers please confirm what you are claiming for and why you consider the Council to be at fault.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Kay Osborne Dip CII

Insurance Manager Audit & Risk Management London Borough of Enfield Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XF

insurance@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 3003

Kav.osborne@enfield.gov.uk 020 8379 1476

From: Rewired <re wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 10 August 2020 14:19

To: Insurance <insurance@.enfield.gov.uk>: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk> Subject: RE: Kay Osborne letter asked for

Dear Kay Osborne

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me by phone last week please see attached letter you asked me to send to you.

Regards

123,

Simon

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

www.enfeld.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

124,

Extra Page: Error!

125,

Extra Page: Error!

126,

Extra Page: Error!

127,

Extra Page: Error!

128,

Extra Page: Error!

 

 

 

 

 

42.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-08-2020 22-44

14/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 129,130

 

 42.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

42. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -14-08-2020 22-44

14/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 129,130

--

129,

What's in your account

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 14/08/2020 10:44:44 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your August account summary is inside.

Customer Number: 374

August Account Summary for Simon.

Pro tips, just for you:

What's your domain worth? Find out now.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

Here's a sweet discount on your next new order.

What's in your account:

130,

DOMAINS

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

toosmooth.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.com

toosmoothentertainment.com

GODADDY MOBILE APP

All the tools and help you need to succeed online — all on your phone.

Register a domain, build your website and manage your account on the fly.

GET IT ON

Google Play

online

Opening new businesses for 5 years! Start your online business now. Available at Ł40.14 Ł0.99

Ł13.99

Ł1.99*

WTTiiTI

Ł19.14

Ł2.99*

Ł21.57

.agency

Ł3.97*

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Note: If you are the domain administrator of more than one GoDaddy domain account, you may receive this notice multiple times.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3959414390

 

 

 

 

 

 

43.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -21-08-2020 11-44

21/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 131,132,133,134

 

 43.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

43. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -21-08-2020 11-44

21/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 131,132,133,134

-

131,

No Good for Report!

132,

No Good for Report!

133,

No Good for Report!

134,

No Good for Report!

 

 

 

 

 

 

44.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -26-08-2020 10-00

26/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 135,136

 

 44.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

44. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -26-08-2020 10-00

26/08/2020

/ Page Numbers: 135,136

--

135,

Hello Simon

Your Motor Trade Insurance Policy is due

to renew!

Renewal date: 08/09/2020 Reference Number: 156

Get a Quick Quote

It's that time again and we have on file from previous years that your renewal is

due on the 08/09/2020.

As you have used us before to find cheap traders’ insurance, we thought we may remind you of your upcoming renewal and see if you would like to use us again.

You can get a quote by pressing the big green button above OR by calling us

From: Total Insurance <info@total-insurance.co.uk>

Sent time: 26/08/2020 10:00:31 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, Your Motor Trade Insurance is due to renew

total insurance motor trade header

136,

dedicated call centre on 0203 876 5050 and quoting your reference number

located above.

reviews

This e-mail has been sent to re_wired@ymail.com,

 

 

 

 

 

 

45.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -01-09-2020 13-41    

01/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 137,138

 

 45.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

45. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -01-09-2020 13-41          

01/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 137,138

--

137,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 01/09/2020 01:41:16 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon Cordell: Your GoDaddy Renewal Notice

You qualify for 20% off any new order of Ł29.84 or more. *

Use promo code tfh1964d5 at checkout.

24/7 Support: 020 7084 1810 Simon Cordell —

Customer Number:374

Your domains are about to auto­ renew.

Smart choice. As long as your payment info is still up to date, you can keep doing your thing. Not sure it's right? No problem. Just sign into your account and find out.

.UK (. CO.UK)

Domain Renewal

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

Auto-renews on 06/09/2020  Ł11.99 / 1 Year **

COM Domain Renewal

t-s-enterprises.com

Auto-renews on 06/09/2020  Ł15.99 / 1 Year **

UK domains need to be renewed 15 days before they cancel. Learn more >

We participate in account update services. As part of Visa® and MasterCard® programs, banks may notify us of updated credit card expiration date(s) and/or card number(s), which will automatically update your payment information in our system and allow us to attempt to renew your product(s) as scheduled. If paying with American Express, auto­renewal on an expired/re-assigned card may be automatically billed by American Express using the new expiration date and/or card number without notification to us. Similar services may be supported by another card

138,

brands. If attempts to bill your credit card are unsuccessful, your product(s) will expire. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

We will automatically renew the above product(s) on the renewal date and charge the credit card you have associated with each product. If the credit card associated with each product has expired or been closed, we cannot automatically renew the product and your product(s) will expire. We may be notified by banks of updates to your expiration date and/or card number, allowing for successful product renewal. Some card brands may automatically bill the new credit card without notification to us. To update your credit card information, or to change your automatic renewal status, please log in to your account.

NOTE: Our free product credit policy has been updated - see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the Credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part.

If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

**Plus ICANN fee of Ł0.15 per domain name per year. Domains automatically renew at original registration length.

Prices are current as of 01/09/2020 and may be changed without notice. All domain name registrations and renewals are non-refundable and are subject to the terms and conditions of our Registration Agreement. Certain domains will be billed up to 30 days prior to the renewal date.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

4011833610

 

 

 

 

 

 

46.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -06-09-2020 19-42

06/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 139,140           

 

 46.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

46. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -06-09-2020 19-42

06/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 139,140

--

139,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 06/09/2020 07:42:53 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Renewal receipt for order #1743

Customer: 374

Your items have been renewed.

.UK (. CO.UK)

1 Domain       

1 Year Ł11.99

Domain Renewal

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

Subtotal: Ł11.99

Tax: Ł2.40

Total: Ł14.39

We have billed your PayPal agreement ending with the last two digits: 0V for the amount of Ł14.39. To review all your products and services, sign into your account.

If your products are on a 1-month subscription term, they will automatically renew next month at the same price listed here, unless otherwise indicated.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part. If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Note: Our free product credit policy was updated — see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

140,

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

4030224371

 

 

 

 

 

 

47.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -07-09-2020 20-36

07/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 141,142           

 

 47.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

47. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -07-09-2020 20-36

07/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 141,142

--

141,

From: GoDaddy Renewals <renewals@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 07/09/2020 08:36:35 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Renewal receipt for order #174

Customer: 37486337

Your items have been renewed.

.COM Domain

1 Domain

1 Year Ł16.14

Renewal

t-s-enterprises.com

Subtotal: Ł16.14

Tax: Ł3.23

Total: Ł19.37

We have billed your PayPal agreement ending with the last two digits: 0V for the amount of Ł19.37. To review all your products and services, sign into your account.

If your products are on a 1-month subscription term, they will automatically renew next month at the same price listed here, unless otherwise indicated.

NOTE: This message confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to the Terms in GoDaddy's Universal Terms of Service Agreement, Privacy Policy, and any other applicable agreements. Your use of these products is governed by the terms of these agreements and policies. If you wish to cancel, please learn more about our Refund Policy. This message also confirms that during the checkout process you agreed to enrol your products in our automatic renewal service. This keeps your products up and running, automatically charging then-current renewal fees to your payment method on file, with no further action on your part. If you do not wish to continue using our automatic renewal service, you can cancel automatic renewal by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Note: Our free product credit policy was updated — see Section 9 of our Universal Terms of Service for more details. In the event that the credit is redeemed, after the initial free one-year period, the free product will automatically renew at the then-current renewal price until cancelled. To review billing or to update your payment information, log in to your account. If you do not wish to renew, you can cancel this product by visiting the Renewals and Billing page in your GoDaddy account.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

142,

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

4032014626

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

48.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -08-092-020 09-06

08/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 143,144

 

 48.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

48. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -08-092-020 09-06

08/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 143,144

--

143,

No Good for Report!

144,

No Good for Report!

 

 

 

 

 

49.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-13-09-2020 21-29

13/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 145

 

 49.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

49. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-13-09-2020 21-29

13/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 145

--

145,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 13/09/2020 08:29:10 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

50.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-14-09-2020 02-24

14/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 146

 

 50.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

50. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-14-09-2020 02-24

14/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 146

--

146,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 14/09/2020 01:24:05 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

51.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - InfinityFree-15-09-2020 21-54

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 147

 

51.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

51. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - InfinityFree-15-09-2020 21-54

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 147

--

147,

From: Infinity Free <noreply@infimtyfree.net>

Sent time: 15/09/2020 09:54:35 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Verify Email Address

Infinity Free

Hello!

Please click the button below to verify your email address.

If you did not create an account, no further action is required.

Regards,

Infinity Free

If you're having trouble clicking the "Verify Email Address" button, copy and paste the URL below into your web browser: https://app.infinitvfree.net/email/verifv/2293563/e463cf5b5ef927b779bd6bf6cdb9e16732d916b7?email=rewired%40ymail.com&expires=1600206875&signature=106cd56101d23c5a68858c30d5f946ff74e 38fe3ca20f9358dbe61e5c28ac3e3

© 2020 Infinity Free. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

52.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - InfinityFree-15-09-2020 22-11

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 148

 

 52.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

52. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - InfinityFree-15-09-2020 22-11

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 148

--

148,

From: Infinity Free <noreply@infinityfree.net>

Sent time: 15/09/2020 10:11:35 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Your new Infinity Free account has been created

Infinity Free

Hi re_wired@ymail.com,

Thank you for signing up with Infinity Free! Your hosting account will now be setup over the next few minutes and this email contains all the information you will need in order to begin using your account.

Here are the details of your new hosting account:

Hosting Account Details

Username: epiz_26750706

Password: (can be found in your client area)

Label: digital-boy-live-newspaper great-sit...

Domain: digital-boy-live-newspaper.great-site.net

Please note that it takes up to 72 hours for your domain name to start working. This is caused by DNS caching, and depends on many factors (your internet settings being the most important one). Learn more about this.

What to do now?

The first thing to do now is to login to your control panel. Go to your client area, find the account and click Control Panel.

From there you will be able to install scripts, create databases, add additional domains and more.

You can also upload your website with FTP. Please make sure you have logged into the Control Panel once first to enable FTP access.

Get Support

Do you need help in getting started or would you like to know more about what you can do with our hosting? Check out our knowledge base for the answers to many common questions and issues!

Are you unable to find your answer there, or would you like to talk to someone, please check our community forum as well!

Regards

Infinity Free

 

 

 

 

 

53.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

53. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-15-09-2020 13-16

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 149

 

 53.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

53. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-15-09-2020 13-16

15/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 149

--

149,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 15/09/2020 12:16:46 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

54.

Blank

 

 

 

 

 

             

55.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-17-09-2020 16-58

17/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 150

 

 55.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-17-09-2020 16-58

17/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 150

--

150,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 16/09/2020 01:31:24 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked         

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

56.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-17-09-2020 16-58

17/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 151

 

 56.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

55. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-17-09-2020 16-58

17/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 151

--

151,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 18/09/2020 10:53:54 AM

To: Hosting Activation <noreply@hostmessage.info>

Subject: Re: Your new hostfree.pw hosting account

On Friday, 18 September 2020, 10:30:10 BST, Hosting Activation <noreply@hostmessage.info> wrote:

Dear Client,

Thank you for registering at HostFree.pw. We are delighted to inform you that your application epree_2676 has been successful! Your account has been activated and you should be able to login to the Control Panel now.

For Unlimited Premium Web Hosting at affordable price visit at https://www.hostafirm.com

Take careful note of your login details below and consider printing them for your own records.

C panel

Username: epree_2676

C panel

Password: ****

Your URL: http://horrific.hostfree.pw

FTP Server: ftp.hostfree.pw

FTP Login: epee _ FTP

Password: ****

MySQL Database Name: CREATE INSIDE CONTROL PANEL

MySQL Username: epree_2676

MySQL Password: ****

MySQL Server: SEE INSIDE CONTROL PANEL

Control Panel URL: http://cpanel.vhostfull.com

Once you have logged into your Control Panel, you can change your password if required.

For Unlimited Premium Web Hosting at affordable price visit at https://www.hostafirm.com

Thank you for choosing HostFree.pw, enjoy your free hosting account!

Best Regards,

HostFree.pw

http://www.hostfree.pw

 

 

 

 

 

 

57.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-18-09-2020 12-54

18/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 152

 

 57.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-18-09-2020 12-54

18/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 152

--

152,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 18/09/2020 11:54:11 AM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

58.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-18-09-2020 12-54

18/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 153

 

 58.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

57 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-18-09-2020 12-54

18/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 153

--

153,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 23/09/2020 04:52:09 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

59.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-24-09-2020 18-36

24/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 154

 

 59.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

59. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-24-09-2020 18-36

24/09/2020

/ Page Numbers: 154

--

154,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 24/09/2020 05:36:06 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

 

60.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -12-10-2020 15-16

12/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 155,156

 

 60.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

60. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -12-10-2020 15-16

12/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 155,156

--

155,

From: Renewals at Confused.com <Reminder@reminders.confused.com>

Sent time: 12/10/2020 03:16:14 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: [REMINDER] Your van insurance renewal for your is due soon!

Confused. ®

Your van insurance renewal is due in 5 days!

Hi Simon,

We can see from your last van insurance quote that your renewal is due in 5 days.

Your time is precious, and so is your van. So tick your insurance renewal off your to-do list in just a few minutes with Confused.com.

Compare quotes from over 30+ van insurers to make sure you're getting a great price!

Already sorted your insurance. Stop any more reminders.

GET A QUOTE

Not the right time to renew.

Select a month and we'll send you a van insurance reminder ahead of time, so you don't have

to rush when getting a quote.

156,

Car Insurance

Van Insurance

Car Finance

Running Your Car Home & More

Don't be confused. Be Confused.com

Listings are provided by Inspop.com Ltd on a non-advised basis. This means that no advice is given or implied and you are solely responsible for deciding whether the product is suitable for your needs. If you are not sure which is the right product for you, you should seek advice. Inspop.com Ltd is acting as a credit broker, not a lender. You will not be charged a fee for using this service, but you should check with your chosen provider to find out what fees may be applicable. Inspop.com Ltd may receive a payment from the product provider you select in the table.

© Copyright 2020 Confused.com. All rights reserved.

This email is sent for and on behalf of Inspop.com Limited trading as Confused.com. Inspop.com Limited registered in England and Wales at 3rd Floor, Greyfriars House, Greyfriars Road, Cardiff CF10 3AL (Reg. No. 03857130). Inspop.com Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (Firm reference number: 310635).

We will never conduct any business face-to-face. If anybody knocks on your door posing as Confused.com, please do not give them any personal details. Make sure to report the incident to your local police force by calling 101 and please also let us know by contacting us at communications@confused.com.

Unsubscribe

We're sending you this email based on when you told us your renewal was. You can update your Confused.com contact preferences

 

 

 

 

 

 

61.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -17-10-2020 15-32

17/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 157,158

 

 61.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

61. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -17-10-2020 15-32

17/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 157,158

--

157,

From: Renewals at Confused.com <Reminder@reminders.confused.com>

Sent time: 17/10/2020 03:32:05 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your van insurance renewal is due soon!

Confused. ®

Your van insurance renewal is due in 5 days!

Hi Simon,

We can see from your last van insurance quote that your renewal is due in 5 days.

Your time is precious, and so is your van. So tick your insurance renewal off your to-do list in just a few minutes with Confused.com.

Compare quotes from over 30+ van insurers to make sure you're getting a great price!

Already sorted your insurance. Stop any more reminders.

GET A QUOTE

Not the right time to renew.

Select a month and we'll send you a van insurance reminder ahead of time, so you don't have

to rush when getting a quote.

158,

Car Insurance

Van Insurance

Car Finance

Running Your Car Home & More

Don't be confused. Be Confused.com

Listings are provided by Inspop.com Ltd on a non-advised basis. This means that no advice is given or implied and you are solely responsible for deciding whether the product is suitable for your needs. If you are not sure which is the right product for you, you should seek advice. Inspop.com Ltd is acting as a credit broker, not a lender. You will not be charged a fee for using this service, but you should check with your chosen provider to find out what fees may be applicable. Inspop.com Ltd may receive a payment from the product provider you select in the table.

© Copyright 2020 Confused.com. All rights reserved.

This email is sent for and on behalf of Inspop.com Limited trading as Confused.com. Inspop.com Limited registered in England and Wales at 3rd Floor, Greyfriars House, Greyfriars Road, Cardiff CF10 3AL (Reg. No. 03857130). Inspop.com Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (Firm reference number: 310635).

We will never conduct any business face-to-face. If anybody knocks on your door posing as Confused.com, please do not give them any personal details. Make sure to report the incident to your local police force by calling 101 and please also let us know by contacting us at communications@confused.com.

Unsubscribe

We're sending you this email based on when you told us your renewal was. You can update your Confused.com contact preferences

 

 

 

 

 

62.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-10-2020 11-02

22/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 159,160

 

 62.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

62. 1. 2.

Car - Go Compare -22-10-2020 11-02

22/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 159,160

--

159,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 22/10/2020 11:02:24 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: GoDaddy presents: Back to Business - join this exclusive webinar and learn how to grow your online business.

Need help? Contact us.

Customer Number: 3748

FREE W E B I N A R | 3 November, 10am - 12pm

Register Now _>

You are invited to GoDaddy presents: Back to Business, an exclusive virtual event for micro-business owners to help you bounce back from COVID-19 and learn how to make the most of your online presence.

On Tuesday 3rd November, GoDaddy presents: Back to Business is

reaching entrepreneurial hotspots across the UK, sharing knowledge, expertise and support while also shining a light on small business heroes in your area.

Interested? Click here to register.

2020 has put extraordinary pressure on small businesses. Your ability to thrive will drive forward the UK's economic recovery - and as a long-standing supporter of small business, we want to help. As part of our global #OpenWeStand programme, GoDaddy presents: Back to Business - a virtual roadshow which will provide UK entrepreneurs with tools, resources and connections to help you rebuild and

thrive.

Whether your business is new to the world of online, or you simply want to hear more about how to get back on track - we have something for everyone. Click here to see the full agenda.

In addition to advice and resources you will have access to a network of other small business owners in your which you can share experiences with. GoDaddy is here to help you and your business succeed. Are you ready to boost your online

business?

Join us on Tuesday 3rd November from 10am - 12pm to be part of the action.

160,

Interested? Click below to register.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

4171346950

 

 

 

 

 

63.

Blank

 

 

 

 

             

64.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-28-10-2020 15-40

28/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 161

 

 64.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

64. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Drive to web-28-10-2020 15-40

28/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 161

--

161,

From: Google <no-reply@accounts.google.com>

Sent time: 28/10/2020 03:40:12 PM

To: Re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Security alert for your linked Google Account

Your account Re_wired@ymail.com is listed as the recovery email for crompton098765@gmail.com.

Drive to Web was granted access to your linked Google account

crompton098765@gmail.com

If you did not grant access, you should check this activity and secure your account.

You received this email to let you know about important changes to your Google Account and services. © 2020 Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

 

 

 

65.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -30-10-2020 15-45

30/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 162,163

 

65.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

65. 2.

Van -Renewals at Confused -30-10-2020 15-45

30/10/2020

/ Page Numbers: 162,163

--

162,

From: Renewals at Confused.com <Reminder@reminders.confused.com>

Sent time: 30/10/2020 03:45:22 PM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your van insurance renewal is due in 5 days!

Save on van insurance with Confused.com

Confused. ®

Your van insurance renewal is due in 5 days!

Hi Simon,

We can see from your last van insurance quote that your renewal is due in 5 days.

Your time is precious, and so is your van. So tick your insurance renewal off your to-do list in just a few minutes with Confused.com.

Compare quotes from over 30+ van insurers to make sure you're getting a great price!

Already sorted your insurance. Stop any more reminders.

GET A QUOTE

Not the right time to renew.

Select a month and we'll send you a van insurance reminder ahead of time, so you don't have

to rush when getting a quote.

163,

Car Insurance

Van Insurance

Car Finance

Running Your Car Home & More

Don't be confused. Be Confused.com

Listings are provided by Inspop.com Ltd on a non-advised basis. This means that no advice is given or implied and you are solely responsible for deciding whether the product is suitable for your needs. If you are not sure which is the right product for you, you should seek advice. Inspop.com Ltd is acting as a credit broker, not a lender. You will not be charged a fee for using this service, but you should check with your chosen provider to find out what fees may be applicable. Inspop.com Ltd may receive a payment from the product provider you select in the table.

© Copyright 2020 Confused.com. All rights reserved.

This email is sent for and on behalf of Inspop.com Limited trading as Confused.com. Inspop.com Limited registered in England and Wales at 3rd Floor, Greyfriars House, Greyfriars Road, Cardiff CF10 3AL (Reg. No. 03857130). Inspop.com Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (Firm reference number: 310635).

We will never conduct any business face-to-face. If anybody knocks on your door posing as Confused.com, please do not give them any personal details. Make sure to report the incident to your local police force by calling 101 and please also let us know by contacting us at communications@confused.com.

Unsubscribe

We're sending you this email based on when you told us your renewal was. You can update your Confused.com contact preferences

 

 

 

 

 

 

66.

Blank

 

00/00/2020

 

67.

Blank

 

00/00/2020

 

68.

Blank

00/02/2020

 

69.

Blank

00/00/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

70.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - GoDaddy -17-11-2020 01-57

17/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 164,165

 

 70.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

70. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - GoDaddy -17-11-2020 01-57

17/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 164,165

--

164,

From: GoDaddy <donotreply@godaddy.com>

Sent time: 17/11/2020 01:57:50 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Simon, your November account summary is inside.

Customer Number: 3748

November Account Summary for Simon.

Get important account and product alerts sent to your mobile device.

What's your domain worth? Find out now.

This is a great time to ensure your account is secure. Update your password and add or review two-step verification protection.

Make sure you aren't missing out on special offers. Visit My Account and look for the Contact Preferences tab under "Settings" to opt-in to offers related to your purchase.

165,

Shop Now

Use promo code RPACCA20DA at checkout.

What's in your account:

DOMAINS

Log in to make changes, like pointing them to your Facebook or Twitter page.

toosmooth.co.uk

toosmoothentertainment.com

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.com

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

<E33 Unleash your inner rebel. Available at Ł11.51 Ł0.90 Search now >

Ł19.14

Ł7.99*

Ł16.82

Ł5.45*

Ł19.99

Ł6.99*

*See offer terms, conditions and legal policies.

Note: If you are the domain administrator of more than one GoDaddy domain account, you may receive this notice multiple times.

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

4252064877

 

 

 

 

 

 

71.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-22-11-2020 00-46 (2)

22/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 166,167

 

 71.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

71. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-22-11-2020 00-46 (2)

22/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 166,167

--

166,

From: No-IP Notices <noreply-31766937@noip.com>

Sent time: 22/11/2020 12:46:50 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Welcome to No-IP

No Ip

We have two options to help get your new account configured; you can do it on your own, or we can help you. Follow the steps below to configure your account, or configure your device now using our Device Configuration Assistant.

If you need additional help, please open a support ticket , or give us a call, 1-775­853-1883. Our Customer Success Team is here to help!

Dynamic DNS Account Configuration

Login to your No-IP account.

Create a hostname (example: yourname.ddns.net)

This hostname will be the URL you will use to connect to your device from anywhere.

Download and Install the Dynamic Update Client (DUC) .

This software is only needed if your router or device does not have No-IP as an integrated Dynamic DNS provider. ( What is an integrated Dynamic DNS provider ?)

After installation, you will need to login to the DUC and configure it to update the hostname you added in Step 2. Windows DUC Instructions ,

Mac DUC link Instructions , & Linux DUC Instructions )

167,

If you are behind a router or firewall, you will need to open and forward the correct ports for the services you wish to run.

Port Forwarding Guides

Not sure which ports to forward? Check out this list of common ports and what they are used for.

Device Configuration Assistant

Not sure how to set up your account or your hostname on your own?

Our Device Configuration Assistant will walk you through device configuration and port forwarding to help ensure your hostname and network are properly configured from the start.

Go to the Device Configuration Assistant now to begin the configuration process.

Need Help?

Our Getting Started Guide is a great resource for additional configuration assistance. If you still need help, please open a support ticket, or give us a call, 775-853-1883. Our In-House Customer Support Team is here to help.

Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC c/o No-IP.com 425 Maestro Dr. Suite 200 Reno, Nevada 89511 USA +1 775-853-1883

 

 

 

 

 

72.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-22-11-2020 00-46

22/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 168

 

 72.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

72. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-22-11-2020 00-46

22/11/2020

/ Page Numbers: 168

--

168,

From: No-IP Notices <noreply-31766937@noip.com>

Sent time: 22/11/2020 12:46:29 AM

To: re_wired@ymail.com

Subject: Confirm Your No-IP Account

No Ip

Confirm Your No-IP Account

Thanks for creating a No-IP account. We are happy you found us. To confirm your account, please click the button below.

Need help? Open a Support Ticket now.

Thank you for choosing No-IP! We hope that you enjoy our rock-solid services that we have been offering since 1999 to millions of users.

Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC c/o No-IP.com 425 Maestro Dr. Suite 200 Reno, Nevada 89511 USA +1 775-853-1883

© 1999-2020 Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC.

 

 

 

 

73.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-10-12-2020 19-55

10/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 169

 

 73.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

73. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - No ip-10-12-2020 19-55

10/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 169

--

169,

From: No-IP Password Reset <noreply-31766937@noip.com>

Sent time: 10/12/2020 07:55:24 PM

To: Simon Cordell <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Password reset on No-IP.com

No Ip

Password reset requested

Simon, there was recently a request to change the password on your account. Click below to confirm this change:

Didn't ask to reset your password? If you didn't ask for your password, it's likely that another user entered your username or email address by mistake while trying to reset their password. If that's the case, you don't need to take any further action and can safely disregard this email.

Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC c/o No-IP.com 425 Maestro Dr. Suite 200 Reno, Nevada 89511 USA +1 775-853-1883

© 1999-2020 Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC.

 

 

 

 

 

74.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 15-12-2020 18-32   

15/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 170,171

 

 74.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

74. 1. 2.

kay Osborne 15-12-2020 18-32         

15/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 170,171

--

170,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 15/12/2020 06:32:48 PM

To: Kay Osborne <Kay.Osborne@Enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: Your Claim

Dear Miss Kay Osborne

I have received your email and will be doing my best to comply with your request in as short of a time scale as possible.

This will include the following.

1) To provide you with the relevant documentation by my chosen method. "Website Links" regarding my claim.

As explained I hope to be able to provide you and others with the associated web links within the next couple of following days, as of today's date but due to the complexity and size of the claim doing so, is a hard job to complete in all aspects, but I will endeavour to do my utmost best and hope to be back in contact with you soon.

Many thanks Mr. Simon Cordell

On Tuesday, 15 December 2020, 18:06:49 GMT, Kay Osborne <kay.osborne@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

I am writing to confirm that we had a telephone conversation this afternoon, in which you provided a detailed background regarding the circumstances of your claim. We agreed that you would provide confirmation to me that the documents were available to be viewed by our Insurers and their representatives.

Once you have checked that all the documents are accessible please can you confirm in an email, with details of where our Insurers and their representatives can locate said documents.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Kind regards

Kay Osborne Dip CII

Insurance Manager London Borough of Enfield Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XY

020 8379 3003 insurance@enfield.gov.uk

Direct dial 020 8379 1476

Direct email kav.osborne@enfield.gov.uk

171,

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

75.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Hopto-15-12-2020 12-07

15/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 172,173

 

 75.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

75. 1. 2.

Legal Defence Work - Hopto-15-12-2020 12-07

15/12/2020

/ Page Numbers: 172,173

--

172,

From: No-IP Notices <notice-31766937@noip.com>

Sent time: 15/12/2020 12:07:08 PM

To: Simon Cordell <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: ACTION REQUIRED: serverone.hopto.org is Expiring Soon

No Ip

serverone.hopto.org is expiring soon

Please confirm your hostname now. Inactive hostnames are removed from our system if they are not confirmed every 30 days. This policy helps keep only active hostnames on our network.

Click the button above to confirm your hostname, or copy/paste the following link into your browser:

https://www.noip.com/confirm-host?n=7Nv9XLI9wvQJC0Xj2wq

This message only goes out to Free Dynamic DNS accounts. Upgrade to Enhanced Dynamic DNS today!

Benefits of Upgrading Include

·         Removes 30-day account confirmation

·         Hostnames don't get deleted every 30 days

·         Allows you to create up to 25 hostnames

·         Removes advertisements on redirects

·         Advanced records like SRV, TXT records and domain keys

·         Need Help? Awesome Phone Support

Upgrade to Enhanced Dynamic DNS now and SAVE $3 Coupon Code: 3OFFEXP

To learn more about this, please check out this article in our Knowledge Base Why is my hostname expiring?

173,

Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC c/o No-IP.com 425 Maestro Dr. Suite 200 Reno, Nevada 89511 USA +1 775-853-1883

© 1999-2020 Vitalwerks Internet Solutions, LLC.

 

 

 

 

 

76.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 2.

Legal Defence Work - GoDaddy-1-4778

14/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 174,175           

 

 76.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

76. 2.

Legal Defence Work - GoDaddy-1-4778

14/01/2020

/ Page Numbers: 174,175

--

174,

Jordan

GoDaddy Guide Call us 4

Your Products

A Cherry on Top

Domains

toosmoothentertainment.com

toosmooth.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.co.uk

t-s-enterprises.com

toosmoothentertainment.co.uk

View My Account

Tyson + GoDaddy

Science may be saving the world, but creativity's not sitting on the side-lines. See how Tyson is solving one of the earth's newest problems with his innovative use of one humanity's oldest technologies.

Make the world you want

Get Inspired

January Account Summary

175,

Shop Now

Keep your store open 24/7. Available at Ł64.10 Ł2.50.

Ł20.10

Ł7.10*

Me

Ł13.99

Ł2.99*

buzz

Ł38.60

Ł0.87*

Click here to unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Please do not reply to this email. Emails sent to this address will not be answered.

Copyright © 1999-2020 GoDaddy Operating Company, LLC. 14455 N. Hayden Rd, Ste. 219, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 USA. All rights reserved.

3279691080

 

 

 

 

 

 

77.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 2.

Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council-1-21487

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 176,177,178,179,180

 

77.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

77. 2.

Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council-1-21487

24/06/2020

/ Page Numbers: 176,177,178,179,180

--

176,

From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Sent time: 24/06/2020 07:53:31 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: FW: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Attachments: Cordell letter 24.6.2020.pdf

Cordell letter 27.06.19.pdf

Here are the letters they sent today

From: complaints and information <complamtsandmfonriation@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent: 24 June 2020 15:33

To: 'Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk' <Lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: Letter regarding contact with Enfield Council [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Please find attached letter for your attention regarding communications with the Council.

Yours sincerely

Karen Hale

Complaints and Information Service Manager Complaints and Information Team Enfield Council

Classification: OFFICIAL

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

177,

178,

179,

180,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Headers

2021

 

1.

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE Nigel Adams -22-01-2021 12-05

22/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 1

 

1.

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

1. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE Nigel Adams -22-01-2021 12-05

22/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 1

1.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 22/01/2021 12:05:08 PM

To: niadams@dacbeachcroft.com; Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Information you asked for

21/01/2021

Dear Nigel Adams

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me today on the phone.

I spoke to Kay Osborne today from Enfield Council and was told DAC Beachcroft is dealing with the claim I am bringing against Enfield Council; I was told by Kay Osborne a letter had been sent to me on the 22/12/2020

which as of today’s date 22/01/2021 I have not received, could this please be forwarded to me via this email, Kay Osborne did say she would get this addressed today and get the letter sent to me via email.

As I have only found out today DAC Beachcroft is dealing with this claim would it please be possible to obtain an update.

Would is also please be possible to include in all correspondence my mother by way of email: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Kind Regards S Cordell

Address: 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE you asked for 22-01-2021 13-05

22/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 2

 

 

2.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

2. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE you asked for 22-01-2021 13-05

22/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 2

2.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 22/01/2021 12:05:08 PM

To: niadams@dacbeachcroft.com;

Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>

Subject: RE: Information you asked for

21/01/2021

Dear Nigel Adams

Thank you for taking the time to speak to me today on the phone.

I spoke to Kay Osborne today from Enfield Council and was told DAC Beachcroft is dealing with the claim I am bringing against Enfield Council; I was told by Kay Osborne a letter had been sent to me on the 22/12/2020

which as of today’s date 22/01/2021 I have not received, could this please be forwarded to me via this email, Kay Osborne did say she would get this addressed today and get the letter sent to me via email.

As I have only found out today DAC Beachcroft is dealing with this claim would it please be possible to obtain an update.

Would is also please be possible to include in all correspondence my mother by way of email: lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk

Kind Regards S Cordell

Address: 109 Burncroft Ave, Enfield, EN3 7JQ

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 11-01

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 3,4       

 

 

3.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

3. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 11-01

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 3,4 

--

3,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 10:01:08 AM

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@.dacbeachcroft.com

4,

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at

Brexit: We hahttp://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicy.ve amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 5,6, 7

 

4.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

4. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 5,6, 7

5,

From: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 12:02:24 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DAC Beachcroft

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government's measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

6,

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please

7,

note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

5.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-48

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 8,9,10,11         

 

 

5.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

5. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-48

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 8,9,10,11

8,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 12:48:56 PM

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr David Knapp

As Enfield Council understands I have problems writing so much in an email due to the years that I have been forced to suffer. My mother does help me when writing to people but not even she can explain what I have been put through in detail as she does not live with me.

It is impractical for me to start to explain the breaches of my Human Rights that have occurred over the last Eight Years by email to which I am claiming for and all the dates involved to each offence that has taken place let alone the corruption and criminal offences that I have been forced to undergo.

I do not intend to make all communication to you by phone alone but to balance the weight of the scenario to which we are both trying to resolving. so, both phone and email would be best and or a meeting to take place.

I have built a website that documents most of what I am claiming about and I have put the files under Simon's Cases under the menu bar at.

Website: Horrificcorruption.com

You can take a look there if you wish to / Audio and Diary are a good place to start.

As you may have noticed I am using a Yahoo email account I also have a Hotmail account and both are limited to the amount of documentation that any person can send and these limits make using emails useless as I have collected a lot of evidence to support my claim that I believe would be mandatory for you to receive.

When using my website, I am allowed to send campaigns that have no limit to what can be sent by email and my intentions are for me to soon upload the last stages of my defence that is labelled as "Report Years" this is where the general public will be able to interact with what has happened to me illegally and unmorally. I hope to have the Report years section completed by latter today. Once this is finished I can send to you and all other who were or should be involved the documents that you and they require. I believe the general public will help me pinpoint out more than what I can do alone.

I have already won all the case's brought against me at court and will not except the Enfield Council's wrong doings to myself. especially in the magnitude to which they have committed.

I wish to speak to you on the phone today so I can direct you to some of the relevant parts contained within the website Horrificcorruption.com before I go public for the first time in the hope of other options arising.

As asked earlier will you please call me by phone

From a civilian at home Mr. S.P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,12:02:35 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

9,

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

10,

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company

11

registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

6.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 12,13,14

 

6.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

6. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 13-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 12,13,14

12,

From: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 12:02:24 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DAC BEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government's measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

13,

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please

14,

note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

7.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 15-14

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 15,16,17,18,19

 

7.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

7. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 25-01-2021 15-14

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 15,16,17,18,19

15,

From: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 02:14:12 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. I am afraid that I am not prepared to discuss the claim without you putting in an email what your allegations are. I do not require a lot of documentation with your email, just a few core documents will suffice.

I strongly advise you however to seek independent legal advice. The Law Society will be able to recommend lawyers local to you. Your claim appears to be complex and, more importantly, some or all of it may be time barred as a consequence of the operation of limitation.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DAC BEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government's measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 12:49

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mr David Knapp

As Enfield Council understands I have problems writing so much in an email due to the years that I have been forced to suffer. My mother does help me when writing to people but not even she can explain what I have been put through in detail as she does not live with me.

It is impractical for me to start to explain the breaches of my Human Rights that have occurred over the last Eight Years by email to which I am claiming for and all the dates involved to each offence that has taken place let alone the corruption and criminal offences that I have been forced to undergo.

I do not intend to make all communication to you by phone alone but to balance the weight of the scenario to which we are both trying to resolving. so, both phone and email would be best and or a meeting to take place.

I have built a website that documents most of what I am claiming about and I have put the files under Simon's Cases under the menu bar at.

Website: Horrificcorruption.com

You can take a look there if you wish to / Audio and Diary are a good place to start.

As you may have noticed I am using a Yahoo email account I also have a Hotmail account and both are limited to the amount of documentation that any person can send and these limits make using emails useless as I have collected a lot of evidence to support my claim that I believe would be mandatory for you to receive.

When using my website, I am allowed to send campaigns that have no limit to what can be sent by email and my intentions are for me to soon upload the last stages of my defence that is labelled as "Report Years" this is where the general public will be able to interact with what has happened to me illegally and unmorally. I hope to have the Report years section completed by latter today. Once this is finished I can send to you and all other who were or should be involved the documents that you and they require. I believe the general public will help me pinpoint out more than what I can do alone.

I have already won all the case's brought against me at court and will not except the Enfield Council's wrong doings to myself. especially in the magnitude to which they have committed.

I wish to speak to you on the phone today so I can direct you to some of the relevant parts contained within the website Horrificcorruption.com before I go public for the first time in the hope of other options arising.

As asked earlier will you please call me by phone

16,

From a civilian at home Mr. S.P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,12:02:35 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@.dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired  re_wired@ymail.com

 Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

17,

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

18,

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the

email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

19,

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/Drivacvoolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

8.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 10-01

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 20,21

 

8.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

8. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 10-01

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 20,21

20,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 10:01:08 AM

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@.dacbeachcroft.com

21,

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicy.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.        

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 12-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 22,23,24

 

9.        

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

9. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 12-02

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 22,23,24

22,

From: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 12:02:24 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DAC BEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government's measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

23,

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please

24,

 note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

10.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 12-48

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 25,26,27,28

 

10.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

10. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 12-48

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 25,26,27,28

25,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 12:48:56 PM

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr David Knapp

As Enfield Council understands I have problems writing so much in an email due to the years that I have been forced to suffer. My mother does help me when writing to people but not even she can explain what I have been put through in detail as she does not live with me.

It is impractical for me to start to explain the breaches of my Human Rights that have occurred over the last Eight Years by email to which I am claiming for and all the dates involved to each offence that has taken place let alone the corruption and criminal offences that I have been forced to undergo.

I do not intend to make all communication to you by phone alone but to balance the weight of the scenario to which we are both trying to resolving. so, both phone and email would be best and or a meeting to take place.

I have built a website that documents most of what I am claiming about and I have put the files under Simon's Cases under the menu bar at.

Website: Horrificcorruption.com

You can take a look there if you wish to / Audio and Diary are a good place to start.

As you may have noticed I am using a Yahoo email account I also have a Hotmail account and both are limited to the amount of documentation that any person can send and these limits make using emails useless as I have collected a lot of evidence to support my claim that I believe would be mandatory for you to receive.

When using my website, I am allowed to send campaigns that have no limit to what can be sent by email and my intentions are for me to soon upload the last stages of my defence that is labelled as "Report Years" this is where the general public will be able to interact with what has happened to me illegally and unmorally. I hope to have the Report years section completed by latter today. Once this is finished, I can send to you and all other who were or should be involved the documents that you and they require. I believe the general public will help me pinpoint out more than what I can do alone.

I have already won all the case's brought against me at court and will not except the Enfield Council's wrong doings to myself. especially in the magnitude to which they have committed.

I wish to speak to you on the phone today so I can direct you to some of the relevant parts contained within the website Horrificcorruption.com before I go public for the first time in the hope of other options arising.

As asked earlier will you please call me by phone

From a civilian at home Mr. S.P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,12:02:35 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

26,

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

27,

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company

 

28,

registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeaehcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

11.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 14-14

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 29,30,31,32,33

 

11.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

11. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE David Knapp -25-01-2021 14-14

25/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 29,30,31,32,33

29,

From: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Sent time: 25/01/2021 02:14:12 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: RE: Your Claim v LB Enfield

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. I am afraid that I am not prepared to discuss the claim without you putting in an email what your allegations are. I do not require a lot of documentation with your email, just a few core documents will suffice.

I strongly advise you however to seek independent legal advice. The Law Society will be able to recommend lawyers local to you. Your claim appears to be complex and, more importantly, some or all of it may be time barred as a consequence of the operation of limitation.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DAC BEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government's measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 12:49

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mr David Knapp

As Enfield Council understands I have problems writing so much in an email due to the years that I have been forced to suffer. My mother does help me when writing to people but not even she can explain what I have been put through in detail as she does not live with me.

It is impractical for me to start to explain the breaches of my Human Rights that have occurred over the last Eight Years by email to which I am claiming for and all the dates involved to each offence that has taken place let alone the corruption and criminal offences that I have been forced to undergo.

I do not intend to make all communication to you by phone alone but to balance the weight of the scenario to which we are both trying to resolving. so, both phone and email would be best and or a meeting to take place.

I have built a website that documents most of what I am claiming about and I have put the files under Simon's Cases under the menu bar at.

Website: Horrificcorruption.com

You can take a look there if you wish to / Audio and Diary are a good place to start.

As you may have noticed I am using a Yahoo email account I also have a Hotmail account and both are limited to the amount of documentation that any person can send and these limits make using emails useless as I have collected a lot of evidence to support my claim that I believe would be mandatory for you to receive.

When using my website, I am allowed to send campaigns that have no limit to what can be sent by email and my intentions are for me to soon upload the last stages of my defence that is labelled as "Report Years" this is where the general public will be able to interact with what has happened to me illegally and unmorally. I hope to have the Report years section completed by latter today. Once this is finished, I can send to you and all other who were or should be involved the documents that you and they require. I believe the general public will help me pinpoint out more than what I can do alone.

I have already won all the case's brought against me at court and will not except the Enfield Council's wrong doings to myself. especially in the magnitude to which they have committed.

I wish to speak to you on the phone today so I can direct you to some of the relevant parts contained within the website Horrificcorruption.com before I go public for the first time in the hope of other options arising.

As asked earlier will you please call me by phone

30,

From a civilian at home Mr. S.P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,12:02:35 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

Re

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

31,

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

32,

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the

email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

33,

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/oaaes/Drivacvoolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

12.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 27-01-2021 12-21

27/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 34,35,36,37,38

 

12.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

12. 1. 2.

DAC Beachcroft 4 LBE v LB Enfield 27-01-2021 12-21

27/01/2021

/ Page Numbers: 34,35,36,37,38      

34,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 27/01/2021 11:21:57 AM

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

On Monday, 25 January 2021,14:14:18 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. I am afraid that I am not prepared to discuss the claim without you putting in an email what your allegations are. I do not require a lot of documentation with your email, just a few core documents will suffice.

I strongly advise you however to seek independent legal advice. The Law Society will be able to recommend lawyers local to you. Your claim appears to be complex and, more importantly, some or all of it may be time barred as a consequence of the operation of limitation.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 12:49

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mr David Knapp

As Enfield Council understands I have problems writing so much in an email due to the years that I have been forced to suffer. My mother does help me when writing to people but not even she can explain what I have been put through in detail as she does not live with me.

It is impractical for me to start to explain the breaches of my Human Rights that have occurred over the last Eight Years by email to which I am claiming for and all the dates involved to each offence that has taken place let alone the corruption and criminal offences that I have been forced to undergo.

I do not intend to make all communication to you by phone alone but to balance the weight of the scenario to which we are both trying to resolving. so, both phone and email would be best and or a meeting to take place.

I have built a website that documents most of what I am claiming about and I have put the files under Simon's Cases under the menu

35,

bar at.

Website: Horrificcorruption.com

You can take a look there if you wish to / Audio and Diary are a good place to start.

As you may have noticed I am using a Yahoo email account I also have a Hotmail account and both are limited to the amount of documentation that any person can send and these limits make using emails useless as I have collected a lot of evidence to support my claim that I believe would be mandatory for you to receive.

When using my website, I am allowed to send campaigns that have no limit to what can be sent by email and my intentions are for me to soon upload the last stages of my defence that is labelled as "Report Years" this is where the general public will be able to interact with what has happened to me illegally and unmorally. I hope to have the Report years section completed by latter today. Once this is finished, I can send to you and all other who were or should be involved the documents that you and they require. I believe the general public will help me pinpoint out more than what I can do alone.

I have already won all the case's brought against me at court and will not except the Enfield Council's wrong doings to myself. especially in the magnitude to which they have committed.

I wish to speak to you on the phone today so I can direct you to some of the relevant parts contained within the website Horrificcorruption.com before I go public for the first time in the hope of other options arising.

As asked earlier will you please call me by phone

From a civilian at home Mr. S.P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,12:02:35 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Thank you for your email. As I stated in my earlier email, I would rather communicate in writing rather than by telephone. Please therefore can you supply by email to me details of your claim against my client. I cannot usefully say anything until I know what your claim is about. I am sorry but experience tells me that it is better to get clarity at an early stage in any claim.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF T: +44 (0)207 894 6358 M: +44 (0)7917 557012 daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent: 25 January 2021 10:01

To: Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com>

Subject: Re: Your Claim v LB Enfield

CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This Message originated outside the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello and I hope all is well.

I am Mr Simon Cordell and as you are aware off, I have been in contact with the Enfield Council in regard to making a claim against them and others government bodies involved in my mistreatment, such a police officer’s and the NHS

I Personally would prefer to have some form of contact by way of telephone with yourself due to the size of the case and to aid in a speedy claim. So, would it please be possible for you to contact me today as of the 25/01/2021 on the following telephone number as a matter of urgency.

36,

Tel: 07864 217519

kind regards Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Monday, 25 January 2021,09:18:40 GMT, Knapp, David <daknapp@dacbeachcroft.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Cordell

Would you kindly note that I have been instructed by the LB Enfield as a consequence of your letter of 10 August 2020. Your recent conversation with Kay Osborne at Enfield refers. However, for the future, could you please send all communications in this matter to me.

Firstly, an apology. I was instructed in mid-December and having spoken with my client drafted a letter to you that was to be sent in hard copy form from my office confirming my instruction. That letter was due to go out on 23 December but unfortunately was not printed and sent out (I currently work remotely) to you. My apologies for the delay therefore which was Covid and Christmas related. I hope that all further communications can be by email.

Turning to your claim itself I note that in your letter you referred to documentation and evidence being completed, presumably that means collated by you. I assume you will then send a Letter of Claim setting out in detail the basis of what I assume is a claim for compensation. Can you please confirm and give me a timescale as to when the Letter is likely to be received by me? Once received, I can consider with my client the way forward.

I anticipate this will be a complex matter and my preferred method of communication is by email to ensure clarity of expression and provide a record of what our respective positions and understandings may be.

I hope you might agree that this is the best way forward and I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

David Knapp

Partner - Claims Solutions Group

DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd

DACBEACHCROFT

The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF

T: +44 (0)207 894 6358

M: +44 (0)7917 557012

daknapp@.dacbeachcroft.com

Following the Government’s measures aimed at preventing the spread of Covid-19, our colleagues are working from home and are well equipped to work remotely. Where possible, please communicate with us by email or phone, so that we can respond to you efficiently.

If you need to serve a document please contact us directly, unless we have previously confirmed to you that we will accept service by email.

37,

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Dages/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

This email is sent for and on behalf of DAC Beachcroft Claims Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary of DAC Beachcroft LLP. It is a limited company registered in England and Wales (registered number 04218278) regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of the directors is available for inspection at our registered office: Portwall Place, Portwall Lane, Bristol BS1 9HS, UK (Sat Nav postcode: BS1 6NA).

This email (and any attachments) is confidential. If it is not addressed to you, please do not read, disclose, copy, or forward it on, but notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any legal advice in the message may be privileged and not disclosable in any court action. We have tried to ensure this email does not contain any viruses, but please check this before opening any attachments, as we cannot accept any responsibility for damage caused by a virus. Please note that we may intercept, monitor, and store emails for the purposes of ensuring compliance with law, our policies and for audit purposes.

For further details please go to http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/leaal-notice. Please also read our DAC Beachcroft Group privacy policy at http://www.dacbeachcroft.com/Daaes/DrivacvDolicv.

Brexit: We have amended our Standard Terms and Conditions and our Standard Basis of Relationship to cover the UK leaving the EU. Equivalent amendments have been proposed for clients with non-standard terms and conditions. The amendments relate to limited changes to the data protection provisions. Please

38,

click here for full details of the amendments.

Fraudsters are increasingly targeting law firms and their clients often requesting funds to be transferred to a different bank account or seeking to obtain confidential information. If you receive a suspicious or unexpected email from us, or purporting to have been sent on our behalf, please do not reply to the email, click on any links, open any attachments, or comply with any instructions contained within it. Instead, please telephone your DAC Beachcroft contact to verify the email. DAC Beachcroft cannot take responsibility for any losses arising from your transfer of funds or disclosure of confidential information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2.

LBE Insurance receipt 03-03-2021 -03-03-2021 16-46

03/03/2021

/ Page Numbers: 39

 

13.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

13. 1. 2.

LBE Insurance receipt 03-03-2021 -03-03-2021 16-46

03/03/2021

/ Page Numbers: 39

39

From: Insurance <insurance@enfield.gov.uk>

Sent time: 03/03/2021 04:46:39 PM

To: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Subject: Automatic reply: Re Insurance Claim Disclosure

We acknowledge receipt of your email, which will be allocated to an Officer in the Insurance Team for consideration.

Whilst all correspondence is processed in strict ‘date received' order, we aim to consider new claims notified to us in line with timescales stipulated in the relevant Civil Procedure Rules - Pre-Action Protocols, details of which can be found using the link http://www.iustice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol

For all other correspondence, our aim is to process these within 10 working days.

Please note that this acknowledgement is automatically generated. If you wish to make further contact by phone, please feel free to call 0208 379 (3003) or (4657) or (3413).

For the purpose of detecting and preventing fraud, information provided to us may be passed to others such as, but not limited to, the Claims and Underwriting Exchange Register (CUE) run by Insurance Database Services Ltd (IDSL) and the Motor Insurance Anti-Fraud and Theft Register, run by the Association of British Insurers (ABI).

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14.      

· Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

16-03-2021 Enfield Insurance FOI -16-03-2021 20-55

16/03/2021

/ Page Numbers: 40,41,42          

 

 

14.      

Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:

14. 1. 2.

16-03-2021 Enfield Insurance FOI -16-03-2021 20-55

16/03/2021

/ Page Numbers: 40,41,42

40,

From: Rewired <re_wired@ymail.com>

Sent time: 16/03/2021 08:55:47 PM

To: complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: CRM FOI 9499 [SEC=OFFICIAL]

Ps. Sorry for the extra reply but I never added the weblinks to the Insurance documents that the Enfield Council have supplied me with already and they are as follows: -­

·         Enfield Letter 27.08.19 Insurance details and claim process MR S CORDELL

https://serverone.hopto.org/Enfield%20Letter%2027.08.19%20Insurance%20details%20and%20claim%20process%20MR%20S%20%20CQRDELL/

· Enfield Insurance Incident report form 2013 - 2020

https://serverone.hopto.org/Enfield%20Insurance%20Incident%20report%20form%202013%20-%202020/

Many thanks Mr. S. P. Cordell

On Tuesday, 16 March 2021, 20:44:08 GMT, rewired <re_wired@ymail.com> wrote:

Hello & thank you for your reply.

In respect of the definition of, "underwriting" I believe the correct terminology of what I request is: -­The insurance policy's the contracts between you and the insurance companies comprehensively for the years of 2013 till 2021 as of today’s date. These insurance policies that I request are to cover the Enfield Council for indemnity that Coverers employers and public liability or any other insurance policies that got taken out by the Enfield Council within 2013 till 16/03/2021 for business purposes that may be relevant towards my insurance claim as a member of the public and or client as a secure housing tenant.

To my understanding this will include.

1. The Insurance policies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_policy

“The insurance policy is a contract between the insurer and the policyholder, which determines the claims which the insurer is legally required to pay. In exchange for an initial payment, known as the premium, the insurer promises to pay for loss caused by perils covered under the policy language”

2. The Insurance schedules.

"A Policy Schedule is an outline of the cover provided under the policy, it will show details of the policyholder, what the policyholder does, and the cover given and the relevant limits, sums insured and excess. ”

3. The Insurance Policies endorsements

Forms added to an insurance policy, to modify its terms. “https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsement

And also, that of:

4. The Insurance certificates: as they all should be read as if they are one document per Insurance contract.

"A certificate of insurance (COI) is issued by an insurance company or broker and verifies the existence of an insurance policy.”

5. A Basic Example

The Metropolitan Police Force 2012

1. Police policy 2012

https://serverone.hopto.org/Police%20policy%202012/

2. Police PL Primary summary 2012

https://serverone.hopto.org/Police%20PL%20Primary%20Summary%202012/

3. Police PL Excess layer Swiss 2012

https://serverone.hopto.org/Police%20PL%20Excess%20layer%20Swiss%202012/

4. Published items

https://wwwmetpolice.uk/foi-ai/af'accessing-information/published-items/?q=insurance

5. Published items

Personal Insurance Indemnity - Policy

https://serverone.hopto.org/Police%20Zurich%20personal-insurance-indemnity—policy/

6. Published items

Information Rights Unit MPS Insurance 2019

https://serverone.hopto.org/Information%20Rights%20Unit%20Mps%20Insurance%202019/

If I can be of any more assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards

Mr. Simon Paul Cordell

On Tuesday, 16 March 2021, 11:17:40 GMT, complaints and information <complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk> wrote:

Classification: OFFICIAL

Dear Mr Cordell,

Thank you for your email where you requested information about Insurance policy of indemnity that covers employers and public liability.

41,

Request

Please may you provide me with:

·         The Insurance policy of indemnity that Coverer employers and public liability or any other insurance taken out by the Enfield Council for business purposes that may be relevant towards my insurance claim in Criminal and civil law against the Enfield Council following the years of 2013 till the present date of the 03/03/2021. This is to be inclusive of all underwriting made for the policies.

·         I have requested this information before, and it was agreed for me to be able to receive such information but sadly I only received the information in part and not complete due to the lack of underwriting missing.

·         I do not believe DAC Beachcroft has the legal authority to refuse the Enfield Councils Insurance details

·         It is mandatory of persons or companies to disclose insurance details when requested to do so in respect to a claim taking place

Please provide the information in this document / form that I have requested within the timescale of 20 working days of this letter.

If it is not possible to provide the information requested due to the information exceeding the cost of compliance limits identified in Section 12, please provide advice and assistance, under the Section 16 obligations of the Act, as to how I can refine my request.

If you can identify any ways that my request could be refined, I would be grateful for any further advice and assistance.

If you have any queries please don’t hesitate to contact me via email or phone and I will be very happy to clarify what I am asking for and discuss the request, my details are outlined below.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your response.

From our preliminary assessment, it is clear that we will not be able to answer your request without further clarification.

The Council requires further information in order to identify and locate the information you have asked for. In particular, it would be useful to know:

1.      Please can you confirm exactly what documents and information you require as we are unclear what you mean by “insurance policy underwriting” and “This is to be inclusive of all underwriting made for the policies”

2.      Could you also confirm what information you previously requested and what did you receive so we can check if any documents are missing.

Once you have clarified your request, I will be able to begin to process your request. If I do not receive clarification within three months your request will be considered to have lapsed. (Under section 1 (3) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a public authority need not comply with a request unless any further information reasonably required to locate the information is supplied).

I also note that you have directed your request to Kay Osborne and the insurance team, in addition to the Complaints and Information Team mailbox, which is outside of the arrangement we have in place for you regarding contact with the Council, as per the letter sent to you in June 2020. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to remind you of the process that we have in place to manage your contact. Should you continue to contact officers outside of this, the Council will have to consider further restrictive measures.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to:

Complaints and Access to Information Team Email - complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.

PLEASE NOTE: As most staff are working from home, please e-mail all correspondence to us, rather than posting it, as there is likely to be delay in responding to correspondence arriving by post.

Kind regards,

Taz Anastassi

Complaints and Information Co-ordinator

Complaints and Information Team

Chief Executive Department

Enfield Council

Silver Street

Enfield

EN1 3XY

complaintsandinformation@enfield.gov.uk Protect the Environment - Think Before You Print.

"Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough, fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities."

42

Classification: OFFICIAL

Be the first to receive the latest Council news straight to your inbox

SIGN UP ONLINE NOW

www.enfield.gov.uk/enewsletters

www.enfield.gov.uk

Enfield Council is committed to serving the whole borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities. Opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the London Borough of Enfield. This email and any attachments or files transmitted with it are strictly confidential and intended solely for the named addressee. It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance.