Friday, May 28, 2021

Eviction back to the streets a third time from a Mayor of London Rough Sleepers Initiative property is a massive assault on me. Not only am I likely to lose Declan to his health condition, but I am also likely to be left crippled following a torn meniscus that has had me using a crutch for months

DAY 377 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A 'NO FAULT' SECTION 21 NOTICE
MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY

14/04/20

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (full letter here)

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms formulates what is the core of free speech. "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression." In an important interpretation of this article, the European Court of Human Rights in Handyside v. UK (1976) indicated that this "freedom of expression" should be construed as follows. It "is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received, or regarded as inoffensive, or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population". Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Cliteur, 2010).

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


Declan and I are living in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) designated property. We expect that any time soon we will have lost our almost two-year battle to stabilise our tenancy. What started off bad has gotten a lot worse. We have been offered an appalling new tenancy by our landlord Peabody Trust and our support provider St Mungo's has and (to the best of our knowledge) continues to process behind our backs outrageous support plans. Although Peabody is our landlord, we are tenants of the Clearing House, which is part of St Mungo's on behalf of the Greater London Authority (the properties are provided by housing associations such as Peabody). Four months into our tenancy, when a Housing First pilot ended, our support was transferred from the Single Homeless Project to the Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's. The Greater London Authority explained: "In other words, at the end of the Housing First pilot, the tenants would revert to being Clearing House tenants and as such would fall to be referred to the TST like all other Clearing House tenants." There is more about the double threat our tenancy poses to Declan's life in the block below titled "We have no pro se (in person) access to the courts". He is a 60-year-old asthmatic with a long history of serious respiratory illness, thus placing him in the high-risk group for COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections. I can't disagree when he tells me that eviction back to the streets a third time is a massive assault on me. Not only am I likely to lose him to his health condition in no time at all, but I am also likely to be left crippled following a torn meniscus that has had me using a crutch for months. Of course, it is self-evident that anyone who is looking at a 'no fault' eviction from a Mayor of London RSI property is in no position to move on. It's a nightmare situation, really. Who would have thought it?


I first tore the meniscus in my right knee last May and tore it again more severely last September. I still need a crutch to get around, even without a backpack for my shopping. Knee supports, crutches and creams... I have tried the lot. Having been referred by my GP to NHS Musculoskeletal Services, the earliest I can speak with a physiotherapist is in two months time over the phone.

We have no pro se (in person) access to the courts


The Central London County Court is based at the Royal Courts of Justice.

The following is the full content of paragraphs 3 and 4 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar that have been updated today.

3. This is Day 377 for us living under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust.[1] We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) property. Peabody's appalling new terms of tenancy have forced us into an unstable weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to Declan's life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Declan accumulated quite a history with the Housing Ombudsman Service before he received the Ombudsman's decision not to investigate a referral from Lyn Brown MP on jurisdictional grounds. The Ombudsman was asked to consider whether or not our tenancy has been renewed like for like; and whether, if not, it should be in light of the landlord having accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will not accept a referral of discrimination from Ms Brown, the Commission's helpline (EASS) having grossly distorted the complaint against Peabody. We no longer have pro se access to the courts (see next paragraph).

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that also poses a threat to his life.

30 June 2020: District Judge Ruth Fine orders Declan to pay £1,850 in costs. St Mungo's are under no obligation to even vouch over the phone that we are clients of the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's TST programme (WITH UPDATE 14/05/21)[1]

__________________________

[1] Part of the Mayor of London's RSI programme in our case is access to the Mayor's Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's.



Metropolitan Police Crime Reference No. 5330050/20. On 16 October 2020, our flat door on the 2nd floor was vandalised by two thugs with a crowbar. Declan and I were in the flat at the time and fortunately our double locked door held firm. It's my opinion that they just wanted to break the door lock but didn't have enough time. The communal door lock downstairs wasn't broken, and on 11 November 2020 that lock was changed. Our flat door was repaired by a security contractor on 1 December 2020 with silicone sealant and glue gun. The police closed the case within two days of the crime due to a lack of evidence.



14 May: Pixsy (day 185): I have found Declan's Motion to Dismiss to fight their threatened court action in an article titled "Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling". No sooner had we heard from them than they were named and shamed by Computer Weekly and it's a truly sickening read


Our emails relating to brain-computer interfaces continue to be targeted. This is only the latest targeted category of emails.


For months we experienced an almost total blockade of our emails to prominent space advocates anywhere in the world (another targeted group). That blockade extended to an offer of financial help to us personally the week before Christmas 2020. We continue to have problems sending and receiving emails and op-eds when it comes to a close colleague in Washington, DC. Declan's use of his mobile phone to try to get my permission emails through to prominent space advocates has also proven unsuccessful. On both recent occasions the leading expert could only be reached through voice mail. When it comes to space travel, we most recently had the honour of listing a Hall of Famer astronaut among our Honorary Associates. It was one of the few emails that we have gotten through to prominent space advocates since last September. (A distinction is made here between a prominent space advocate and someone who has written an article about space travel. I do get some permission emails through to space writers, but regrettably not very many and only occasionally.)

15 May: The Investigatory Powers Tribunal considered Declan's complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and concluded that it is obviously unsustainable. It has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino

I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse.

An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010





Facebook's suppression tactics with us



On 4 September 2020, which also happened to be Declan's 60th birthday, the Housing Ombudsman Service set our landlord Peabody Trust a third and final deadline to respond to his Stage 1 complaint. Almost immediately that same day we were unreasonably threatened by Facebook that our Page would be unpublished by them. For the rest of the year, the distribution of the page was dramatically reduced from 120-400K to an average 5-10K post reach for the previous seven days. What, when or how often I posted had little or no effect on the suppression of the post reach on any one given day. This year we had an average 15K-20K in this post reach before I was forced to leave Facebook on 4 February for two months. On 9 March I switched off Facebook 'likes' for more freedom from the platform and any eviction back to the streets for the third time. Later that week I decided to leave the platform for the period of one year rather than risk being banned for life.

17 October 2020: We have permission to publish this ISAF letter of 30 September to Facebook COO Sheryl Samberg. Facebook has so severely restricted our Page's distribution since 4 September that it's almost as good as an unpublished page

We have had 10.7 million hits in the past three years on Facebook and despite their unfair practices (10,712,672 million hits as at 13 March to be exact). Our five most popular articles had 6.6 million Facebook likes/shares before I switched off the button for more freedom from the platform (6,585,640 likes/shares as at 9 March to be exact). We expect to have a massively improved site this time next year, and hopefully we will have found someone interested in us who has insiders at Facebook.



From My Picks:

An American perspective: "I read your powerful case against your weird landlord." In reference to the following blog post:

14 May: Threat to life: Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate Lyn Brown MP's second referral about the Information Commissioner's decision that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to Declan's life?


Our list of 303 Honorary Associates includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates, 18 US National Medal laureates and 13 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these categories of emails in particular. (Last month Declan had the honour of adding the 20th Nobel laureate to the list, having had an average of 85% of his emails blocked for over a week.)

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Tuesday, May 25, 2021

Today I have written to our web host SiteGround. The articles on our Church and State homepage can now be seen and I can edit and publish new articles. I have also received an explanation for these earlier problems

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).



25 May 2021

Dear SiteGround,

The articles on our Church and State homepage cannot be seen, and as the webmaster, I cannot edit or publish new articles. These problems can be seen from the two links below. Please can you let me know when our website can be restored to us?

Sincerely,

Lola Heavey
Webmaster
Church and State

Hello,

Thank you for contacting our HelpDesk.

I was unable to reproduce the issue, however, I was able to find errors in the logs and it seems that you have encountered a rare issue with Ultrafast PHP.

We are working on a permanent fix but if you encounter the issue again you can access Site Tools > Devs > PHP Manager and quickly change from Ultrafast PHP to Standard PHP and then back to Ultrafast PHP.

That will reinitialize Ultrafast PHP and should correct the issue. In case that doesn't help then you can submit a new support request so that we can check further.

Access to http://churchandstate.org.uk/ is now restored.

If you have any further questions don't hesitate to contact us back.

Best Regards,

Georgi Borisov
Technical Support Team

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Friday, May 21, 2021

MediaFire: I am waiting as a paying customer for this image hosting site to get back to me a second time. They used to provide me with the link I need from them to embed an image in this Church and State blog

I am a paying customer of MediaFire. Since yesterday, they haven't provided me with the link I need to embed an image in this Church and State blog. I am using an alternative image hosting site. Yesterday I informed them that I changed my password, as they had suggested, but that the problem still persists. I am waiting for them to get back to me a second time. This was my initial message yesterday:

Dear MediaFire,

Can you please tell me how to get the Direct Link that you provided me with before to embed an image in my blog? Today I have had to use an alternative image hosting site to embed images in my blog.

This is a screenshot I have from before: https://www.mediafire.com/view/fofixi56w072mbm/mediafire2.jpg/file [this is the first image in the block below]

Today that Direct Link is nowhere to be seen: https://www.mediafire.com/view/dwuzq4zuglvcnrg/mediafire.jpg/file [this is the second image in the block below]

Sincerely,
Maria Heavey

MediaFire used to provide me with the Direct Link I need to embed an image in this blog. This is a screenshot I have from before:



Today that Direct Link is still nowhere to be seen:



On Mon, 20 May 2021 at 20:46, MediaFire wrote:
Hi,

Thank you for contacting MediaFire. We understand how important it is that you regain access to your account. Use our Password Reset Tool to create a new password. Here are instructions on how to use the Password Reset Tool:

1. Here is the URL to the Password Reset Tool: https://www.mediafire.com/lost_password.php

2. Once you access the Password Reset Tool, enter the email address registered to your MediaFire account*. Then click the Send Me A Password-Reset Email button. Please click the button just once.

3. Check your email for the email we sent you. If you do not see it in your inbox, please check your spam folder as well.

Read the instructions carefully, and click the link that leads you back to MediaFire.

4. Once you are back to MediaFire, create a new password. Then click the Update My Password button.

5. Now that the password is reset, you will be directed back to the MediaFire home page. From there, you may log into your account using your new password.

Here are a few tips on choosing a new password for your account. We suggest you increase your account security by selecting a unique password that you have not used on other websites and apps. Strong passwords contain more than eight characters and include lowercase and capital letters, special characters and numbers.

*If you do not have access to the email address registered to your account, please visit our Help Center at: https://mediafire.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360037663514-Resetting-An-Account-Password

To translate this article please copy and paste this message into Google Translate. You can find Google Translate here: https://translate.google.com/

Kind regards,

Customer Support
MediaFire

8 March: Tonight I have had to rectify almost every image in four blogs by moving the images from MediaFire to an alternative host for images. It started with this blown-up GCHQ image throughout this blog. Will all these images and more be restored to their former size?

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Saturday, May 15, 2021

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal considered Declan's complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and concluded that it is obviously unsustainable. It has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino

THIS BLOG POST NOW APPEARS IN A NEW (PAID FOR) BACKUP CHURCH AND STATE BLOG THAT I AM CURRENTLY DEVELOPING HERE AT WORDPRESS.

This Church and State blog was blocked by Google Blogger yesterday not long after I posted an earlier version of this same blog post (now reconstructed on a different timeline). I was in the process of creating a new blog for this blog's restoration when the block was lifted. In the early hours of this morning, Declan received an unsolicited no-reply email from the Blogger Team in relation to the earlier version of this blog post stating that: "Your content has violated our Malware and Viruses policy.... [A]dditional violations could result in termination of your blog." I have today written to Google Support to enquire whether this updated version of the same blog post today could result in the termination of this blog.


DAY 364 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A 'NO FAULT' SECTION 21 NOTICE
MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY

14/04/20

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (full letter here)

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).



Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


This is Day 364 for Declan and me living under the legal threat of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust. We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative property. Things have gotten so bad with our email that I'm only publishing one article a day on Church and State and spending the rest of the day researching brain-computer interfaces. This will remain the case until I have made at least one significant breakthrough in this field, with Declan using his mobile to phone America to try to get our emails through to people. Domestically things could not be more menacing for us than they are at the moment. In fact, we have only known pressure like this before we received a no-fault eviction notice from our previous landlord. There is more about the interception of our email, laptop and TV interference and Declan's ongoing problems with Newham Council in my previous blog post yesterday, Threat to life: Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate Lyn Brown MP's second referral about the Information Commissioner's decision that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to Declan's life? The post reveals 17 knighted professors emailed earlier this month, and only two read. The excessive targeting of this category of emails was maintained all that week. We can only assume in the absence of an alert from Mailtrack that Declan's reply that week to the 13th knighted professor to be listed as one of our Honorary Associates was blocked. This is far from unusual and has applied to, among others, a number of the 20 Nobel Laureates on the list. Either that or the alerts were blocked (which is revealed when we receive a response to an email without us ever receiving the alert). Either way, the sabotage and manipulation of our email has remained a constant for years but has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino. Nothing can be relied upon, not even my next day's reply a couple of days ago to the co-founder with Elon Musk of Neuralink, which almost certainly was blocked together with two new permission emails of mine:


Zero emails read have been commonplace for years among excessively targeted categories of emails (the three most targeted categories of emails are identified further on in this blog post).


The Investigatory Powers Tribunal has carefully considered your complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and has concluded that it is obviously unsustainable, and thus falls within the provisions of Rule 13(3)(a) of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal Rules 2000, such that, pursuant to s67(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Tribunal has resolved to dismiss the claim.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal was created in October 2000 by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and given the power to investigate any complaints against the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), MI5 or MI6, as well as complaints about surveillance operations mounted by the police or any other public bodies. The Guardian reported in 2014 that the tribunal, which claims to be completely independent of the UK Government, is secretly operating from a base within the Home Office, by which it is funded. The newspaper found that the IPT had investigated about 1,500 complaints and upheld only 10, five of which concerned members of one family who had all lodged complaints about surveillance by their local council. No complaint against any of the intelligence agencies had ever been upheld. The discovery that the IPT is lodged within a Whitehall department has fuelled criticisms of the tribunal that has been levelled by rights groups, lawyers and complainants. The IPT's critics complain that the secrecy is excessive and that its procedures are stacked so heavily in favour of the government and against complainants that it is fundamentally unfair. According to The Guardian, some senior lawyers have described the IPT as "Kafkaesque", while one eminent barrister dismissed it as a "kangaroo court". The newspaper also reveals that because of the perception that the tribunal is unfair, many would-be complainants spurn it.


Our list of 301 Honorary Associates includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates, 18 US National Medal laureates and 13 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these categories of emails in particular.

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse." An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010



Powerful

Exactly the question needing an answer!

Thanks for keeping me posted!

Don Collins, Founder, International Services Assistance Fund, Washington DC

15 May 2021

Dear Google Support,

I refer to your Blogger Team's unsolicited no-reply email below by way of explanation for why my Church and State blog was blocked as an "unsafe site" yesterday. I received this email in the early hours of this morning after the block had been lifted.

The email states in relation to my blog post yesterday (titled "The Investigatory Powers Tribunal considered Declan's complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and concluded that it is obviously unsustainable. It has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino") that: "Your content has violated our Malware and Viruses policy.... [A]dditional violations could result in termination of your blog."

I have reconstructed the blog post on a different timeline and have posted an updated version of the blog post under the same title this morning. Please can you confirm that my updated blog post (which will be regularly updated with new Mailtrack daily reports) will not result in my blog being terminated?

https://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2021/05/the-investigatory-powers-tribunal_15.html [link to this blog post]

Sincerely,

Lola Heavey
Webmaster
Church and State

This afternoon I received this re-evaluation of content email from the company:

Hello,

We have re-evaluated the post titled "The Investigatory Powers Tribunal considered Declan's complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and concluded that it is obviously unsustainable. It has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino" against Community Guidelines https://blogger.com/go/contentpolicy. Upon review, the post has been reinstated. You may access the post at http://network-of-those-abused-by-church.blogspot.com/2021/05/the-investigatory-powers-tribunal.html [link to yesterday's blog post].

Sincerely,


The Blogger Team

Yesterday this Church and State blog was blocked and flagged as dangerous. I now have a new (paid for) backup blog that I am currently developing at WordPress for any future battle for this blog's restoration. We do have a number of insiders at Google who have contributed significantly to our website over the years. As well as Honorary Associates, some of our heaviest hitters in computer science are on the company's payroll.

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Friday, May 14, 2021

Threat to life: Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate Lyn Brown MP's second referral about the Information Commissioner's decision that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to Declan's life?

Almost all the images in this blog post had to be transferred to an alternative host website for rectification. I then discovered that these amplified images in MediaFire could be rectified by adding the proper width and height to the code. It seems that images in this Church and State blog that are held in MediaFire may have been restored by the company to their true size. We had before MediaFire images deleted and exchanged but never amplified.

DAY 363 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A 'NO FAULT' SECTION 21 NOTICE
MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY

14/04/20

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (full letter here)

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).



5 May: Mailtrack: 17 emails to knighted professors, 2 read. Last month's blog post on email interception is my new flagship post for a snapshot picture of the blocking of our email for years and excessive targeting of particular categories of emails


Declan and I are living in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) designated property. We expect that any time soon we will have lost our almost two-year battle to stabilise our tenancy. What started off bad has gotten a lot worse. We have been offered an appalling new tenancy by our landlord Peabody Trust and our support provider St Mungo's has and (to the best of our knowledge) continues to process behind our backs outrageous support plans. Although Peabody is our landlord, we are tenants of the Clearing House, which is part of St Mungo's on behalf of the Greater London Authority (the properties are provided by housing associations such as Peabody). Four months into our tenancy, when a Housing First pilot ended, our support was transferred from the Single Homeless Project to the Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's. The Greater London Authority explained: "In other words, at the end of the Housing First pilot, the tenants would revert to being Clearing House tenants and as such would fall to be referred to the TST like all other Clearing House tenants."

When it comes to TST support plans, Andrew McCarthy, Head of Quality and Information Security at St Mungo's, finally erased in September 2020 slanderous and defamatory information about Declan. However, he has not erased at least two series of support plans that stand in flagrant breach of our support agreement (stating, inter alia, that there "will be no support plan"), that we never knew existed, that are riddled with inaccuracies and outright falsehoods, and that add to the destabilisation of our tenancy. He reveals the coercive nature of Action Plans (one of four types of support plans): "The most meaningful Action Plans are always those produced in partnership between client and support worker. Action Plans without participation from a client should only be created as a very last resort." This runs contrary to St Mungo's non-coercive statement to the court in 2016:

For the avoidance of doubt, as alleged by Mr Heavey, we do not admit that our Tenancy Support Team ("TST") model is "coercive". We try to provide support to individuals in a way that best suits their needs and wishes. When St Mungo's took over responsibility for providing support for Mr Heavey, we respected his wish to set out parameters for how we would work with him in a "support agreement".

Elizabeth Denham, CBE is the UK Information Commissioner. On 16 April we received the Commissioner's review on Declan's complaint. The Commissioner's decision means that St Mungo's will continue to process support plans for both of us individually without our knowledge or consent because St Mungo's identified (substantial) public interest as the lawful basis for the processing. However, the public interest defence does not apply with excessive data, and we therefore continue to seek the honouring of our support agreement to ensure that excessive processing of our personal data is not conducted (data minimisation). The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman confirmed last month that the caseworker required a second referral from Lyn Brown MP (Lab) that took into account the Commissioner's review. So on 19 April Declan once again copied St Mungo's CEO Steve Douglas, CBE into the complaint in the first block below that corrects the statement above from St Mungo's to the court in 2016 and explains the direct threat the Commissioner's decision poses to his life. Ms Brown's office confirmed yesterday that she has referred the complaint to the Ombudsman a second time. Since Andrew McCarthy's patently coercive statement in an email last September, St Mungo's have from the top down chosen to ignore all subsequent correspondence from Declan about this complaint. At least we will have this fact for a free legal aid solicitor in any eviction action against us.

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 12:08, Declan Heavey wrote:
For the attention of St Mungo's CEO Steve Douglas, CBE

Rt Hon Lyn Brown MP
Member of Parliament for West Ham

Address removed for email


19 April 2021

Dear Ms Brown,

Second referral to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
  
Please find attached as requested my completed complaint form for your second referral to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. I am copying into this email St Mungo's CEO Steve Douglas, CBE. Thank you again for your assistance in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate this complaint?

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


This is Declan's complaint about the Information Commissioner's Office for Lyn Brown MP's second referral to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. The Information Commissioner's review (the first PDF below) upholds the outcome and explanations provided in the Commissioner's report (the second PDF below).

The details of your complaint

I am living in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) designated property. I am a tenant of the Clearing House, which is part of St Mungo Community Housing Association (St Mungo's) on behalf of the Greater London Authority (GLA). Four months into my tenancy, when a Housing First pilot ended, my support was transferred from the Single Homeless Project to the Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's. My complaint is about the Information Commissioner's report (upheld upon review) that allows for how St Mungo's TST is processing my personal data. St Mungo's refuse to erase support plans that stand in breach of my support agreement (stating, inter alia, that there "will be no support plan"), that I never knew existed, that are riddled with inaccuracies and outright falsehoods, and that add to the destabilisation of my tenancy.

In court papers in 2016, St Mungo's expressly validated my support agreement that deems support plans inappropriate and unnecessary taking into account my needs and wishes:

For the avoidance of doubt, as alleged by Mr Heavey, we do not admit that our Tenancy Support Team ("TST") model is "coercive". We try to provide support to individuals in a way that best suits their needs and wishes. When St Mungo's took over responsibility for providing support for Mr Heavey, we respected his wish to set out parameters for how we would work with him in a "support agreement".

My support agreement was the result of an almost two-year legal battle with the GLA, which culminated in District Court Judge Silverman calling for round table talks for non-coercive support for me (the Housing First project offered support which was voluntary), contrary to the above statement. Andrew McCarthy, Head of Quality and Information Security at St Mungo's, has revealed the coercive nature of Action Plans (one of four types of support plans): "The most meaningful Action Plans are always those produced in partnership between client and support worker. Action Plans without participation from a client should only be created as a very last resort." St Mungo's TST even go so far as to allege in at least two Support Overviews (another type of support plan) that I am not working, which they know to be false.

It is the Information Commissioner's decision that St Mungo's TST can continue to process these support plans without my participation because I have been provided by St Mungo's with a Privacy Notice that explains that they collect personal information under the legal basis of (substantial) public interest. This does not provide a justification for support plans that are inappropriate and unnecessary, which would explain why I have a support agreement that states that there will be no support plan. Under data protection law, St Mungo's can only rely on public interest as a legal basis for processing personal information if the processing is necessary. If St Mungo's can reasonably perform their tasks in a less intrusive way (such as through the continued use of action notes in this instance), the public interest defence cannot be adduced, and certainly not for support plans deemed inappropriate and unnecessary with my support agreement.

St Mungo's eventually removed slanderous and defamatory information from one of these support plans. However, I cannot reasonably be expected to continually spend excessive amounts of my time dealing with false narratives, based on misleading and harmful misinformation, apparently used to coerce my participation in support plans that have been deemed inappropriate and unnecessary (my support agreement also clarifies that my "engagement with St Mungo's TST is completely voluntary"). I have therefore repeatedly requested the reclosure of four support related categories in accordance with my support agreement to ensure that excessive processing of my personal data is not conducted (data minimisation). I have also repeatedly communicated to St Mungo's that this processing is causing me substantial damage and distress, whereas precisely the opposite impression is given in the Commissioner's report.

How have you been affected by what has happened?

As it stands, the Commissioner's decision on my complaint that permits St Mungo's to continue processing inappropriate and unnecessary support plans without my participation causes me substantial damage and distress. First, the decision renders my ongoing battle to stabilise my tenancy unwinnable, thereby inhibiting my ability to exercise my rights and resulting in inevitable financial loss (substantial damage), as I no longer have pro se access to the courts. Although my engagement with St Mungo's TST is completely voluntary, I have recently been to court to get them to even take a phone call to confirm that I am a client of theirs. This phone call was only agreed within a week of the court ruling that there was no obligation upon St Mungo's to take such a phone call and levying costs against me in the sum of £1,850. This time I escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for me. Second, the Commissioner's decision on my complaint poses a direct threat to my life (substantial distress). It is not unreasonable to think that the false narratives I have seen could have been and, once re-established, may yet be used for eviction. I am a 60-year-old asthmatic with a long history of serious respiratory illness, thus placing me in the high-risk group for COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections. Eviction from an RSI property would leave me wholly vulnerable and with no prospect of being housed with such data being held against me.

What are you hoping we can achieve?

Given the substantial damage and distress caused to me, I respectfully request that the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman upholds my complaint that St Mungo's could reasonably perform their tasks in a less intrusive way (such as through the continued use of action notes), and that the public interest defence cannot be adduced for support plans deemed inappropriate and unnecessary with my support agreement. This then would result in the reclosure of four support related categories that had been closed for four years and ensure that, in accordance with my support agreement, excessive processing of my personal data is not conducted (data minimisation).

ICO review:



ICO report:




Declan should have received an auto-reply from Newham Council to his email below to Newham Benefits Service on 6 April about our Housing Benefit, but he didn't. That email was only acknowledged by auto-reply after he resent the email during a follow-up phone call a couple of days later. Despite an additional email, two recorded letters and three phone calls, we're still waiting for an up-to-date notification decision letter on Declan's claim that shows the figures he declared following a salary increase last February. Most of our rent continues to be paid by Housing Benefit but based on an erroneous notification decision letter dated 8 March 2021 (received on 26 March) that for over two months has left us vulnerable to, if not prosecution, the suspension or termination of these rent payments. Declan has already had his claim for Housing Benefit twice suspended by the Council because of erroneous notifications from the Department for Work and Pensions that we had vacated. We have had no dealings with the DWP during this tenancy, having come off the streets as two part-time employees of Network for Church Monitoring for some time.

On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 16:30, Declan Heavey wrote:
For the attention of Chris Boylett, Head of Newham Benefits Service

6 April 2021

Dear Ms Daranijo,

Please find attached the payslips you have requested. There have been no changes affecting my and my wife's tenancy agreement with the landlord. Our tenancy continues on a periodic basis with no changes in our rent or service charges in our rent.

On 11 February 2021, I told Newham Benefits Service in writing about changes I thought might affect my Housing Benefit or Council Tax Reduction; namely, my and my wife's income changing. On 26 March 2021, I wrote to Head of Service Chris Boylett requesting a notification decision letter that takes these income changes into account. I had just received a notification decision letter that calculated my Housing Benefit allowance based on the financial details I provided last year.

Please can you acknowledge receipt of this email so that I know that an up-to-date notification decision letter is coming?

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

26 March: Why would Newham Council calculate our Housing Benefit based on last year's financial details when Declan declared a change in income last month? Twice the Council has suspended his claim because of false notifications from the Department and Work and Pensions that we had vacated. We have had no dealings with the DWP during this tenancy

Declan lost this Financial Ombudsman case

The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Headquarters in Gogarburn. The RBS owns National Westminster Bank (NatWest).


Declan dealt with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) about the RBS's NatWest for over a year following the non-payment of his salary by standing order. The Financial Ombudsman effectively found in a final decision in this case that the Executive Case Manager at RBS wouldn't have been reasonably aware when she paid Declan compensation on 17 February 2020 - in recognition of issues he had experienced in setting up two replacement standing orders on the Network for Church Monitoring account - that there had been some error previously made by NatWest in setting up the replacement standing order for the payment of his salary. Declan's complaint about the subsequent cancellation of the standing order without his knowledge or consent that resulted in the non-payment of his salary on 24 February 2020 was passed by the investigator to an ombudsman, who is the former Team Manager at FOS and has held roles at Alliance and Leicester (now Santander). Below is a link to Declan's response to the ombudsman's published decision not to uphold his complaint.

FOS investigator: "NatWest have said although the cancellation was processed on the 12th February 2020, it wasn't uploaded for processing until later – so it didn't actually cancel until the 19 February 2020."


26 March: NatWest Bank: Declan's response to the Financial Ombudsman's decision on their website. Pixsy continues to chase payment for the past non-commercial use of one image on the Church and State website

The above complaint concerning the non-payment by standing order of Declan's salary was only the first of three complaints about NatWest that he submitted to the FOS last year for resolution. The first of the other two complaints involved the wayward transfer in branch of £1,850 to St Mungo's by court order, after the cashier manually changed Declan's surname from Heavey to Henry. This was another complaint not upheld by the FOS, notwithstanding that Declan received £30 compensation with a final decision letter before the error was resolved with St Mungo's.



The FOS's third investigation is ongoing and relates to the second time, on 7 October 2020, we discovered that NatWest had made an error with the spelling of Declan's surname (Haeavey). I made the discovery when I attempted to make a payment to him online:



20 March: No quick fix from the Financial Ombudsman again this year. We're still waiting to be made public this Ombudsman's decision about the non-payment by standing order of Declan's salary last year. Laptop interference continues unabated

We have no pro se (in person) access to the courts


The Central London County Court is based at the Royal Courts of Justice.

The following is the full content of paragraphs 3 and 4 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar that have been updated today.

3. This is Day 363 for us living under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust.[1] We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) property. Peabody's appalling new terms of tenancy have forced us into an unstable weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to Declan's life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Declan accumulated quite a history with the Housing Ombudsman Service before he received the Ombudsman's decision not to investigate a referral from Lyn Brown MP on jurisdictional grounds. The Ombudsman was asked to consider whether or not our tenancy has been renewed like for like; and whether, if not, it should be in light of the landlord having accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will not accept a referral of discrimination from Ms Brown, the Commission's helpline (EASS) having grossly distorted the complaint against Peabody. We no longer have pro se access to the courts (see next paragraph).

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision [link to this blog post] of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to his life.

30 June 2020: District Judge Ruth Fine orders Declan to pay £1,850 in costs. St Mungo's are under no obligation to even vouch over the phone that we are clients of the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's TST programme (WITH UPDATE 14/05/21)




I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse.

An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010


The group targeted above was US National Medal of Technology and Innovation laureates. These national medals are presented by the President of the United States on behalf of the American people, and are among the highest honours in the nation for professional achievement.

At the end of February, for the first time in weeks, we were able to get an email directly to a close colleague in Washington, DC. But emails from us to this colleague continue to be blocked on an on-off basis and by far more off than on since February. Among Declan's blocked emails in February was his reply to the 19th Nobel Prize laureate to accept his invitation to be listed as one of our Honorary Associates. Declan writes that: "[W]e are engaged in a life and death struggle for survival (my wife's blog post about this is here)." The link is to my regularly updated post (currently the previous post) about the Equality and Human Rights Commission's refusal to accept a referral of discrimination from Lyn Brown MP. We continue to battle through the never-ending assault on our email, which is worse this year than it has ever been. We had never gone weeks on end without being able to communicate directly with one person by email, which has already happened twice this year.





14 May: Pixsy (day 185): I have found Declan's Motion to Dismiss to fight their threatened court action in an article titled "Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling". No sooner had we heard from them than they were named and shamed by Computer Weekly and it's a truly sickening read


Laptop interference: For 15 weeks it's been cuts to the targeted laptop from the internet and speeds lower than 1 Mbps. Last week Declan's primary laptop was functioning at 1 Mbps (5 Mbps today) and we both continue to be cut off the internet on individual laptops



The targeting of one or more of our four operational laptops kicked off again in December 2020. It's either cut the targeted laptop(s) from the internet or slow down speeds to anything from 74 Mbps to less than 1 Mbps.[1] For four weeks it was an average 5 Mbps on Declan's primary laptop until 26 March, when it was 71 Mbps, the first time over 70 Mbps since last December (5 Mbps today). With his secondary laptop, it was an average 20 Mbps for three weeks until 26 March, when it was 61 Mbps, one of the few times over 60 Mbps since last December (68 Mbps today). Seldom have two laptops been treated the same way at any one time, unless we have been cut off the internet altogether for anything up to 7 days to date. This month is an unprecedented sixth consecutive month for this sustained targeting of one or more of our laptops. (The second day since last December that Declan had two laptops functioning above 50 Mbps was on 6 April; and the fifth day within the same six-month period that his primary laptop was back to the usual normal of above 70 Mbps was on 11 May.)

7 February 2019: The targeting of our two primary laptops runs into a record-breaking third month. My primary laptop has been targeted for over three months (WITH UPDATE 23/12/20)

__________________________

[1] The sustained cutting of Declan's secondary laptop from the internet continued throughout the morning of 2 April (nine cuts in total) as he updated with two laptops the Futurism section of our Church and State website for Rumelhart Prize laureates. The following week we had the honour of listing a third Rumelhart Prize laureate as an Honorary Associate. The Rumelhart Prize was founded in 2001 to introduce the equivalent of a Nobel Prize for cognitive science.

TV interference: 23 days these past 15 weeks it's been 0% Signal Quality and that includes three days in a row for two weeks running (then it's been particular free view and/or subscription channels that are unwatchable, today included)



2 January: We have once again lost all free view channels using our second BT TV YouView box (day 4). This time it's on an on-off basis and by far more off than on. Four cuts during this period on what's left on HDMI input without these channels. We have had three BT engineers in our flat to date to no avail. No equipment, phone line or aerial fault detected. When we switch from HDMI to Antenna, we have always had and continue to have perfect reception on free view channels using our aerial.

6 January: British Telecom: No let up on inference on individual TV channels using our second BT YouView box. The blockade of Church and State emails has extended to the sabotage of an offer of financial help to us personally. Pixsy's threat to Church and State remains open and ongoing




From My Picks:

14 May: The Equality and Human Rights Commission have advised Lyn Brown MP that they will not accept a referral from her. Why must the Commission's helpline (EASS) distort Declan's claim of discrimination against the landlord? (previous post)



Our list of 301 Honorary Associates includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates, 18 US National Medal laureates and 13 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these categories of emails in particular. (Last month Declan had the honour of adding the 20th Nobel laureate to the list, having had an average of 85% of his emails blocked for over a week.)

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

The Equality and Human Rights Commission have advised Lyn Brown MP that they will not accept a referral from her. Why must the Commission's helpline (EASS) distort Declan's claim of discrimination against the landlord?

Almost all the images in this blog post had to be transferred to an alternative host website for rectification. It seems that amplified images in this Church and State blog that are held in MediaFire may have subsequently been restored by the company to their true size.

DAY 363 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A 'NO FAULT' SECTION 21 NOTICE
MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY

14/04/20

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (full letter here)

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms formulates what is the core of free speech. "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression." In an important interpretation of this article, the European Court of Human Rights in Handyside v. UK (1976) indicated that this "freedom of expression" should be construed as follows. It "is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received, or regarded as inoffensive, or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population". Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Cliteur, 2010).



The Equality Advisory Support Service (EASS) is the helpline arm of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. If you want to phone the Commission, it's the EASS you deal with. And they're not easy to get through to. Straight off the bat, Declan spent a total of three hours on hold before someone picked up. Numerous times he tried leaving a message for a call back but was cut-off every time. And twice he unsuccessfully requested a call back in writing. The EASS initially led him to believe that the Commission is not public-facing and that referrals were via them. Then, on 17 December 2020, he received an email from them dismissing his complaint of discrimination against Peabody Trust for new terms of a Rough Sleepers Initiative tenancy that are not only not fair or reasonable but have forced us into a weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to his life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Only when Declan took issue with the EASS's gross distortion of his complaint did we learn from them that a case can be referred to the Commission via either an MP or a solicitor. Lyn Brown MP (Lab) was subsequently informed by the Commission that they will not accept a referral from her because they do not provide advice to individuals and that such is the role of the EASS helpline.

On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 16:30, Lyn Brown wrote:
Dear Mr Heavey,

Lyn has asked me to write to you, enclosing the below response that she has received from the Equality and Human Rights Commission in response to her enquiries on your behalf regarding your complaint of Peabody.

The response from the Equality and Human Rights Commission advises that they are not resourced to directly advise individuals, and would normally suggest engaging with the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

Lyn hopes that this information is helpful, but once you have had the opportunity to consider the content of the Equality and Human Rights Commission's reply, if you wish to raise any aspect, or if Lyn can be of any further help, please do not hesitate to contact this office once again.

In any further communication please quote the reference above.

Kind regards,

Sally Hinkley
Caseworker

Office of Lyn Brown MP
Member of Parliament for West Ham

Declan has not heard back from Ms Brown about this matter since he responded to the email above by pointing out that the referral for the Equality and Human Rights Commission is clearly in pursuit of pre-enforcement action to help protect our rights without resorting to a court case, and not the provision of advice on the issue already received from the Commission's helpline.

The Commission's helpline (EASS): Service failure?

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


On 18 February the Equality and Human Rights Commission's helpline (EASS) refused to escalate Declan's Stage 2 complaint to the Government Equalities Office, the body which sponsors the service, apparently on the grounds that no compelling reason was provided below to indicate a service failure.

Date: 03/02/2021
Reference Number: 210203-000057
Subject: Complaint (GEO)

Dear Equality Advisory and Support Service,

I am dissatisfied with the response that I have received to my Stage 2 complaint and request that the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS) escalate my complaint to the Government Equalities Office on the grounds of a service failure.

The case of discrimination is against Peabody Trust for proposed new terms of a Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) tenancy.

First, the view has been expressed by the EASS that I am not being discriminated against because it was falsely contended by the EASS that I mentioned that I am no longer a tenant of Clearing House which is part of St Mungo's on behalf of the Greater London Authority (GLA). I have never said or written that I am a former Clearing House tenant. On the contrary, I initially wrote that: "I am making this complaint to you for discrimination against me as a Clearing House tenant."

I also provided a quote from the GLA establishing that I am a Clearing House tenant. Contrary to EASS findings, it is not in dispute what type of tenants my wife and I are in our current situation. We are Clearing House tenants, and this has never been disputed by any other party.
  
Second, nowhere in the new tenancy does it state as contended in writing by the EASS that I am living in temporary accommodation and could be at risk of eviction to help other rough sleepers on the way to permanent housing. This interpretation of the two-year fixed-term tenancy is wrong.

An impartial review of the information above reveals a deliberate manipulation and distortion of the evidence showing bias, which constitutes a service failure on the part of the EASS.
 
The response to my Stage 2 complaint does not correct and only compounds this service failure. It is not possible to see a clear link between the way I am being treated and my protected characteristic of having a philosophical belief without first recognising that I am a Clearing House tenant. For example, it stands to reason that no other Clearing House tenant in an RSI property would be obliged to accept support from the landlord. It is therefore absurd of the EASS to suggest (upon review) that I am being treated as other Clearing House tenants in RSI properties.

I do not believe that the EASS has addressed my concerns with careful consideration.

Yours faithfully,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

DJ Ruth Fine orders Declan to pay £1,850 in costs


The Central London County Court is based at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Heavey v St Mungo's (2020)

The following is the full content of paragraph 4 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar that has been updated today.

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to his life.

30 June 2020: District Judge Ruth Fine orders Declan to pay £1,850 in costs. St Mungo's are under no obligation to even vouch over the phone that we are clients of the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's TST programme (WITH UPDATE 14/05/21)[1]

__________________________

[1] Part of the Mayor of London's RSI programme in our case is access to the Mayor's Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's.





14 May: Pixsy (day 185): I have found Declan's Motion to Dismiss to fight their threatened court action in an article titled "Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling". No sooner had we heard from them than they were named and shamed by Computer Weekly and it's a truly sickening read (previous post)


Our emails relating to brain-computer interfaces continue to be targeted. This is only the latest targeted category of emails.


For months we experienced an almost total blockade of our emails to prominent space advocates anywhere in the world (another targeted group). That blockade extended to an offer of financial help to us personally the week before Christmas 2020. We continue to have problems sending and receiving emails and op-eds when it comes to a close colleague in Washington, DC. Declan's use of his mobile phone to try to get my permission emails through to prominent space advocates has also proven unsuccessful. On both recent occasions the leading expert could only be reached through voice mail. When it comes to space travel, we most recently had the honour of listing a Hall of Famer astronaut among our Honorary Associates. It was one of the few emails that we have gotten through to prominent space advocates since last September. (A distinction is made here between a prominent space advocate and someone who has written an article about space travel. I do get some permission emails through to space writers, but regrettably not very many and only occasionally.)

23 December 2020: The blockade of Church and State emails extends to the sabotage of an offer of financial help to us personally. Pixsy with their outrageous Third Notice threaten our Church and State website. And Declan's primary laptop targeted this afternoon

I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse.

An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010





Facebook's suppression tactics with us



On 4 September 2020, which also happened to be Declan's 60th birthday, the Housing Ombudsman Service set our landlord Peabody Trust a third and final deadline to respond to his Stage 1 complaint. Almost immediately that same day we were unreasonably threatened by Facebook that our Page would be unpublished by them. For the rest of the year, the distribution of the page was dramatically reduced from 120-400K to an average 5-10K post reach for the previous seven days. What, when or how often I posted had little or no effect on the suppression of the post reach on any one given day. This year we had an average 15K-20K in this post reach before I was forced to leave Facebook on 4 February for two months. On 9 March I switched off Facebook 'likes' for more freedom from the platform and any eviction back to the streets for the third time. Later that week I decided to leave the platform for the period of one year rather than risk being banned for life.

17 October 2020: We have permission to publish this ISAF letter of 30 September to Facebook COO Sheryl Samberg. Facebook has so severely restricted our Page's distribution since 4 September that it's almost as good as an unpublished page

We have had 10.7 million hits in the past three years on Facebook and despite their unfair practices (10,712,672 million hits as at 13 March to be exact). Our five most popular articles had 6.6 million Facebook likes/shares before I switched off the button for more freedom from the platform (6,585,640 likes/shares as at 9 March to be exact). We expect to have a massively improved site this time next year, and hopefully we will have found someone interested in us who has insiders at Facebook.



From My Picks:

14 May: Threat to life: Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate Lyn Brown MP's second referral about the Information Commissioner's decision that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to Declan's life? (newer post)

Our list of 301 Honorary Associates includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates, 18 US National Medal laureates and 13 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these categories of emails in particular. (Last month Declan had the honour of adding the 20th Nobel laureate to the list, having had an average of 85% of his emails blocked for over a week.)

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"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 (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal considered Declan's complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and concluded that it is obviously unsustainable. It has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino

This Church and State blog was temporarily blocked by Google Blogger today not long after I posted this blog post. I was in the process of creating a new blog for this blog's restoration when the block was lifted.

DAY 363 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A 'NO FAULT' SECTION 21 NOTICE
MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY

14/04/20

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (full letter here)

Our Church and State website has no less than 63 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).



Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


This is Day 363 for Declan and me living under the legal threat of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust. We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative property. Things have gotten so bad with our email that I'm only publishing one article a day on Church and State and spending the rest of the day researching brain-computer interfaces. This will remain the case until I have made at least one significant breakthrough in this field, with Declan using his mobile to phone America to try to get our emails through to people. Domestically things could not be more menacing for us than they are at the moment. In fact, we have only known pressure like this before we received a no-fault eviction notice from our previous landlord. There is more about the interception of our email, laptop and TV interference and Declan's ongoing problems with Newham Council in my blog post this morning, Threat to life: Will the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigate Lyn Brown MP's second referral about the Information Commissioner's decision that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that poses a direct threat to Declan's life? The post reveals 17 knighted professors emailed at the beginning of last week, and only two read. The excessive targeting of this category of emails was maintained all week. We can only assume in the absence of an alert from Mailtrack that Declan's reply last Friday to the 13th knighted professor to be listed as one of our Honorary Associates was blocked. This is far from unusual and has applied to, among others, a number of the 20 Nobel Laureates on the list. Either that or the alerts were blocked (which is revealed when we receive a response to an email without us ever receiving the alert). Either way, the sabotage and manipulation of our email has remained a constant for years but has gotten to the point where sending and receiving emails is like playing in a casino. Nothing can be relied upon, not even my next day's reply to the co-founder with Elon Musk of Neuralink, which seems to have been blocked with my two new permission emails yesterday.


The Investigatory Powers Tribunal has carefully considered your complaint and Human Rights Act claim, and has concluded that it is obviously unsustainable, and thus falls within the provisions of Rule 13(3)(a) of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal Rules 2000, such that, pursuant to s67(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Tribunal has resolved to dismiss the claim.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal was created in October 2000 by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and given the power to investigate any complaints against the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), MI5 or MI6, as well as complaints about surveillance operations mounted by the police or any other public bodies. The Guardian reported in 2014 that the tribunal, which claims to be completely independent of the UK Government, is secretly operating from a base within the Home Office, by which it is funded. The newspaper found that the IPT had investigated about 1,500 complaints and upheld only 10, five of which concerned members of one family who had all lodged complaints about surveillance by their local council. No complaint against any of the intelligence agencies had ever been upheld. The discovery that the IPT is lodged within a Whitehall department has fuelled criticisms of the tribunal that has been levelled by rights groups, lawyers and complainants. The IPT's critics complain that the secrecy is excessive and that its procedures are stacked so heavily in favour of the government and against complainants that it is fundamentally unfair. According to The Guardian, some senior lawyers have described the IPT as "Kafkaesque", while one eminent barrister dismissed it as a "kangaroo court". The newspaper also reveals that because of the perception that the tribunal is unfair, many would-be complainants spurn it.


Our list of 301 Honorary Associates includes 20 Nobel Prize laureates, 18 US National Medal laureates and 13 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these categories of emails in particular.

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse." An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010