Wednesday, February 24, 2016

I have been dealing with our web host SiteGround for the past three days and I am still no closer to getting answers

I just don't get it! According to an email alert I received on 3 February from our web host SiteGround, the Operating System and other proprietary software for the server take 10GB of disk space. Our Church and State website takes an additional 2GB but that still leaves our server with 8GB because our SiteGround plan comes with 20GB. SiteGround technical support tells me that there are also logs, cache and temporary files - generated by the server - that grow until they are 'flushed' at some point, after which the disk usage reverts back to normal. Even if these files took another 2GB, that would still leave our server with 6GB; plenty for me to get on with without having to constantly check my Server Status page, which three days ago stated that our server had used 84% of our disk storage. The problem here lies in the fact that as soon as 90% of available storage is used, SiteGround issues an alert stating that without an upgrade our site could start experiencing service problems. They issued us with such an alert for the first time three weeks ago when coincidentally Declan was at a court hearing (see part two below).

The 84% figure I discovered last Monday made absolutely no sense. On 15 December 2015, when our site took more than 3GB, the standard flush brought our disk usage down from 85% to 72%. On 5 January 2016, when our site took 2.75GB, the flush brought our disk usage down from 80% to 69%. But on Monday, even though our site now only takes 2GB (because I have deleted lots of old pictures we don't need anymore), the disk usage stood at 84%. I quickly contacted SiteGround technical support but by the close of business on Monday all they would confirm was that there would be "no flush any time soon", which meant we could have been heading straight for service problems despite the fact that our chairman in North Carolina, Dr Stephen Mumford, pays SiteGround $1,000 a year to ensure that our 2GB site runs smoothly in 20GB of disk space without unnecessary hitches.

Click to enlarge

Yesterday morning I discovered that a flush had taken place overnight, but our total disk usage is still inexplicably high at 74% instead of 67% or less. 74% of 20GB is 14.8GB, meaning that, minus the 10GB taken for the Operating System and other proprietary software and the 2GB taken by our site, something is taking more than 2.5GB of disk space - the equivalent of a website bigger than Church and State! Neither yesterday nor today have SiteGround provided me with an explanation to account for this extra 2.5GB that I consider satisfactory. Based in Bulgaria, SiteGround is among the top hosting companies, as their Recap 2015 shows. And this link provides a look behind the scenes at their work, with the interview questions answered by their CEO, Tenko Nikolov.

Trending today (pageviews: 10,278):

Click to enlarge

1. Handwritten Draft Of King James Bible Discovered: Reveals No 'Divine Powers'

2. Cardinal says gay couples shouldn't be invited to family gatherings if children are present

3. Humans will be extinct in 100 years says eminent scientist

4. The Problem With Faith: 11 Ways Religion Is Destroying Humanity

5. 'Christian' Website Offers Tips On 'How To Help Women Learn Their Place'

6. Religious Psychosis – The Global Nightmare (Part II)

7. Catholic Archbishop says domestic violence is caused by women 'not obeying men'

8. Does the Internet Spell Doom For Organized Religion?


***

The following is taken from part two of my blog post on 3 February, "Heavey v The Greater London Authority: Outcome of Preliminary Hearing".


While Declan was at Court, I received for the first time ever an alert from our hosting company SiteGround stating that our Church and State website had used 90% of our available storage and that we could start experiencing service problems.

Click to enlarge

At first I thought this was some kind of mistake. I have these two screenshots dated 28 January 2016 showing that our disk space usage is 2.48GB and that we are only using 69% of the available storage:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

I find it inexplicable how I could have received this alert, especially since our disk space usage is now just 2.39GB (ie, 0.09GB less than when we were only using 69% of the available storage). Our chairman Dr Stephen Mumford is paying SiteGround $1,000 per year to host the site and I am hoping this can be sorted without another upgrade.

SITEGROUND UPDATE (4 February): After two days of correspondence with SiteGround, a technical support supervisor has finally explained that the reason for the 90% usage was "the cPanel upgrade done by our system administrators recently". All the files left behind by this upgrade have now been 'flushed' and everything is back to normal.

Friday, February 19, 2016

The Mayor of London's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's Broadway) stands in violation of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

This, as it must, has become a full time occupation. Keep going.
- A friend in Washington DC

Violation of Article 8 - Mayor of London's Clearing House service

"Our renewable two-year assured shorthold tenancy agreement dated 17 May 2014 (the "Agreement") stipulates that housing is conditional on accepting support. However, the GLA Clearing House offer of only coercive support through TST is at variance with the non-coercive support provision contained in the Agreement at Schedule 3; therefore, GLA Clearing House has rendered the Agreement non-renewable because we are rightly unwilling to accept coercive support. It follows that because a non-renewable tenancy agreement leaves us vulnerable to eviction after 17 May 2016, GLA Clearing House has failed to provide us with sufficient procedural protection of our rights in violation of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 with reference to Connor v UK (2004)."

The Greater London Authority (GLA) changed the goalposts last Tuesday by now putting our tenancy at risk by rendering our renewable tenancy agreement non-renewable this May. The quote above is taken from this email Declan sent earlier this afternoon to the Mayor of London's GLA Clearing House service, run for the Mayor by St Mungo's Broadway.

Click to enlarge

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

The Mayor of London's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's Broadway): Resolve your dispute with us through the courts

So a High Court (Judicial Review) Letter Before Claim to the Greater London Authority it will be:

Click to enlarge

Monday, February 15, 2016

Run by St Mungo's Broadway, the Mayor of London's Clearing House Service's defiance of a second district court judge moves into a second week

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

Part 1 (11 February 2016): Complaint to the Mayor of London: Declan is engaged in a battle royal with the Mayor's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's Broadway) over data held against us in defiance of a court order issued last May

On 3 February Declan's case against the Greater London Authority (GLA) for terminating our eligibility to our flat without a right of review or appeal was struck out by a district court judge. We are hoping we will not have to appeal, but just in case we are left with no other option, Declan will have no difficulty establishing that the Mayor of London's Clearing House service, run for the Mayor by St Mungo's Broadway, is currently standing in defiance of a second district court judge for a second week (see the link above for their defiance of the first district court judge for over eight months):

Click to enlarge

For the European Small Claims Court: The Co-Chair of the National Board of Advisors of the Federation for American Immigration Reform responds to Facebook's 6th block

I recently read an article--I forget where--citing the frequent practice of FACEBOOK doing lockouts. All it would take would be one individual on its staff who didn't care for our messages to cause trouble.

Click to enlarge

For the European Small Claims Court:

Click to enlarge



Read more
http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/02/both-parties-fail-american-citizens-and-democracy/

Sunday, February 14, 2016

We are on course to file our case against Facebook Ireland in the European Small Claims Court on Tuesday before their sixth block is lifted



We are well on course to have our claim against Facebook Ireland lodged with the European Small Claims Court before this sixth block expires on Tuesday night. This is paragraph 37(iii) of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that he is putting the finishing touches to.

HEAVEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

COMMUNICATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION UNDER
THE FIRST OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE
INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

Paragraph 37(iii) of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations

In a letter dated 22 December 2015, the Applicant's local MP, Shadow Home Office Minister Lyn Brown, stated that she had written to the managing director of Facebook UK seeking an explanation for why Facebook had twice blocked the Applicant's wife from posting to groups and removed all her postings to groups since 2010 (1-4 December and 5-7 December 2015). The Applicant had already issued a European Small Claims Court letter before claim to Facebook Ireland, the entity with which users based outside the USA and Canada have a contractual relationship. Despite the strength of both of these letters, Facebook has subsequently four times blocked the Applicant's wife from posting to groups (6-9 January, 12-15 January, 20-22 January and 13-16 February 2016) and twice removed all her postings to groups since 2010 (6-9 January, 12-15 January 2016), each again without any stated reason or cause.

This is what Shadow Home Office Minister Lyn Brown says she wrote to Facebook UK on our behalf last December:

Click to enlarge

But in fact it is the secretive censors in Facebook's European HQ in Dublin who decide what is - and what isn't. This is Declan's pre-action letter to Facebook Ireland well over 40 days ago and to which we have not received a reply:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Saturday, February 13, 2016

The Mayor of London's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's Broadway) defies a second district court judge

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

Part 1 (11 February 2016): Complaint to the Mayor of London: Declan is engaged in a battle royal with the Mayor's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's Broadway) over data held against us in defiance of a court order issued last May

On 3 February Declan's case against the Greater London Authority (GLA) for terminating our eligibility to our flat without a right of review or appeal was struck out by a district court judge. We are hoping we will not have to appeal, but just in case we are left with no other option, Declan will have no difficulty establishing that the Mayor of London's Clearing House service, run for the Mayor by St Mungo's Broadway, is currently standing in defiance of a second district court judge for over a week (see the link above for their defiance of the first district court judge for over eight months):

Click to enlarge

Heavey v The Greater London Authority

Claimant's Response to Defendant's Skeleton Argument
For the Preliminary Hearing
3 February 2016



***

As Declan points out in the updated complaint to the United Nations that he is currently putting the finishing touches to, we were evicted from our previous flat on 14 March 2013 because according to our then live-in landlady's ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, our flat was needed for somebody with a mental illness. Former MI5 whistleblower David Shayler also lived with human rights activist Belinda McKenzie in the same political 'safe house' for a couple of years until 2007. It is unfortunate that Shayler declared himself the Messiah in 2007, became a squatter, and was subsequently ridiculed in the press for changing his name to Delores Kane. A New Statesman article dated 11 September 2006 featuring Shayler and Belinda gives no indication that Shayler believed he was the Messiah at that time; whilst a Daily Mail interview with him the following year reveals he believed himself to be Jesus by June 2007. He has never regained his normal self.


The Esquire article below* is mentioned in a Guardian article dated 27 March 2012. It is an eye-opener, highlighting the monitoring and surveillance that Shayler had to live with back in 2000, and the contradictory briefings and slanders that were coming out of the British establishment and the media. The author, Dr Eamonn O'Neill, is a lecturer in journalism at Strathclyde University.

*On 2 May 2013, Issuu removed this pdf from my Issuu account following a copyright complaint by Hearst Communications. I had uploaded the article to my Issuu account in December 2012. In March 2013, when last I checked, the article had been viewed more than 15,000 times. It can be read here.

BBC PANORAMA: The David Shayler Affair (August 1998)

According to BBC Panorama, Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair". In 2002, he was jailed for seven weeks for breaking the Official Secrets Act.

Facebook blocks me for the sixth time



Thursday, February 11, 2016

Complaint to the Mayor of London: Declan is engaged in a battle royal with the Mayor's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's) over data held against us in defiance of a court order issued last May

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

Heavey v St Mungo's

Brief details of claim (proposed)

On 20 July 2015, 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. The Claimant then discovered that personal data contained on a paper referral form dated 17 March 2014 had been inaccurately held online by the Defendant in non-compliance with a court order dated 8 May 2015. Supplemental to a Letter Before Claim, the Claimant wrote to the Defendant on 9 February 2016 about inaccurate financial data that leaves him and his wife open to accusations of deception and fraud, but to no avail. The Defendant has also rejected the Claimant’s proposal later that day for an Alternative Dispute Resolution meeting to settle this 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 inaccurate personal data in respect of which he is the data controller, and exclude any text added by the referral worker which was not included on the handwritten form and signed off by the Claimant and his wife and co-signed by the referral worker. The Claimant seeks an award of damages for distress of not more than £1,000.

Click to enlarge

The Mayor of London's Clearing House service (run by St Mungo's) has stood in defiance of this order since it was issued last May:

Click to enlarge

Related blog post (14 October 2015): "Mayor of London's Clearing House service withholds financial data against us in defiance of court ruling"

'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

About Church and State

Letter from our Chairman

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.

Friday, February 05, 2016

St Mungo's Broadway: Seeking to illegally break our tenancy agreement under threat of eviction?



Last Wednesday Declan's case against the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) for terminating our eligibility to our flat without a right of review or appeal was struck out by a district court judge. We are hoping we will not have to appeal, but just in case we are left with no other option, Declan has just sent the email below to the chief executive of St Mungo's Broadway, whose charity for the homeless is commissioned by the GLA to run the Mayor's Clearing House service. At the moment Declan is putting the finishing touches to his updated complaint to the United Nations pursuant to Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Later tonight I will add this email as an annex to the complaint:

Click to enlarge

GLA Clearing House has stood in defiance of this order since it was issued last May:

Click to enlarge

Heavey v The Greater London Authority

Claimant's Response to Defendant's Skeleton Argument
For the Preliminary Hearing
3 February 2016



***

As Declan points out in the updated complaint to the United Nations that he is currently working on, we were evicted from our previous flat on 14 March 2013 because according to our then live-in landlady's ex-husband, Dr Nigel McKenzie, a consultant psychiatrist in Highgate Mental Health Centre, our flat was needed for somebody with a mental illness. Former MI5 whistleblower David Shayler also lived with human rights activist Belinda McKenzie in the same political 'safe house' for a couple of years until 2007. It is unfortunate that Shayler declared himself the Messiah in 2007, became a squatter, and was subsequently ridiculed in the press for changing his name to Delores Kane. A New Statesman article dated 11 September 2006 featuring Shayler and Belinda gives no indication that Shayler believed he was the Messiah at that time; whilst a Daily Mail interview with him the following year reveals he believed himself to be Jesus by June 2007. He has never regained his normal self.


The Esquire article below* is mentioned in a Guardian article dated 27 March 2012. It is an eye-opener, highlighting the monitoring and surveillance that Shayler had to live with back in 2000, and the contradictory briefings and slanders that were coming out of the British establishment and the media. The author, Dr Eamonn O'Neill, is a lecturer in journalism at Strathclyde University.

*On 2 May 2013, Issuu removed this pdf from my Issuu account following a copyright complaint by Hearst Communications. I had uploaded the article to my Issuu account in December 2012. In March 2013, when last I checked, the article had been viewed more than 15,000 times. It can be read here.

BBC PANORAMA: The David Shayler Affair (August 1998)

According to BBC Panorama, Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair". In 2002, he was jailed for seven weeks for breaking the Official Secrets Act.

Wednesday, February 03, 2016

Heavey v The Greater London Authority: Outcome of Preliminary Hearing


County Court at Central London, Royal Courts of Justice

This afternoon Declan's case against the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) for terminating our eligibility to our flat without a right of review or appeal was struck out by a district court judge. We await his order and transcript of judgment, but hope this email to GLA Clearing House tonight, the source of all the problems, will negate the chances of us having to appeal:

Click to enlarge

GLA Clearing House, run by St Mungo's Broadway, has stood in defiance of this order since it was issued last May:

Click to enlarge

Related blog post (14 October 2015): "Mayor of London's Clearing House service withholds financial data against us in defiance of court ruling"

***

While Declan was at Court, I received for the first time ever an alert from our hosting company SiteGround stating that our Church and State website had used 90% of our available storage and that we could start experiencing service problems.

Click to enlarge

At first I thought this was some kind of mistake. I have these two screenshots dated 28 January 2016 showing that our disk space usage is 2.48GB and that we are only using 69% of the available storage:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

I find it inexplicable how I could have received this alert, especially since our disk space usage is now just 2.39GB (ie, 0.09GB less than when we were only using 69% of the available storage). Our chairman Dr Stephen Mumford is paying SiteGround $1,000 per year to host the site and I am hoping this can be sorted without another upgrade.

SITEGROUND UPDATE (4 February): After two days of correspondence with SiteGround, a technical support supervisor has finally explained that the reason for the 90% usage was "the cPanel upgrade done by our system administrators recently". All the files left behind by this upgrade have now been 'flushed' and everything is back to normal.

The Mayor of London's Greater London Authority seeks to have Declan struck off as a director of Network for Church Monitoring

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

Part 1 (1 February 2016): Heavey v The Greater London Authority: Will the Central London County Court rule that our newly litigated claim may not be pursued through a claim for damages?

Declan has the AUDACITY to bring a point of law that has been upheld by the European Court of Human Rights to the attention of the Central London County Court...

Heavey v The Greater London Authority

Claimant's Response to Defendant's Skeleton Argument
For the Preliminary Hearing
3 February 2016



And the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority seeks £1,500 in costs...

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Which will have Declan filing for bankruptcy and struck off as director of N4CM.

Click to enlarge

Update (3 February 2016): Outcome of Preliminary Hearing

Monday, February 01, 2016

Heavey v The Greater London Authority: Will the Central London County Court rule that our newly litigated claim may not be pursued through a claim for damages?

Mayor of London Boris Johnson

"Your case seems very winnable."
- a friend in Washington DC

Declan's Opening Statement to the Court on 3 February 2016

I hope to establish at this hearing of the GLA's application to contest the Court's jurisdiction that mine is a newly litigated claim (as opposed to a re-litigated claim), and that as such it can be pursued through a claim for a declaration of unlawfulness and damages. However, to avoid a trial hearing all Counsel for the GLA would have to do here is agree to a review of the Authority's decision regarding my and my wife's tenancy, along with our right of appeal to an independent tribunal, given that the legal framework applying to the decision that has deprived us of a review has not provided us with sufficient procedural protection of our rights, in violation of Article 8 of Human Rights Act 1998. That said, should my application be set aside pursuant to CPR Part 11, I would in light of the finding of an Article 8 ECHR violation in Connors v UK (2004) respectfully request leave to appeal the issue of the Court’s jurisdiction to hear my claim for a declaration (that the legal framework applying to the referral decision that has deprived me of a review has not provided myself and my wife with sufficient procedural protection of our rights) and damages for distress.


Click to enlarge

Over three months ago, the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) lodged its application to contest the court's jurisdiction by way of reply to Declan's claim against it in the Central London County Court for terminating our eligibility for our flat without the right of review or appeal. The hearing of GLA's application will take place this Wednesday. The Authority not only falsely accuses us of re-litigating a matter which has already been determined by the High Court in judicial review proceedings (see Background, paragraph 9 below), but they make out that our claim may not be pursued by way of a claim for damages. Really? According to Hickman and Rose Solicitors (see graphic above), a public law issue may be pursued through a claim for damages. This afternoon we received further argument from GLA Principal Solicitor Steve Gee that we cannot seek a mandatory order from any Court other than the High Court (Judicial Review), so Declan's opening statement to the Court on Wednesday forgoes an order for a review with a right of appeal and retains his initial request for a declaration of unlawfulness and damages for distress.

BACKGROUND

1. On 17 May 2014 my wife and I were granted our current tenancy by Family Mosaic Housing Association as clients of the Mayor of London's Greater London Authority (GLA) Housing First programme with support from the Single Homeless Project (SHP), one of three charitable organisations funded by the GLA to operate Housing First within the Greater London area.

2. Housing First is an internationally acclaimed programme for entrenched rough sleepers, the core principle of which is the provision of permanent accommodation and non-compulsory support (Johnsen with Teixeira, 2010). These principles are contained in a funding agreement between the GLA and SHP dated 13 March 2014, which provides that "clients who meet the criteria for a Housing First offer will be offered long term tenancies…. Long term tenancies would mean for a minimum of two years with the possibility to extend and preferably for the lifetime of the client."

3. On 4 September 2014, less than four months into our tenancy, I received an email from SHP informing me for the first time that GLA Housing First was a pilot scheme culminating on 31 March 2015 and that both my wife and I would be referred to the Mayor’s Clearing House programme (GLA Clearing House), operated for the Mayor by St Mungo’s Broadway.

4. GLA Clearing House departs significantly from the key principles of Housing First, in that it does not provide the permanent accommodation and voluntary support characteristic of the Housing First model. Rather, it is a coercive programme that requires clients to comply with holistic support plans and "eligibility for flats, issued on two-year renewable Assured Shorthold Tenancies, terminates when individuals are deemed to no longer require support to live independently" (Johnsen and Teixeira, 2012).

5. No mention was made in SHP’s email of 4 September 2014 to a possible review of the decision by GLA to refer my wife and me to its Clearing House programme or how I could make a complaint and how such a complaint will be handled.

6. I wrote on numerous occasions to SHP and twice to the GLA protesting my and my wife's referral to GLA Clearing House, but to no avail. Finally, on 18 June 2015, I filed at the High Court an application for permission to apply for a judicial review against the GLA. The GLA in its Grounds of Opposition to my claim for judicial review stated: "The GLA, acting reasonably and within its statutory powers, was entitled to choose Clearing House as a replacement for the Housing First pilot."

7. By order dated 12 August 2015, the High Court refused me permission to bring judicial review proceedings on the grounds that my claim form should have been filed within three months after the grounds to make the claim arose on 4 September 2014, and that the GLA had not acted unlawfully by referring my wife and me from the Mayor of London’s Housing First programme to the Mayor’s Clearing House programme (the "referral decision"), thereby terminating our eligibility for our flat within one year of the commencement of our tenancy because we are able to live independently.

8. It is evident from SHP's email of 4 September 2014, judicial review pre-action correspondence and the GLA's Grounds of Opposition to my claim for judicial review that I have been repeatedly deprived of my right of review, and that the GLA has not properly considered the impact of its referral decision on my family life. For example, the GLA states at paragraph 13 of the Grounds of Opposition that its initial letter of 23 March 2015 was not a new decision but a response to my first pre-action protocol letter, and that it "has not reviewed the earlier [referral] decision or taken any new decision regarding the Claimant's tenancy".

9. On 10 September 2015, the High Court having established that the GLA has not committed a violation of the applicable law (and therefore with no grounds to appeal the JR), I filed a claim for damages against the Authority in the Central London County Court under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (the right to a family life). Contrary to the GLA's assertions, I have not sought to re-litigate in the County Court what has already been dealt with within judicial review proceedings. In the County Court I have challenged the GLA for depriving me of my right of review in respect of the referral decision that was made in line with applicable law, not the lawfulness of the decision to refer my wife and me to GLA Clearing House which was the subject of the judicial review application.

10. In my claim before the County Court I have cited Connors v UK (2004) in saying that the legal framework applying to the referral decision that has deprived me of a review has not provided my wife and me with sufficient procedural protection of our rights. In Connors v UK the European Court of Human Rights found that the existence of judicial review did not provide a safeguard to gypsies where the local authority terminates licences in accordance with the applicable law.

11. I am pursuing this case through a claim for a declaration of unlawfulness and damages; nonetheless, I think it likely that a County Court judge will dismiss my case on the attached application to contest the Court’s jurisdiction, filed at Court by the GLA on 14 October 2015. I am therefore looking for a solicitor who may be willing to argue the Court's jurisdiction on my behalf up to the Court of Appeal. Alternatively, having been denied permission to appeal by the Court of Appeal, I may be left with no option but to appeal the insufficient procedural protection of our rights to the European Court of Human Rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights - the right to a family life - before we are evicted from our home upon the expiry of our tenancy agreement on 17 May 2016.

Declan Heavey
71 Queens Road West
London
E13 0PE

Tel: 0788 043 7681
Email: dheavey@gmail.com

(Emphases added.)

Last December we received from the Court the GLA's application to dispute the Court's jurisdiction, filed at Court on 14 October 2015. The application has not been sealed by the Court - no surprise there (see blog of 16 December 2015, "Central London County Court: Will the Parliamentary Ombudsman have to investigate the Court's failure to send us a copy of the Greater London Authority's application to contest the court's jurisdiction?") - but these are the reasons (save today's mandatory order point) why Mr Gee contends that the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear Declan's claim:

Click to enlarge

Mr Gee gives the clear impression above that the Mayor of London's Housing First programme has finished. If this is the case is then the GLA not lying to the taxpayer? Their website states: "Our Housing First pilot introduced the model to London, and there are now plans to roll this out more widely at a local level" (from the Mayor of London's 2015 "Rough Sleeping Commissioning Framework", page 12). But they are putting us back to the street on a threat to life without the right of review or appeal. Forgoing the reference to an order for a review with a right of appeal, this is Declan's claim for a declaration of unlawfulness and damages that was issued by the Court on 11 September 2015:

Brief details of claim

The Claimant challenges the Defendant for depriving him of his right of review in respect of its decision to refer him and his wife from the Mayor of London's Housing First programme to the Mayor's Clearing House programme (the "referral decision"), thereby terminating their eligibility for their flat because they are able to live independently. On 12 August 2015 the High Court refused the Claimant permission to apply for Judicial Review, principally because his Claim Form was not filed within 3 months after the grounds to make the claim arose on 4 September 2014. It is evident from the email the Claimant received on 4 September 2014, judicial review pre-action correspondence and the Defendant's Grounds of Defence (in particular paragraph 13) that the Claimant has been repeatedly deprived of his right of review, and that the Defendant has not properly considered the impact of the referral decision on his family life. It has not taken into account the Claimant and his wife's needs and vulnerable position as rough sleepers for almost 4 years in total. The Claimant is therefore making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unlawfully and an order that it reviews the referral decision and provides the Claimant with the opportunity to appeal to an independent tribunal if he is not satisfied with the outcome.

Value

The Claimant expects to recover damages for distress of not more than £1,000.


Particulars of claim (threat to life and wellbeing, paras. 16-17):


Related blog post (14 October 2015): "Mayor of London's Clearing House service withholds financial data against us in defiance of court ruling"

'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

http://churchandstate.org.uk/about/

http://churchandstate.org.uk/letter-from-the-chairman/

http://churchandstate.org.uk/category/church-and-state-press/

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 (3 February 2016): Outcome of Preliminary Hearing