Seventh visit by the police

Two nights ago we received our seventh visit from the police – this time by a not very friendly female police community support officer. After the usual how long have you been sleeping in the porch, she only had two other questions before walking away abruptly: where do you put your bags at night; and have you ever been robbed.

Then, as we were bedding down, a total of four homeless passed by the porch within minutes of each other – Declan recognised them from the Dellow Centre and the Whitechapel Mission. (This morning at 5.10am a rough looking character approached us while we were packing to leave, asking for the direction to somewhere while at the same time eyeing our bags. Would he have run off with a bag if he had had the chance? I think so.)

This visit from the police wouldn’t have been related to Declan’s appointment the next morning with Detective Constable Alexander Head in Bethnal Green Police Station to have his statement taken in relation to the assault on him by a homeless guy in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February – when he was punched twice in the face in an unprovoked attack. No, of course not. That would be what - thuggery?

You may ask why DC Head would take Declan’s statement now, when Declan wasn’t given the time of day for almost two and a half months (see below for chronology in respect of Declan’s efforts to have his statement taken). Enter Rev Graham Carter, head of the Methodist Church in the UK.

Carter wrote to Declan on 20 April in reply to Declan’s letter to him of 17 April (see blog of the next day) regarding harassment and intimidation in the Methodist-run Whitechapel Mission. In his letter, Carter says that the allegation of assault is being dealt with by the police and it is, therefore, not possible for him to comment on it. It would be our contention that the police then had to do just that – deal with it.

Anyway, this is Carter’s letter of 20 April:

Dear Mr Heavey

I acknowledge receipt of your letter of 17th April regarding your allegations of harassment and intimidation in the Whitechapel Mission.

Clearly the allegation of assault is being dealt with by the police and it is, therefore, not possible for me to make any comments on this. Your other allegations are most appropriately dealt with locally by those responsible for the running of the Whitechapel Mission, either the Management Committee or the Trustees, and I advise you to take up your concerns with them.

With all good wishes,

Yours sincerely,

Revd R Graham Carter

And this is the letter Declan sent by registered post this morning to Rev Peter Powers, Superintendent Minister for Tower Hamlets:

Dear Rev Powers

Re:  Harassment and intimidation in the Whitechapel Mission

I refer further to the enclosed copy of letter to me of 20 April from Rev Graham Carter, President of the Methodist Conference of Great Britain.

I also enclose copy of my letter and enclosures of 27 April to Chief Superintendent Mark Simmons of Bethnal Green Police Station regarding the unprovoked assault on me in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February (Crime ref: 4204886/07).

I reconfirm that on 16 April I narrowly escaped being assaulted for the second time in the Whitechapel Mission. On this occasion, as stated in my previous letter to you of 24 April, the kitchen worker who intervened (Tony) took the view that it was my fault for not talking to the homeless that visit the premises. (That this was the view taken, would be evident from CCTV footage.)

Although I was informed by the acting manager of the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February that I enter the premises at my own risk, I remain adamant that this ought not to be the case. Again, I understand that if a visitor is invited onto the institution’s premises then a common duty of care will be owed by the institution to the visitor. This is to ensure that the visitor will be reasonably safe in the premises for the purposes for which he has been invited or permitted.

Kindly note that yesterday morning I was informed by Detective Constable Alexander Head of Bethnal Green Police Station that the Metropolitan Police have been informed by the management of the Whitechapel Mission that there is no CCTV footage of the assault on me on 17 February available from the camera covering the canteen area.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

cc  Rev Graham Carter (by registered post – with enclosures herein referred to)

The enclosure referred to in paragraph 2 of above letter is Declan’s letter yesterday to Chief Superintendent Mark Simmons requesting under the Date Protection Act 1998 a copy of the statement taken by DC Head (some of which quoted verbatim the statement Declan handed in to Bethnal Green Police on 19 February). In this letter to CS Simmons, Declan enclosed the following chronology in respect of his efforts to have his statement taken:

19 Feb - 9.30pm, 1st visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Hand in statement of 19 February for the attention of Police Constable Richard Bentley. Told PC Bentley will phone me to have my statement taken by him.

21 Feb - 10.00pm, 2nd visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. PC Bentley on his holidays. Told PC Calabrese of Limehouse Police Station will phone me to have my statement taken by her.

23 Feb - 11.30am, 1st phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone on 26 February for PC Calabrese.

26 Feb - 6.15am, 2nd phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone at 7.00am for PC Calabrese.

- 7.15am, 3rd phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone control room.

- 7.20am, 4th phone call to Limehouse Police Station - Control Room. Told I will be phoned back immediately. (No call.)

- 7.25am, 5th phone call to Limehouse Police Station - Control Room. Told PC Calabrese will phone me.

- 8.30pm, 1st phone message from Limehouse Police Station. Asked to phone Detective Constable Alexander Head of the Beat Crime Unit to have my statement taken by him.

27 Feb - 7.30am, 6th phone call to Limehouse Police Station - Beat Crime Unit. Told to phone at 9.00am for DC Head.

- 9.00am, 7th phone call to Limehouse Police Station - Beat Crime Unit. Speak with DC Head. Told he will phone me to have my statement taken by him.

1 Mar - 7.00pm, 2nd phone message from Limehouse Police Station. PC Bentley says he is to arrest suspect, after which he will phone me to have my statement taken by him.

23 Mar - 5.30am, 8th phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Request crime report update. Told update not available over the phone.

- 7.00am, 3rd visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Request crime report update. Told report includes letters to me from DC Head of 26 February and 9 March, neither of which I received. Asked to call back at 8.00am for phone call to DC Head to have my statement taken by him. (7.30am, Whitechapel Mission issue letter stating no letter arrived for me since 20 January.)

- 8.00am, 4th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Asked to phone DC Head between 10.00pm and 6.00am.

24 Mar - 5.30am, 9th phone call to Limehouse Police Station - Beat Crime Unit. Told DC Head will phone me.

26 Mar - 12.30pm, 1st registered letter - DC Head. In reference to chronology to 26 March, I request (1) copy of the letters of 26 February and 9 March, and (2) appointment to have my statement taken.

29 Mar – 1st letter from Bethnal Green Police Station. Acknowledgement of receipt of my letter to DC Head of 26 March. States DC Head will be responding to my letter "as soon as possible".

16 Apr - 7.30am, 5th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Request crime report update. Told last entry is station’s letter of acknowledgement of 29 March.

- 4.00pm, 2nd registered letter - Chief Superintendent Mark Simmons. In reference to chronology to 26 March, I confirm that my statement has yet to be taken.

- 4.00pm, 3rd registered letter - Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Ian Blair. Enclose for the Commissioner’s attention copy of my letter and enclosures of even date to CS Simmons.

22 Apr - 7.30am, 6th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Request crime report update. Told last entry is station’s letter of acknowledgement of 29 March.

23 Apr - 10.00am, 4th registered letter - Commissioner Blair. In reference to chronology to 26 March, I confirm that my statement has yet to be taken.

25 Apr - 9.00pm, 1st phone message from Bethnal Green Police Station. DC Head says that he has moved from Limehouse PS to Bethnal Green PS. He requests that I phone him at the robbery desk to have my statement taken by him as soon as possible.

26 Apr - 7.00am, 7th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Told to call back at 9.00am for DC Head.

- 8.30am, 8th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Not known when DC Head will be on duty. Told DC Head will phone me.

- 9.15am, 1st phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Desk. Get voice-mail. Confirm that I wish to have my statement taken as soon as possible.

- 1.55pm, 2nd phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Desk. Get voice-mail. No message.

- 1.57pm, 3rd phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station. Told to phone robbery office for DC Head.

- 2.00pm, 4th phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Office. Told to phone back in 30 minutes for DC Head. (I confirm that my phone will be on for DC Head to phone.)

- 2.30pm, 5th phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Office. Told to phone back in 20 minutes for DC Head. (I confirm that my phone will be on for DC Head to phone.)

- 2.50pm, 6th phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Office. Told to phone back in 20 minutes for DC Head. (I confirm that my phone has been on since 2.00pm, and will remain on for DC Head to phone.)

- 3.10pm, 7th phone call to Bethnal Green Police Station - Robbery Office. Speak with DC Head. Told he will take my statement on 27 April at 11.00am.

27 Apr - 11.00am, 9th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. My statement taken by DC Head. Told suspect has yet to be arrested.

The harassment and intimidation in the Whitechapel Mission has been exacerbated by police delays in taking Declan’s statement – didn’t he have to call staff on 16 April to avoid being assaulted by a homeless? Step into a bus outside the establishment to escape being assaulted by, er, another homeless?

Finally, these are a few highlights from the week: the day that DC Head leaves a message on Declan’s mobile saying that he will take his statement and requests a return phone call to arrange a time, that night we are treated to an all-night blue flashing light from the porch alarm (Wednesday from 8.30pm to 5.30am); a homeless tries to get into confrontation with Declan and, when I brush him off, he pushes me and then rubs up against me (Monday at 9.10am, in the queue to enter the Dellow Centre); no hot water in the women’s washroom since last Monday, at least not from 6.00am to 6.35am – a first (Whitechapel Mission).

Second letter to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

This morning at 7.00am Declan again narrowly escaped being assaulted – seriously assaulted would be more appropriate – by probably the most dangerous character that visits the Whitechapel Mission (or used to visit, because we hadn’t seen him for some time up to last Friday).

This time the assault was going to take place no more than 100 metres from the Whitechapel Mission – that after Declan wrote on 17 April to the head of the Methodist church in the UK, Rev Graham Carter regarding harassment and intimidation in the mission. It may well be that the only thing we have achieved is that now we have to watch our backs outside it.

And I mean “we” because Declan and I agree that it should be me who takes the next hit. So from now on I am standing between Declan and whatever homeless decides to try it on outside washrooms – there is no shortage, I can assure you.

Anyway, the narrow escape occurred at the nearby bus stop (we had intended going to Covent Garden to sell The Big Issue) and although there were about 10 people waiting for buses, this homeless selected us for special treatment. Twice he tried to talk to Declan, but on both occasions I brushed him off. Then, all of a sudden, he decides to hijack a bus: he enters but instead of paying his fare, he first changes the position of the driver’s rear-view mirror and then starts insulting everybody on the bus, including the driver. He was so time-consuming one woman left the bus while some others at the bus stop were telling the driver to call the police.

As the homeless held up this bus, ours arrived – which we just got onto in time. Also fortunately for us, the homeless left his bus too late and, having lost his target, hit the window Declan was at with his fist, looking venomously straight at him. Given the force with which he hit the window, Declan is under no illusion that he would have been knocked out.

So, if this was a premeditated attempted assault, who sent him? And why? There is no need to go into muddy waters, especially since you don’t have to be the most intelligent person in the world to figure it out. As to the why, well yes, there is no problem with muddy waters there: it is about stopping Declan from lodging his case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights by introductory letter. Quite evidently we’ve got a pretty strong case that won’t easily be dismissed.

Needless to say, we are still waiting for sight and copy of this letter from the Department for Work and Pensions stating, according to Judge Walker in his judgment of 11 December, that the termination of our unemployment benefit on 27 September because Declan did not sign on was a “mistake”, but there was another good reason for terminating payment (see previous blog).

The next place up for an assault has to be our porch, Declan reckons. Yes, I can see it: Declan is sent to hospital (well, now it will be me); our bags are stolen (with all our documents); and, of course, we lose the porch. Come to think of it, it’s a very tempting initiative! It’s not like the porch is a blind spot though: we have already had homeless to it as we are bedding down and, with one or two exceptions, Declan has recognised every one of them.

To return the compliment, this morning Declan and I paid yet another visit to Bethnal Green Police Station (Declan’s sixth visit) to request a crime report update in relation to the assault on Declan in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February, when he was punched twice in the face by a homeless in an unprovoked attack. Still no progress, so this is Declan’s second registered letter to Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis:

Dear Sir Ian

Re:  Crime ref: 4204886/07

I refer to my letter and enclosures to you of 16 April 2007 regarding the above.

I re-enclose copy of my letter and enclosures of 16 April 2007 to the Tower Hamlets Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Mark Simmons of Bethnal Green Police Station.

As stated in my letter to CS Simmons, I note the letter to me of 29 March 2007 from PC Katherine Jones of Bethnal Green Police Station wherein it states:

I acknowledge your letter regarding Crime ref: 4204886/07, which was received on 29th March 2007. This has been referred to DC Head who will be responding to your letter as soon as possible.

In further reference to chronology in relation to my efforts to 26 March 2007 to have my statement taken in respect of the assault on me in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February 2007, I wish to confirm that I have yet to hear back from DC Head or anyone on his behalf.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

Second request for access to case file

Last night, I think, the Bishopsgate City of London police wanted to move on us under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. They have the power to arrest under the Vagrancy Act 1824, but they need to comply with the Human Rights Act 1998.

In an article in the April edition of the Police Review magazine, titled “Rough sleepers”, journalist Sarah Bebbington reports that people have the right to sleep outside if they want to, but the police use the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 to crack down on offensive behaviour and they will enforce the Vagrancy Act 1824.

In a nutshell, three workmen did their best to provoke us in the porch we sleep in at night. The objective: no doubt to render us porchless, and perhaps even arrested for offensive behaviour. It wouldn’t have taken much to offend them.

This move on us was unprecedented: we have been sleeping in the porch (save a brief period in rolling shelters) since 3 November. OK, this is the account. No sooner have we spread our things along our cardboard (9.35pm), when two workers come out of the building and, as if we are not there, start smoking and chatting while standing on the cardboard, forcing us to dump all our stuff unceremoniously to one side.

One of them then picks up one of Declan’s runners and asks if he can use it as a doorstop. No, Declan tells him, so this guy takes off one of his own runners and uses it for the purpose. After a few minutes, a third worker arrives by van and he and his loose dog join in the fun – the dog takes particular interest in us and sniffs about, until his owner eventually decides to put him back in the van.

Ten minutes having past, all three head inside, only to leave again at 10.00pm. They return at 10.20pm and leave for good at 11.25pm, blowing the alarm of the porch on their way out. Were they upset at being so careless? Not if their body language and laughs mean anything. If you ask me, they were having a ball: the best end to their day.

The alarm wasn’t switched off until 11.40pm, but we don’t know by whom because whoever it was never left by the porch – yes, there is a very fine front to the building. And after that? The alarm box flashed a blue light all night, still going strong when we got up as usual at 5.00am.

So much for Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which says that applicants to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg must not be subjected to any form of pressure from the authorities to modify or withdraw their complaints, either by direct coercion or flagrant acts of intimidation (see previous blog).

Article 38 of the Convention is one we are particularly keen on for our introductory letter to lodge our case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights. This Article requires that the respondent state should provide “all necessary facilities” for any investigation (in whatever form it takes) carried out by the Court in order to establish the facts. Enter the Royal Courts of Justice.

On 2 April, Declan wrote to the Deputy Master of Civil Appeals requesting access to the case file for sight and copy of this letter from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) which states, according to Judge Walker in paragraph 32 of his judgment of 11 December, that the termination of our unemployment benefit on 27 September because Declan failed to sign on was a “mistake”, but that there is another good reason (unspecified by Judge Walker in his refusal of permission to allow Declan apply for judicial review against the DWP) for terminating payment.

There is nothing the Deputy Master of Civil Appeals can do, Declan was informed in writing yesterday, as this letter must have been within papers that were before Judge Walker in the High Court on 11 December. He was directed to contact the Administrative Court with his request.

Never one to miss a catch (and in this instance a catch of monumental proportions, given that the Court of Appeal refused without a hearing permission to appeal for the reasons cited in Judge Walker’s judgment), Declan did just that. This is the letter he sent by registered post yesterday afternoon to the Head of the Administrative Court Office, Lynne Knapman:

Dear Ms Knapman

Re:   Access to court documents in the matter of the Queen on the application of Heavey v Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Administrative Court Ref. No. CO/7092/2006)

As directed by the Civil Appeals Office, I am writing to you on the above matter.

I enclose copy of the order made by Lord/Lady Justice Scott Baker on 22 March 2007, which states in respect of my application for permission to appeal that the reasons for refusing permission “are clearly explained in the judgment of Walker J”.

Under Article 38(1)(a) of the European Convention on Human Rights (and to precede the lodgement of my case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights by introductory letter), I hereby request access to the papers that were before Mr Justice Walker on 11 December 2006.

Paragraph 32 of the judgment of Mr Justice Walker states:

... there is a letter from the Department which says that in the letter of 27th September the reference to him having failed to sign on was a mistake. The Department says that there is another good reason for terminating payment ...

I seek sight of this letter from the Department for Work and Pensions which says that in the letter to me of 27 September from Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus the reference to me having failed to sign on is a mistake, and copy of same.

I can confirm that I have had no sight of any such letter from the DWP, nor have I been provided with any reason by the DWP or the Court for the termination of payment other than that provided in the letter of 27 September 2006, namely that I did not sign on (two days before I was due to do so on 29 September 2006).

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

Harassment and intimidation in the Whitechapel Mission

Yesterday afternoon, Declan wrote a letter to the head of the Methodist church in the UK – on Monday morning he narrowly escaped being assaulted in the Whitechapel Mission canteen area by a friend of the homeless guy that punched him twice in the face on 17 February, an assault the Metropolitan Police are refusing to investigate.

As I said in the previous blog, the Whitechapel Mission – where we arrive every morning at 6.00am (opening time) to wash – is fast becoming a place of safety hazards. Yesterday morning, for example, as soon as I had come out of a toilet cubicle, having changed into my everyday clothes, who comes in but the homeless woman that seriously harassed me on Sunday (also in the washroom). She muttered something and then banged the door of her own toilet cubicle. Perhaps she was taking a break.

All my free time, which is not much these days with all the different problems we are encountering at every corner, is spent reading Declan’s book on taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Yesterday I had a very nice breakthrough: Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights establishes a duty on Convention states not to hinder the effective exercise of the right to apply to the European Court. Under Article 34, applicants must not be subjected to any form of pressure from the authorities to modify or withdraw their complaints, either by direct coercion or flagrant acts of intimidation.

Where a state prevents the effective right of application, the Court may find a violation of Article 34. Accordingly, if there is any evidence at any stage of a Convention application that the applicant’s effective right of application is being restricted, then the matter should immediately be drawn to the Court’s attention by lodging relevant evidence, including statements.

Well, that’s nice. I wonder if the letters I have published in this blog from Declan to the head of the Methodist Church in the UK (see below), Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (last Monday’s blog) and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Providence Row Charity (last Sunday’s blog) would surface. Perhaps we could even throw in his letter to the chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Big Issue Foundation (last Thursday’s blog). Could it be that the Court would find that the UK has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention?

Anyway, this is the letter that Declan sent yesterday by registered post to the head of the Methodist church in the UK, Rev Graham Carter:

Dear Rev Carter

Re:   Harassment and intimidation in the Whitechapel Mission

As head of the Methodist church in the UK, I enclose for your attention copy of my letter and enclosures of 16 April 2007 to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Sir Ian Blair concerning the investigation (or lack thereof) into the unprovoked assault on me in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February 2007.

Yesterday morning in the Whitechapel Mission I narrowly escaped being assaulted for the second time. On this occasion, the kitchen worker who intervened (Tony) took the view that it was my fault for not talking to the homeless that visit the premises. (That this was the view taken, would be evident from CCTV footage.)

Although I was informed by the acting manager of the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February that I enter the premises at my own risk, this ought not to be the case. I understand that if a visitor is invited onto the institution’s premises then a common duty of care will be owed by the institution to the visitor. This is to ensure that the visitor will be reasonably safe in the premises for the purposes for which he has been invited or permitted.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

Letter to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

At 7.00am this morning, while I was having my first shower since last Friday (when Declan and I were denied access to services in the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre, see previous blog), Declan narrowly escaped a serious assault in the canteen area of the Methodist-run Whitechapel Mission.

The homeless guy that wanted to assault Declan was, er, a friend of Ali, the homeless guy who twice punched Declan in the face on 17 February, also in the Whitechapel Mission’s canteen area – an attack the Metropolitan Police are refusing to investigate, despite that it was totally unprovoked and eventually stopped by one of the floor staff. The mission is fast becoming a place of safety hazards; only yesterday morning I was seriously harassed in the women’s washroom (see the end of previous blog).

These two homeless are not just friends, but must be quite good friends because a few minutes before the attempted assault by this homeless guy, Ali’s girlfriend was happily chatting with him.

The scenario was not unsimilar to the last time: homeless guy wants to sit at our table, not in the seat available, but in my seat, which Declan is protecting with his rucksack; he insists on my seat and starts untying the rucksack; Declan grabs the rucksack, unties it himself and surrenders my seat to this choosy guy; the homeless, now sitting in my seat, is not apparently content with his victory and calls Declan gay, a c*** , and a lot more besides; finally, when Declan has had enough and stands up to untie our bags and leave, this guy also stands, and comes at Declan with every intention of throwing a punch.

After the assault by Ali, Declan is fast enough to avoid being trapped by grabbing the lose rucksack, moving away from the table and shouting for floor staff to come to allow him to leave in safety (he still had to untie our remaining bags from under his chair). Did he get much help from staff? Not really. Apparently it was his fault for not wanting to talk with the homeless that frequent the establishment! We must look like we came down in the last shower of rain.

Because Declan is very concerned that avoiding assault is now going to be his daily diet while frequenting the mission – where we arrive every morning at 6.00am (opening time) to wash – he took me straight to Bethnal Green Police Station to get a progress report on the case against Ali. There is no progress at all, Declan was informed.

Well, that was so reassuring that when the police officer gave Declan his notepad to initial the officer’s entry that Declan did not wish to take this morning’s incident further, Declan first wrote: “I am happy to pursue my case as it stands. No contact was made. All is on CCTV.”

This afternoon Declan sent a registered letter to the most senior police officer in the country, the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Sir Ian Blair with a serious complaint. The question now is: will Declan end up in hospital before he lodges his case against the UK in the European Court of Human Rights by introductory letter? They would have to have me seriously assaulted also; because as a relative I can not only put the finishing touches to this introductory letter, but lodge it.

This is the letter to Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Mark Simmons that Declan enclosed with his letter to Sir Ian (“chronology” can be found in this blog):

Dear Chief Superintendent Simmons

Re:   Crime ref: 4204886/07

I refer to the enclosed copy of letter to me of 29 March 2007 from PC Katherine Jones of Bethnal Green Police Station with copy of my letter and enclosures of 26 March 2007 to DC Alexander Head of your Beat Crime Unit, to which PC Jones refers.

I note that PC Jones states:

I acknowledge your letter regarding Crime ref: 4204886/07, which was received on 29th March 2007. This has been referred to DC Head who will be responding to your letter as soon as possible.

In reference to chronology in relation to my efforts to 26 March 2007 to have my statement taken in respect of the assault on me in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February 2007, I wish to confirm that I have yet to hear back from DC Head or anyone on his behalf.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

cc   Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (by registered post – together with enclosures herein referred to)

Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre deny us access to services

On Friday, the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre prevented Declan and I from accessing its services (no breakfast nor shower) and then, even more outrageously, refused Declan entry when he returned to ask for the name of the chief executive of the Providence Row Charity, of which the Dellow Centre is a part; a worker came out and dealt with Declan through the gates.

The reason we were denied access to the services, despite having queued for them, was simply because Declan refused to let staff fill in registration forms without us first familiarising ourselves with the questions that were being asked, particularly after Declan discovered that a member of staff had ticked, without my knowledge, that I didn’t require food or clothes from the establishment. And why were the staff so adamant to re-register us again anyway? Declan told them that our circumstances hadn’t changed one iota since we first registered with them at the beginning of November.

This banishment from the centre is of course at total variance with the information they provide on the internet. For example, in a report they did in 2003 (I could not find a more recent one), titled Between the street and a home, they state: “It [Dellow Centre] was opened in 1994 and since then it has helped anyone regardless of their housing circumstances.”

Outraged, not only did Declan write a registered letter to the Chief Executive of the Providence Row Charity, Steven Lee-Foster, but he will also be sending a copy of the letter by registered post to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Simon Bartley tomorrow. This is the letter:

Dear Mr Foster

Re:  Re-registration (and denial of access to services)

Further to the difficulties my wife and I experienced in relation to our re-registration (at your staffs’ request) at Providence Row on 13 April, I wish to confirm a) the imminent lodgement by introductory letter of my case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights in respect of the termination of my joint claim for Jobseeker’s Allowance on 27 September 2006 (because I did not “sign on” two days before I was due to do so on 29 September 2006), and b) both my wife and I require food, clothing, laundry and showers from the Dellow Centre of the Providence Row Charity (as we have done since we became rough sleepers on 3 November 2006).

In reference to our banishment from the Dellow Centre on 13 April (after a member of staff ticked on my wife’s registration form, and without her knowledge, that she required neither food nor clothes from the Dellow Centre; and my subsequent insistence on our familiarisation with the form), I note the “History” page from the Providence Row Charity website states the following:

Everyone who seeks our help today can still use all our services free of charge, and we help anyone regardless of their religion, ethnicity or age.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

cc  Mr Simon Bartley, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Providence Row Charity (by registered post)

Simon Bartley is also the chairman of the Skills Commission – a steering body for the National Skills Forum and Associate Parliamentary Skills Group, consisting of a select group of key individuals with a stake in skills policy. The next time we are denied access to services at this centre, Declan is going straight with his complaint to its Patron, the Duke of Norfolk and the Charity Commission.

It just never finishes: last Wednesday Declan had to send a registered letter to the chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Big Issue Foundation (see previous blog), and two days later we are shown the door by the Dellow Centre. We even have to watch our back in the library Idea Store Whitechapel: yesterday I had to ask for my membership card back on two different occasions; on the first, the card had been conveniently placed under a metal box. Would I be safe in assuming that if we lost either of our two cards the library wouldn’t accept our care-of address, even though the Whitechapel Mission is just across the road?

As for the Big Issue, matters are far from resolved. Although Declan’s letter to the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Big Issue Foundation had the desired effect and we got our Covent Garden pitch back (for Tuesdays pm, Thursdays pm, and weekends), we were subsequently told that our two Liverpool Street pitches were “training pitches”. This too has now been resolved in our favour: after Declan wrote to the founder of the Big Issue for the fourth time, we were informed our Liverpool Street pitches are not in fact training pitches (and therefore we are not going to be taken off them in favour of trainee vendors). However, for the first time since we got our Liverpool Street pitches on 5 December, the outreach manager has now said that both pitches are free for other vendors after 6.00pm.

It just so happens 5.30pm to 7.30pm is the most profitable for us on these two pitches, especially as many passers-by have already seen us early in the morning and at lunch time. So, because we are extremely concerned Big Issue staff may turn both of these pitches into sharing pitches, we want to give up our Covent Garden pitch on weekdays – at the additional cost to Declan of the only two half-decent hot meals he has been getting a week (at St Martins for £2.10).

We are particularly wary of a sharing pitch because of our experiences with the Covent Garden pitch – shared not only by Declan and I, but another vendor who Declan has had some unsavory dealings, many reported in this blog. Did I say that we were never informed of the source of the unfounded allegation which resulted in us losing the pitch three weeks ago, despite that we had precedence on it?

Our sales strategy is to stay with our two Liverpool Street pitches Monday to Friday (no sharing, thank you) and just keep the Covent Garden pitch for Saturdays and Sundays (on weekends our Liverpool Street pitches die). How can the Big Issue complain?

Anyway, mindful of the Big Issue Code of Conduct wherein it states: “We will help you to maximise your sales by providing a quality magazine and an effective sales strategy”, Declan sent another email this afternoon to the outreach manager Paul Joseph, which he will also send by registered post to the founder of The Big Issue, Dr John Bird tomorrow. It reads:

Subject: Liverpool Street pitches

Dear Paul

Further to the telephone message I left on your voice-mail yesterday morning, I reconfirm receipt of your email of 13 April and again request a meeting to help my wife and I to maximise our sales.

In light of your letter of 11 April 2007 with pitch slips that restrict our Liverpool Street pitches to daytimes (for the first time since 5 December 2006), it is difficult to adequately answer your question as to how regularly we would like to work Covent Garden without a meeting to discuss an effective sales strategy.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey

cc  Dr John Bird, Editor-In-Chief, The Big Issue (by registered post)

And finally the Whitechapel Mission. This morning while in the washroom a homeless woman comes in and, like other homeless women I am forced to meet in the washroom many mornings, she is adamant that I talk to her. But this time this particular woman is taking none of my usual ignoring tactics: she goes around me and in front of me, and kneels down with me when I kneel down for some toiletry from my bag. And when she realises that she is getting nowhere, she mounts an accelerating litany of abuse: I shouldn’t come to the mission to get free services and not talk to people; I must think I am better than everyone else; she is going to pray to Allah to send me to hell; she is going to tell Allah I am a bitch; and of course the usual f*** off a few times.

And then, after she challenges me to call management, who comes in but the manager. As I am putting on my coat and grabbing my bags – to get out as fast as possible – she is complaining to the manager about how horrible I have been to her!

Back in the canteen area, this same homeless woman threw a bowl of cornflakes and milk over some homeless guy’s head, and you should have heard a volunteer complaining to the manager that he had already cleaned this guy’s hair three times (with a table cloth) and that she had to go. But was she thrown out? Nope, ten minutes later she twice slapped a Pole across the face and almost caused a riot between four tables of Poles and two tables of Muslims. Eventually a volunteer grabbed her by the waist and carried her out the side door kicking and screaming. Not exactly “real time enforcement”.

Letter to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Big Issue Foundation

Yesterday Declan sent a registered letter to who we thought was the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Big Issue Foundation (and Chief Executive of The Charity Bank), Malcolm Hayday. The Big Issue Foundation’s “Who’s Who” webpage is in need of an update: Hayday emailed Declan at 10.00am this morning stating: “I am no longer Chairman of the Foundation, having retired a couple of months ago but will ensure that your letter is brought to the attention of Ian MacArthur at the Company and my successor at the Foundation, Steve Round.“ (Ian MacArthur is the Managing Director of The Big Issue Company.)

This letter that Declan sent to Hayday (see below) was in relation to the pitch we lost in Covent Garden two Saturdays ago because an outreach worker found that neither Declan nor I had worked it for two and a half weeks, an allegation we have been refuting ever since. Anyway, today we learnt that we have our Convent Garden pitch back as before (to be worked by either of us on Tuesdays pm, Thursdays pm and weekends), but were informed that we have no security of tenure whatsoever in relation to our respective pitches at Liverpool Street Station, as they are in fact “training pitches”.

So all the work we have been putting into our Liverpool Street pitches since the beginning of December, thinking it would pay off in the coming months, may not actually pay off at all – or at least not for us. Mindful of The Big Issue’s code of conduct, and in particular the company’s responsibilities to vendors, Declan has sent another email this afternoon to the founder of the Big Issue, Dr John Bird (his fourth email to Bird to date, see titles), which I will publish in my next blog.

In the email Declan is seeking to determine whether the Liverpool Street pitches we have been developing as (self-employed) vendors are training pitches or not. We always understood that these pitches were ours, which is why we have been working them on full weekdays from 7.30am until 7.30pm (with breaks, of course). Frankly, I would like to know how many Big Issue vendors work with such dedication, and so personably.

The ramifications for us, should it be established that these two pitches are indeed training pitches, could not be more catastrophic, particularly as we have been additionally informed that our Convent Garden pitch may become a training pitch unavailable to permanent vendors should the volume of new vendors increase. It would mean that we could end up with either pitches that don’t work for us or pitches registered to other vendors.

Take what happened to us the last two weekends in Covent Garden (during the weekend our pitches in Liverpool Street just die): somehow we ended up losing money instead of making it: two weekends ago we had to return 41 magazines to co-ordinators (19 of which we are still waiting to be paid for), and last weekend we dumped 15 unsold magazines into a bin. The question is: could we end up dumping magazines every day of the week?

In relation to the Methodist-run Whitechapel Mission and the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre, these are the highlights: a homeless woman knocks loudly on the mirror I am using to wash myself, determined that I answer her question: do I have a spare cigarette (Tuesday at 6.15am, Whitechapel Mission); I am called a whore and a slut by some homeless guy that sat at our table after I told him that I didn’t have a light (Wednesday at 6.45am, Whitechapel Mission); the nun in charge of clothes gives me a pair of jeans that might have been fashionable 10 years ago: plenty of homeless go around the establishment wearing a fine pair of jeans, thank you very much (Wednesday at 10.30am, Dellow Centre).

Anyway, this is the letter Declan sent to Hayday yesterday:

Dear Mr Hayday

Re:  The Big Issue Company

As Chairman of The Big Issue Foundation, I enclose for your attention copy of my registered letter of 2 April to the founder of The Big Issue Company, Dr John Bird together with my email to Dr Bird of 31 March therein referred to.

In reference to the loss of our day-pitch in Covent Garden on 31 March, the finding that neither my wife nor I had worked the pitch for two and a half weeks is worrisome. As stated in my email of 31 March to Dr Bird, either my wife or I had been working this pitch for the period in question, as agreed with head office, on Tuesdays pm, Thursdays pm and weekends, bar Tuesday, 27 March (as I had informed head office) and Thursday, 29 March (it was raining).

I can confirm that I have yet to receive a reply from Dr Bird or anyone on his behalf.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

Roughing things up

The Bishopsgate City of London police are indeed roughing things up: we have narrowly escaped being attacked (as I wrote in the previous blog, Declan foresaw this new escalation of harassment and intimidation last Sunday when he woke me up and told me we had to work fast on the introductory letter to lodge our case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights).

These are the facts. Two nights ago (Thursday night), while we were sleeping, 3 or 4 guys decided to party at our porch – the porch is situated in a business area, which is generally stone quiet after 8.00pm. During the course of this rather unconventional party, one of them roared at us, “Get up!” A few hours later, the same individual came back with one of his friends, screamed at the top of his voice, “Tramps!” as he passed us by and kicked a metal A-board pavement sign by the porch (which has been out for the last few nights) down the pavement.

Now this A-board happens to advertise fake-tan services, although there is not a tanning business in sight. So I think I can safety conclude that the board is removed during the day, only to be put back at night, perhaps as a bargaining chip? Fortunately, the individual on Thursday night decided to boot it a few feet down the pavement rather than hurl it at us. Still, last night, in addition to the A-board, there was a pallet!

This narrow escape has a special timing. Only that morning in the Whitechapel Mission a member of staff put a stop to all conversations to broadcast for the sake of the general homeless population, and in particular for the benefit of Declan (I say that because he was determined to catch Declan’s eye), that two of the homeless present – two middle aged friends who seem to be always drunk – were assaulted the night before while sleeping rough.

If Lord/Lady Justice Scott Baker’s order of 22 March (refusing us permission to appeal Judge Walker’s decision of 11 December to refuse us permission to apply for a judicial review against the Department for Work and Pensions) is so in accordance with the law, why do the police need to threaten us with assault (Declan says that he will be the one to end up in hospital)? Are they actually trying to prevent Declan from lodging our case with the European Court of Human Rights? And when this orchestrated assault is being carried out, will our bags (containing legal documentation, etc) be stolen too?

This week I am also seeing a new level of nastiness towards me in the Sisters of Mercy-run Dellow Centre and the Methodist-run Whitechapel Mission: a homeless woman moved all my things from one place to another while I was drying myself in the shower (Wednesday at 10.30am, Dellow Centre); a homeless woman took possession of the only two sinks in the women’s washroom a few seconds before I came out of the toilet, having changed my clothes (Thursday at 6.15am, Whitechapel Mission); and I was prevented from having a shower when a volunteer handed me a towel that wasn’t big enough to dry my feet, telling me it was the only one she had: shower or no shower (this morning at 6.30am, Whitechapel Mission).

Now that I am on the subject of the Metropolitan Police, this is Declan’s letter of 26 March to Detective Constable Alexander Head of the Beat Crime Unit in Limehouse Police Station concerning the lack of anything in relation to the assault on him in the Whitechapel Mission on 17 February (when he was punched twice in the face by a homeless called Ali in an unprovoked attack):

Dear DC Head

Crime Reference Number: 4204886/07

Please find enclosed copy of my informal statement of 19 February, which I handed in to Bethnal Green Police Station for the attention of PC Richard Bentley (823 HT) on Monday, 19 February in respect of the assault on me in the Whitechapel Mission on Saturday, 17 February.

I also enclose copy of letter of 23 March from the Whitechapel Mission regarding your letters of 26 February and 9 March, neither of which the mission received for me.

I also enclose chronology in relation to my efforts to have my statement formally taken.

I hereby request (1) copy of the aforementioned letters from you of 26 February and 9 March, and (2) an appointment to have my statement formally taken.

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey

This is the chronology, to which Declan refers:

19 Feb - 9.30pm, 1st visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Hand in informal statement of 19 February for the attention of PC Bentley.

21 Feb - 10.00pm, 2nd visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. PC Bentley on his holidays. PC Calabrese of Limehouse Police Station to phone back.

23 Feb - 11.30am, 1st phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone back on 26th for PC Calabrese.

26 Feb - 6.15am, 2nd phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone back at 7.00am for PC Calabrese.

- 7.15am, 3rd phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone control room.

- 7.20am, 4th phone call to Limehouse Police Station – Control Room. To be phoned back immediately. (No call.)

- 7.25am, 5th phone call to Limehouse Police Station – Control Room. PC Calabrese to phone back.

- 8.30pm, 1st phone message from Limehouse Police Station. Asked to phone DC Head.

27 Feb - 7.30am, 6th phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Told to phone back at 9.00am for DC Head.

- 9.00am, 7th phone call to Limehouse Police Station. DC Head to phone back.

1 Mar - 7.00pm, 2nd phone message from Limehouse Police Station. PC Bentley says he is to arrest assailant, after which my statement will be taken.

23 Mar - 5.30am, 8th phone call to Limehouse Police Station. Progress report not available over phone.

- 7.00am, 3rd visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Progress report includes letters from DC Head of 26 February and 9 March, neither of which I received. Asked to call back at 8.00am for phone call to DC Head. (7.30am, Whitechapel Mission issue letter stating no letter arrived for me since 20 January.)

- 8.00am, 4th visit to Bethnal Green Police Station. Asked to phone DC Head between 10.00pm and 6.00am.

24 Mar - 5.30am, 9th phone call to Limehouse Police Station. DC Head to phone back.

26 Mar - 12.30pm, 1st registered letter – DC Head. Request (1) copy of letters from DC Head of 26 February and 9 March, and (2) appointment to have my statement formally taken.

And this is the reply of 29 March Declan received from Bethnal Green Police Station:

Dear Mr Heavey

I acknowledge your letter regarding Crime ref: 4204886/07, which was received on 29th March 2007. This has been referred to DC Head who will be responding to your letter as soon as possible.

In the meantime, if you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the office at the above address. Please quote the above reference number on any further correspondence.

Yours sincerely

Katherine Jones
Correspondence Clerk

A few days ago, I read avidly an article in The Times by Matthew Parris in favour of reason – as opposed to faith. It states: “You are living, dear reader, at a watershed in human history. This is the century during which, after 2,000 years of what has been a pretty bloody marriage, faith and reason must agree to part, citing irreconcilable differences.”

And it leaves me thinking that religious leaders – I think I can safely include here not only religious Christian leaders but Islamic leaders also – would agree to no such parting, at least not so long as the Government thinks it can have a shot at burying people like Declan and I: two people who are seeking to establish a global network of groups and individuals campaigning against the involvement of religion in science and public policy.

Request for access to case file

Last Sunday morning, we spent the whole day in the library Idea Store Whitechapel – Declan actually woke me up at our usual time of 5.00am, which I didn’t initially appreciate because Saturday and Sunday we treat ourselves to an extra two hours’ sleep.

Because we are taking Lord/Lady Justice Scott Baker’s order of 22 March (refusing us permission to appeal Judge Walker’s decision of 11 December to refuse us permission to apply for a judicial review against the Department for Work and Pensions) to the European Court of Human Rights, Declan thought the Bishopsgate City of London police might like to rough things up a bit, and we should work fast on our introductory letter to the Register to the ECHR, giving careful consideration to which articles of the European Convention on Human Rights we contend have been breached.

Declan was highly motivated and also wrote a letter to the Deputy Master of Civil Appeals requesting access to the case file and sight of this letter from the Department for Work and Pensions cited in paragraph 32 of the transcript of Judge Walker’s judgment of 11 December, a letter we have never been privy to. (All is made bare and open in Declan’s letter to the Deputy Master of Civil Appeals below).

Yesterday morning we went to The Big Issue head office to have our pitch slip stamped and our pitches registered in pitch listings, minus of course the Covent Garden pitch we had taken off us on Saturday based on the unfounded allegation that we had not been working it for the last two and a half weeks (see previous blog). When we arrived there, a member of staff and a vendor were talking about someone who had recently been debadged by the Big Issue and what bad shape he was in. Assuming he is not receiving any benefit, I wouldn’t doubt he is in bad shape: he is probably destitute if not selling drugs or running the gauntlet of illegal begging.

When I recall the cameo between this staff member and vendor, I am concerned that I too could end up destitute and wonder: should I pass on to head office a written account of the hours I work my regular pitch at the George Pub by Liverpool Street Station, just in case an outreach worker has to investigate pitches in the area?

Last night at 12.10am, we were woken by two workers who went through the door of the porch we sleep in, only to leave the building a few minutes later. At 5.00am, as we were about to get up, the same thing happened; only this time it took the worker 15 minutes to exit. Are the police looking for a complaint against us? Because blocking workers’ right-of-way sounds pretty good to me.

Needless to say, this eventuality was foreseen by us a long time ago and every night we put down in a way that blocks nobody. We have also been sleeping in this porch without complaint since we first arrived in London on 3 November.

Anyway, this is Declan’s registered letter of 2 April to the Deputy Master of Civil Appeals:

Dear Sir/Madam

Re:  Access to court documents in the matter of the Queen on the application of Heavey v Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Appeal Court Ref. No. C1/2006/2638)

As directed by the Civil Appeals Office, I am writing to you on the above matter.

I enclose copy of the order made by Lord/Lady Justice Scott Baker on 22 March 2007, which states in respect of my application for permission to appeal that the reasons for refusing permission are explained in the judgment of Walker J.

To precede the lodgement of my case against the UK with the European Court of Human Rights by introductory letter, I hereby request access to the case file.

Paragraph 32 of the judgment of Walker J states:

“… there is a letter from the Department which says that in the letter of 27th September the reference to him having failed to sign on was a mistake. The Department says that there is another good reason for terminating payment ...”

I seek sight of this letter from the Department for Work and Pensions which says that there is another good reason (unspecified by Walker J) for terminating payment of my joint claim for Jobseeker’s Allowance on 27 September 2006, and a copy of same.

I can confirm that I have had no sight of any such letter from the DWP, nor have I been provided with any reason for the termination of payment other than that provided in the letter to me of 27 September 2006 from Birmingham Erdington Jobcentre Plus, namely that I did not sign on (two days before I was due to do so on 29 September 2006).

Yours sincerely

Declan Heavey