Saturday, October 28, 2017

Why did the Independent Police Complaints Commission come looking for my consent last month to forward my complaint to the Professional Standards Department of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs? (WITH UPDATE 21/11/2017)

Re: Internet cuts since 26 May 2017

From my newer blog post's Update 21 November (4.16pm):

"And it's not just Facebook blocks, blocks on public access to our Church and State website and the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site that Declan and I are dealing with these days. We have also been dealing with Internet cuts since 26 May. See my blog post of 21 June, Internet cuts: We pay £65 per month for BT Infinity but feel we are in a race against time to stay online (WITH UPDATE 21/11/2017 RE: 170th Internet cut since 26 May 2017)."

21 November (4.06pm): 170 internet cuts since 26 May 2017.* We had to suspend work on our Church and State website on 15 June after 4 internet cuts in one night. With an all-time record breaking 7 cuts in one day by 4pm on 29 August; 14 cuts in September that included on 5 September our latest 1/2 hour removal from the internet plus the almost total shutdown of our BT TV service; no cuts since 15 November (as of 21 November at 4.06pm).

1. 143rd 29 August 2017, 8.42am
2. 144th 29 August 2017, 9.54am
3. 145th 29 August 2017, 10.52am
4. 146th 29 August 2017, 11.38am
5. 147th 29 August 2017, 12.02pm
6. 148th 29 August 2017, 12.47pm
7. 149th 29 August 2017, 3.10pm
-----------------------------------------
10. 152nd 5 September 2017, 11.53am
11. 153rd 5 September 2017, 1.48pm
12. 154th 5 September 2017, 4.35pm
13. 155th 5 September 2017, 9.32pm (28 minutes+)
-----------------------------------------
28. 170th 15 November 2017, 9.41pm

* 12 out of the first 18 internet cuts were within the first four days of a BT engineer's visit on 12 June. It is a matter of written record that this engineer "securely fitted a brand new master socket to another location on the same wall. He also carried out a comprehensive line test and could not find a problem with [our] line".

The War on Free Expression


Not a matter of serious misconduct?

On 15 September 2017 the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) forwarded to the Professional Standards Department of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) my complaint of serious misconduct against HMRC staff. By letter dated 21 September 2017, HMRC Internal Governance dismissed the complaint on the basis that further consideration was unnecessary.

On 12 August 2017 I not only complained to the IPCC about HMRC Pay As You Earn and Self Assessment (SA) updating my address on 11 July 2017 without my permission (and in the full knowledge of the potential detrimental effect of this on my living situation, given that my address has not changed since May 2014), but I also complained about the then subsequent closure of my SA account based upon fabricated hearsay evidence which no independent judiciary would accept. See my previous blog post of 27 October, Home Department: Complaint to the Home Secretary against the Independent Police Complaints Commission. My appeal against the HM Revenue and Customs investigation of serious misconduct is simply being ignored (WITH UPDATE 28/10/2017).

In my previous blog post's update, I explain that Declan and I will be using my complaint yesterday to Home Secretary Amber Rudd about the Independent Police Complaints Commission to defend our tenancy, one way or another. Not only has Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs dismissed the above complaint of serious misconduct against HMRC staff, but yesterday we also received an email from the IPCC telling me that I have no right of appeal to them. The email states: "The IPCC only has remit over complaints against the HMRC when police like powers are used, e.g. raids on property etc." So why did the IPCC come looking for my consent last month to forward my complaint to the Professional Standards Department of HMRC? And why in that same email, and under my own case reference number, did they write: "If you are not happy with the HMRC decision on recording your complaint, you have the right to appeal to us." I appealed against the HMRC's investigation into my complaint, not the non-recording of my complaint by HMRC, as directed by the IPCC website. This is that now non-extant email from the IPCC of 15 September (for some strange reason the terms "police force" and "HMRC" are used interchangeably):

Your ref: 2017/091737

Dear Mrs Heavey

Thank you for contacting the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). We can confirm that we have noted the details of your complaint against the HMRC. The case reference number is 2017/091737.

Please accept our apology for the delay in sending you this response, this is due to a high volume of work currently being received by the Customer Contact Centre.

The IPCC is completely independent of the police service and is responsible for making sure that the police complaints system in England and Wales works effectively and fairly. However, each police force is responsible for considering complaints made against that force and for recording your complaint. If you are not happy with the HMRC decision on recording your complaint, you have the right to appeal to us.

We now need your permission, either by letter, phone, or email to pass details of your complaint to HMRC. Without your consent, we cannot pass on the details of a complaint to a force unless, in exceptional cases, the details of the complaint indicate that it is in the public interest to do so.

Yours sincerely
Jessica North
Customer Contact Advisor
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)

UPDATE 21 November (4.26pm): We haven't heard back from the Home Department about the IPCC (nor did we ever expect to). We have always been aware, however, that one way we could use my complaint to the Home Secretary dated 27 October would be as court exhibit to fight the non-renewal of our housing association tenancy next May: the complaint clearly shows that we have been unable even to secure our home address with HMRC four years into the tenancy itself. 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. According to BBC Panorama, Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair"; he was jailed for seven weeks in 2002 for breaking the Official Secrets Act. 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 published in 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)

Former MI5 whistleblower David Shayler "caused the biggest crisis of official secrecy since the spy catcher affair", according to BBC Panorama. He was jailed for seven weeks in 2002 for breaking the Official Secrets Act.