Lancaster County Court and Lancashire County Council

See links: http://www.criticalreader2006.blogspot.com/ Local Government Ombudsman and Lancashire County Council
and http://www.criticalreader2007.blogspot.com/ Manchester Employment Tribunals and Lancashire County Council (ref to as LCC in this. Not to be confused with Lancaster County Court as named fully throughout. )

More about both of the above agencies will be added.

The previous two entries have highlighted data protection issues within this overall government-led Local Authority corruption compounded by court corruption, also government-led. (To amuse readers, I thought that Falconer had his job on merit, I did not know then that it was incestuousness.)

The Information Commissioner via JIM PRESSLY and the Local Govt. Ombudsman via ROGER BARHAM and COLIN OXLEY refused to deal with the data protection issues including: altering of the Committee Meeting Minutes of LCC (the March 2001 Minutes had been altered in May 2002 to cover for the corporate manslaughter of pensioner, Sheila Bridge); the altered children's files to the detriment of the clients to discredit my work as a social worker; the false data held in my personnel file which LCC via FRANK LOUGHLIN and BILL BROWN (Information Managers LCC) had refused me a Notice of Correction under Section 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA.)
The false data held being the documents of perjury of March 2003 in MET (see link.)

J PRESSLY sent me a book and told me to challenge LCC in a court myself despite him originally stating that they would deal with criminal matters arising. Somebody changed his mind for him.

I initiated a claim in Lancaster County Court in Oct 2002 and the papers firstly went to His Honour Judge Forrester who decided I had a claim of merit and advanced the claim.
Judge Park heard the second date. LAURA SALES was rep. for LCC. L Sales was grossly unintelligent and in the standard way of LCC lied her way through that hearing with Judge Park.
Judge Park recorded on the file that L SALES was a liar. That was recorded in blue fountain pen ink and the court manager, STEPHEN SAINSBURY showed me that record on the file after the hearing when I returned to state that Sales had threatened me outside the court saying I must drop the case.
At that time Sainsbury had not been recruited by LCC.
By then also, Sales knew that Peter Russell's Extended Reasons doc (see MET link) was a false document and also that the papers she was relying on showed perjury.

The case was to be heard 1 July 2003. A few days prior to that Sales entered into Lancaster County Court the Russell document knowing it was false in content, perjury had been committed under Sec 5 of the 1911 Act.
Sales wrote to me saying she had freely entered that false document into the court to discredit me.

Judge GORDON NUTTALL presided on 1 July 2003.
LCC had another barrister, NEIL ANTHONY CADWALLADER who, I later discovered shared an office with T GRIFFITHS (see MET link).
Cadwallader clearly did not know all that had happened, he regurgitated just what he had been told by LCC.
He made the rest up which was seen to be just that, a nonsensical rant.
Cadwallader was completely ignorant of the DPA and thought it ended at Sec7 because much of my argument to court mentioned Sec 7.
He had copied the DPA only up to Sec 7 from a library book.

Within the first 20 minutes it was clear that I was the only one with any understanding or knowledge of the DPA.
Nuttall kept asking questions to Cadwallader and talking about me in the third person: I wasn't there.
Cadwallader had to concede that he couldn't answer Nuttall's questions.
Nuttall despises litigants in person and women, in that order. How dare I know what I was talking about?
He didn't appreciate my being able to answer his questions. I had the full Act and tried to share the copies, they were not interested.
They ganged up on me.
After that first 20 minutes Nuttall switched off the tape (I had no experience then of county courts) and said that he couldn't get it to work again.
I had the right to leave but couldn't for obvious reasons.

Nuttall leaned back in his chair and threw his arm over the back of the chair; I knew what I was in for but it was worse.
I had underestimated him as the most astonishing court room bully in all of this (more examples in other entries).
Cadwallader and Nuttall banged on their tables for effect, Nuttall told me that I wrote 'verbiage' and said that noone would want to read anything I wrote.
He stood the case down and the verbal onslaught continued after we were called back in.
I tried to show Nuttall the 3 documents that proved irrefutably that Russell's document was false in content.
Nuttall confirmed that Sales had freely entered that document into court.

Cadwallader and Nuttall continued to shout, bully, insult and mock me. It took almost 2 hours before they had had their 'fun'.
Had I walked out Nuttall would have said that I vacated my hearing.
Nuttall was jeering at me at the end, "Go on, say something, say something". I didn't speak, I couldn't. I knew what they wanted and I wouldn't give them the satisfaction.
Nuttall said I would pay costs.

I formally complained about the seedy Gordon Nuttall and was ignored.
I asked for a transcript of the hearing ( a friend had told me of that right). I was ignored.
I quoted their own Rules and Procedures to them and was finally allowed to apply for a transcript.
There was only 20 mins to transcribe and that would show it began as I said it had.
I was to pay for the transcript myself and as a deposit I sent £150 not knowing about charges then.
It was sent to J L HARPHAM of SHEFFIELD Court Transcribers.

4 weeks later I had heard nothing and wrote to Sheffield saying that I analysed qualitative date and transcribed tapes and 20 mins shouldn't be taking so long.
Another 2 weeks went by and then I was asked for another (almost) £250.
I had to pay or I would have lost my £150 and the transcript.

Legally transcripts are up to 75p a page. I had paid over 10 times the legal rate.
Theft under the Theft Act 1967 apparent to compound the rest.
It was reported to Lancaster police and the wider county police and ignored. See related link later re police.

It was easy to see at a glance that the transcript could not have been of the hearing, it was of a hearing at least 6 hours in length. It was not of the hearing of 1 July 2003.
Either someone had impersonated my voice and Cadwallader and Nuttall had spoken into tapes or J L Harpham had written the transcript after being told what to write.
The one 20 mins taped had become two full tapes.
Sainsbury, Nuttall, Cadwallader were involved as Harpham's must have known.

There were numerous errors and one whole page recorded that Cadwallader knew the DPA when he did not.
That would have been shown in the true transcript.
I could irrefutably prove that this transcript was not of the hearing at all.

There was a cost hearing apparently on 5 Sept 03 in Lancaster County Court and yet another illegally held cost hearing as the appeal on this travesty was not to be heard until 3 Oct 03.
I was learning about non-listed cases and cases without reference numbers, which judges could hear which tracked cases and so on. The record of L Sales as a liar disappeared from the files. The files have disappeared. Lord Levy is under the impression that destruction of evidence in what are likely criminal cases is a criminal offence in itself.

Whilst Lancaster County Court supposedly issued an 'Order' dated Sept 03 for me to pay costs there was never any county court judgements registered in my name.
2 solicitors trying to deal with my case (before LCC paid them off) confirmed that there were no files in that court.
My situation as a litigant in person was taken advantage of again.

Sometime later a court letter was sent to me, it was a letter that had been intended for J L Harpham and signed by Sainsbury. It was his copy for the court file before the file was destroyed.
The letter (Sainsbury) is saying that they know that I am paying for the transcript but I must not be allowed to see it until the judge has made his alterations.
That is repeated and then reiterated, the last time in bold for effect.
They know I pay for it but must not be allowed to see it before Nuttall makes his alterations.

Nuttall, Cadwallader, Sainsbury and J L Harpham altered that transcript to pervert the course of justice.
I will not have been the only victim of such criminality.
It will be established practice.
That false document was entered by Sainsbury and Nuttall into PRESTON COUNTY COURT for the appeal. They had committed perjury under Sec 5 of the 1911 Act.

That appeal will have its own entry later when it fits into the chronological picture.

Lord Falconer knew that I could show court transcripts were routinely altered and probably are routinely altered on any contentious case to pervert the course of justice for many.
On July 4th 2005 in the Daily Mail, Matthew Hinkley published an article stating that Falconer and Lord Woolf were concerned about the loss of faith in the justice system and would introduce videoed hearings in a pilot study.
I asked if litigants would be able to see the videos: "No". Exactly the same corruption as now when they are not allowed to listen to their tapes.

The letter sent to me from Lancaster County Court had been sent anonymously. As data subject I own the copyright and the publishing rights.

The details of the data controller for county courts were withheld from me for almost 4 years. Sainsbury ignored every single letter I wrote and deprived Judge Forrester of the letter I sent to him.
There will be other entries for this court later.
Falconer knows of the corruption and does nothing.
My complaint to ADRIAN TUTTON in the DCA re Gordon Nuttall as the worst bully in all of this, was dismissed but Tutton is a bully can offer nothing but arrogance and smugness.

The OFFICE FOR JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS via Jacob Strringer asked me for my statement of complaint and then used the 'out of time' factor against me as usual.
The seedy Gordon Nuttall and the unctuous Sainsbury are safe in their corrupt court.
Lord Falconer has vicarious liability for employees committing crimes whilst in his employ.
Falconer knows and does nothing.
Lord Phillips knows and does nothing.
The Law Society knows about Sales and LCC legal reps and does nothing.
The Bar Council knows and does nothing. Those legal agencies will have their own entries later which will be linked.
The Legal Services Ombudsman said they had the files from the Law Society and the Bar Council but there was no complaint to answer: another 'independent' agency shoring up the corruption. Falconer employs the LSO.

NB The Access Rights Unit for the Court Service has a STEPHEN HUNT based in Manchester.
Mr Hunt will ask for £10 as is his right under the DPA for persons wishing to obtain their data under Sec 7.
He will then copy the applicant a few emails of their own and change their application to being one made under the Freedom of Information Act 2002 for which there is no charge for data.
The FOIA 2002 does have a ceiling for issuing data, if the data would cost more than £600 they do not have to issue it. I asked for £599's worth and remain ignored. For £10 I have a few copies of my own emails sent to the corrupt courts in gross insult to my intelligence.

This is England in the 21st Century but we may as well be in the 16th C.
This entry ends here.
Carol Woods Lancaster
Next entry re the Employment Appeal Tribunal.