Saturday, November 22, 2014

First 1/2 of Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project not showing in this blog... again!

Part 1 (this afternoon): Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION]

I have written to TinyPic this evening. This is what Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project under the Data Protection Act 1998 looks like in this blog at the moment (page 1 of the claim form is missing):

Click to enlarge

See my earlier blog this afternoon, Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION], where this particular anomaly will hopefully have been resolved by TinyPic for the second time this month.

Declan's response to the Single Homeless Project CEO's submission to the Central London County Court [DATA PROTECTION]

Part 1: High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

Click to enlarge

Heavey v Single Homeless Project
Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge

This is our chairman's strong rebuttal of SHP's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Update: First 1/2 of Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project not showing in this blog... again!

Monday, November 17, 2014

Yorkshire Building Society: my access to our account targeted?

Click to enlarge



I simply do not tell you both how deeply impressed I am by your work. I go to your website frequently and am just blown away by it every single time I look at it. -- Dr Stephen D Mumford, Chairman, Network for Church Monitoring

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Now the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook

Part 1 (last night): The first Church and State article I cannot share on Facebook

Last night I couldn't share a new Church and State article on Facebook - there was no such problem with articles already published. This morning the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook. I chose this article to illustrate the anomaly:

Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge
Click to enlarge

I have been using Facebook for many years but have never encountered these sort of anomalies. We are however well used to losing Facebook shares, as Declan explains in paragraph 36 of his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:
Paragraph 36 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

36. The Church and State website has been removed from the Internet on five distinct occasions. For example, in May 2012, Just Host, the domain’s then registrar, changed the domain name server records without permission or authorisation and disabled the Applicant’s wife’s facility to correct these records herself (see Annex 30, Just Host: Complaint to European Commission, pp. 78-83). No sooner had the Applicant’s wife successfully transferred the domain name to SiteGround’s registrar on 8 June 2012, than, on 14 June 2012, the site was vandalised to such an extent that the Applicant’s wife was advised by the wordpress theme designers that she had no option but to scratch the theme she had been working with for over two years and start over with a new theme (see Annex 31, WordPress: Final exchange with theme designer, p. 84). The Chairman of N4CM, Dr Stephen D Mumford from North Carolina, US, has been funding the site since December 2010, and the domain since June 2012. Nonetheless, the site continues to be attacked; for example, the Applicant’s wife has posted blogs showing that articles throughout the Church and State website are regularly targeted, and this includes the reduction of Facebook share counts in every section of the site by anything up to 600 shares a time to date.

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

The first Church and State article I cannot share on Facebook

The Vatican is behind much of the inaction of governments to tackle human overpopulation

Click to enlarge
A sample quote from the article

Ehrlich writes that the main source of opposition to contraception “is that of the Vatican and its bishops. Yet Catholics use contraception as much as non-Catholics, and they have abortions with even higher frequency. But the reason that the hierarchy fights against both is that the higher-ups don’t want to admit that the Protestants and Jews were right.” He adds that the “God-fearing” people’s “rigid opposition to something so basic, so critical to the future of life on Earth, as controlling reproduction is just as unethical as any major affront to the environment or terrorist act. They’re working to kill people – women who need safe abortion now, and our descendants who are likely to have much higher death rates related to the decay of human life-support systems as a consequence of overpopulation. The pope and many of the bishops are one of the truly evil, regressive forces on the planet, in my opinion, interested primarily in maintaining their power.”




Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Update: Now the photo selected by Facebook is not the one that appears on Facebook

Wednesday, November 05, 2014

This blog: TinyPic images... not showing!

I have written to TinyPic tonight. This is what Declan's claim against the Single Homeless Project under the Data Protection Act 1998 looks like in this blog at the moment (page 1 of the claim form is missing):

Click to enlarge
This is the main content that is missing:
Brief details of claim

On 19 March 2014, the Claimant made a formal Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 for any information held about him on the Defendant’s computerised database. This information was only submitted by the Defendant to the Claimant on 5 August 2014, following instruction from the Information Commissioner's Office. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained in a printed referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately entered online by the Defendant and submitted to the Clearing House for accommodation purposes. On 15 August 2014, the Claimant and his employer both wrote to the Defendant about inaccurate financial data that leaves the Claimant open to accusations of deception and fraud, but neither has been able to elicit a response from the Defendant on the matter. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that the data controller rectify those financial data and any other personal data in respect of which he is the data controller and which contain an expression of opinion which appears to the Court to be based on the inaccurate financial data. He also seeks an award of damages and punitive damages for breach of data protection obligations.

Page 2 of the claim form is still showing:
Click to enlarge
This is our Chairman's strong rebuttal of SHP's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:
Click to enlarge
Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

St Mungo’s Broadway: Seeking to illegally break our contract with the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme under threat of eviction



Part 1: High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

At the beginning of our tenancy we kept wondering why we were put in an accommodation under the tutelage of the Mayor of London when we had been evicted from our previous flat (see blog of 15 October, "Newham College: We reserve the right to terminate your course at any time") and forced to sleep on the streets of London for over a year, where we were harassed and threatened by the police (see blog of 2 October, "City of London Police: If you want to challenge our word against yours again, you need to make an application to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review"). But the email below to the Single Homeless Project, one of three charities that operate the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme, might just provide a hint of the reason. It concerns St Mungo's Broadway, another premier homelessness organisation, which is seeking to illegally break our contract as clients of GLA Housing First under the threat of eviction:

Click to enlarge

We have a long history with St Mungo's Broadway, formally called Broadway or Broadway Homelessness and Support. This is Declan's account of our last run-in with them in his updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:
Paragraph 30 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

30. In March 2013, Broadway CEO Howard Sinclair wrote in the Guardian that there are occasions when the charity has accommodated rough sleepers straight from the streets. In addition to the Mayor of London providing Broadway with £5 million under his No Second Night Out project, the charity has received £10 million from London and Quadrant Housing Trust, alongside the support of three other trusts, to accommodate people in London for whom there has been no other option, according to Mr Sinclair in the same article. On 29 August 2013, the Applicant filed a claim in the High Court for judicial review against Commissioner of Police for the City of London Adrian Leppard and Home Secretary Theresa May following the decision of the former not to ask Broadway to engage with him and his wife in relation to their welfare and access to the charity’s service for supporting clients to find accommodation in the private rented sector, because the police service has “no mandate to become involved” (see Annex 24, City of London Police: Reply from Commissioner Adrian Leppard (2013), p. 63). The Applicant argued in his claim form that it was unreasonable for the City of London Police to refuse to ask Broadway to help them find private sector accommodation whilst at the same time threatening them with hosings by street cleaners (see Annex 25, City of London Police: Application for Judicial Review, pp. 64-69). On 6 February 2014, Deputy High Court Judge Bidder ruled: “The refusal of the First Defendant to ask the charity ‘Broadway’ to engage or help the Claimant and his wife with their welfare or accommodation is not arguably unreasonable. It is not its job to intervene in any disagreement between a charity and those seeking that charity’s help” (see Annex 26, City of London Police: Order by Deputy High Court Judge Bidding, p. 70).

This is the court order quoted above:
Click to enlarge

Update: Heavey v Single Homeless Project: Will the Central London County Court rule we consented to declarations for online referral that we are paying our own salaries and that we are both mentally ill, and despite our photographic evidence to the contrary?

High Court rules that the Mayor of London bears no responsibility for his Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme

Click to enlarge

Heavey v Mayor of London
SECTION 5 Detailed statement of grounds

The Claimant's letter before claim challenges the decision of the Defendant's GLA Housing First programme to insist upon issuing him with Support Plans ("the decision"). The Claimant asserts that the decision is not compatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR"), guaranteeing the right to a private life. In a final response letter, the Defendant distorts the Claimant’s claim with reference to the Data Protection Act 1998. The Defendant further alleges that the GLA bears no responsibility for Housing First. The Claimant contends that this is incorrect and an unsustainable position. Under the ECHR, the right to security of tenure is guaranteed with the right of privacy and respect of the home. Failing the remedy being sought (see Section 7 below), the Claimant seeks permission to proceed with a claim for judicial review on the ground that the decision of the Defendant’s GLA Housing First programme to insist upon issuing him with Support Plans is in breach of European Community Law.



This is our Chairman's strong rebuttal of the Mayor of London's GLA Housing First programme's accusation that Declan and I are both mentally ill:

Click to enlarge

Church and State website

Church and State Press

Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

If you would like to help us personally, please feel free to pick up one of our books (shameless plug, I know, but every sale helps us to work our way out of our precarious situation). There is currently five books available in Church and State Press here, and all proceeds from the first four of these books go to us with the authors' permission. Thank you all for all the support you have given us, and I hope we can keep our Church and State website going despite the constant threats.



Update (10 September 2015): Threat to life and wellbeing: Our claim against the Greater London Authority filed at the Central London County Court this afternoon