Sheila Oliver's Campaigning Website

Go to content

Main menu

Barry Khan, Stockport Council Solicitor

DRANSFIELD
 
 

Email sent 19/03/13 at 09.17

Dear Mr Khan

You are on record to me previously claiming the VV school is under 5 mts high, hence does not require any lightning risk assessment

Please ref to the BAM construction drawing ref 12/05 C dated 1st Sept 09 and you will clearly see the school building is nearly 7 mts high.

What standard are you relying on anyway reg the 5 mts height?!

Once again you have been caught out in disseminating false and misleading information into the public domain, hence please elevate this complaint to your line manager.

Could it be the VV school is SO high that it obstructs the external changing rooms?

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email sent to Council Solicitor Khan by Mr Dransfield 9th February 2013 at 18.28.

Dear Mr Khan

I am getting increasingly concerned at the length of time it is taking you to resolve the issues which I have raised ref the subject title.

Surely, it is not too difficult for you to establish if the external changing rooms have been built or NOT on the outside Football Pitch??!!.

I do hope you found time to read through the Lychett Minster School Fire Report which I sent to you earlier this week.. It makes very disconcerting reading and, as the Vale View school has not been issued with a Lighting Risk Assessment, a similar fire caused by lightning "could" happen at the Vale View school. This is compounded even further owing to the sub standard installation of the Lightning Protection System at the school.

If the asbestos doesn't kill or maim the Vale View children the lightning certainly will.

May I suggest to you that you should write a letter to all the Vale View parents instructing them to tell the children to VACATE THE SCHOOLS IN THE EVENT OF A THUNDERSTORM.

I would suggest you have a duty of care to place signs around the school with the same message.

I am still available to travel up to Stockport for a Joint Inspection of the faults which I have highlighted to you.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr Dransfield sent the email below on 20/01/13 to Barry Khan, Council Solicitor, Stockport regarding the toxic waste dump school at North Reddish, Stockport:-


"Dear Mr Khan
As previously advised, I gave you 7 days to respond to my complaints ref the subject title and you have failed to convince me that the Vale View school is not illegal.
As to ensure,I have exhausted the SBC complaints procedure,I would be most grateful if you would elevate my complaint to the CEO of the SBC.
Even whilst you have ignored my concerns for public safety at the Valve View school,I am still more than happy to travel up there and advise you of the H&S problems
with thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield"

Click on the links below to see just some of the problems associated with Vale View School:-


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/contamination.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/drainage-problems.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/financial-irregularities.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/how-did-it-pass-planning-.html
http://www.sheilaoliver.org/no-playing-fields.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/not-big-enough-one-year-on.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/traffic.html



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: alan dransfield
To: Barry Khan
Cc: headteacher Valeview
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Vale View Primary School

Dear Mr Khan
I acknowledge and thank you for your following letter and I do thank you for the confirmation that you are considering my request to visit the Vale View school for a co-inspection of the faults I have raised, which, quite frankly, I think it is the best way to resolve this matter. For ease of future readers, I have responded to your comments via Red Capital Letters.
There is nothing in your letter which would cause me to withdraw my claim the Vale View school is operating in a Legal Void.
with thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Barry Khan <barry.khan@stockport.gov.uk> wrote:
Dear Mr Dransfield

I refer to my e-mail of the 4 th January 2012 and your e-mails in reply, namely:
· Two e-mails dated 5 th January 2012
· E-mail dated 6 th January 2012
· E-mail dated 7 th January 2012
· Two e-mails dated 9 th January 2012
· E-mail dated 13 th January 2012
· E-mail dated 14 th January 2012
· E-mail dated 15 th January 2012
· Email dated 20 th January 2012
As requested in your e-mails, I have re-checked the position on whether the football pitch has actually been built and I can re-confirm the position I stated on the 4 th January, namely:
‘I have been informed that the football pitch has been built to Sport England Standards as part of the original contract. All the drainage has been installed as the plans previously sent and all works including alterations to the existing outfalls have been completed”
With regard to your request on the 4 th January -Please double check if the school has been built.” – I can confirm that the school has been built.
THIS SHOULD READ HAS THE FOOTBALL PITCH BEEN BUILT
The issue with regard to producing the ‘as built’ drawings for this school, is that I have been informed that we do not have a copy of the plans on CD. I have been informed that the School only holds paper copies of the drawings (as opposed to the plans for the Council’s Fred Perry House which we have electronically). However I understand that you are in communication with the Council’s Freedom of Information team and if you wish to request a review of any response to any FOI request, then please can you contact them directly. You have raised issues with myself with regard to the legal position of the School and I have addressed those concerns. I can confirm from the information that has been provided to me that I am happy to confirm that the school does not operate in a ‘legal void’ as suggested.
IT BEGGARS BELIEF THE AS BUILT DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN RETAINED IN HARD COPY ONLY.
I can confirm that I have been informed that all the details with regard to the drainage have been built as shown on the ‘as built’ drawings. Again there seems to be some confusion as you state that there is no physical evidence on the site of a Control Panel, however I have been informed that there is in fact a warning panel located in the school.
THE CONTROL PANEL IS/SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO BE INSTALLED OUTDOORS TO ENABLE THE FLASHING WARMING LIGHTS TO BE SEEN.
THE DRAINAGE DRAWINGS PROVIDED TO ME ARE "PROPOSALS ONLY"
With regard to your request for gas monitoring I understand that this has already been answered under your FOI request reference 4873 and a copy of the Site Completion Report has been sent to you. In addition I understand that additional information regarding risk assessments have been sent to you with regard to your FOI request 4436 including a report entitled “Harcourt Street, Site won soil Verification.”
RISK ASSESSMENT HAVE NOT BEEN RELEASED TO ME.
With regard to the fishing pond, the attached link shows that there was an existing drainage system which was installed in 1983 and approved by Sports England, which outfalls to the existing pond. The new scheme plans show that the football fields surface water only now drains to the pond to maintain the system. I have been informed that it is incorrect to state that any of the car park drains to this and this is not what the plan shows. In addition the following documents show that the Environment Agency and United Utilities were consulted regarding the proposed surface water runoff:
THE CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS APPLIED TO THE FOOTBALL PITCH WILL BE DRAINED INTO THE POND WHICH IS NOT ECO FRIENDLY.
http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/mvmedrms.asp?DCNumber=DC024357
Appropriate ecological assessments were carried out prior to the development (Badgers, Great Crested Newt etc ) – and these documents can be found at the above link. In addition the pond is still used for fishing and we have not received any complaints that the eco system has been affected. The Environmental Health Department have been notified and approved the measures on the site.
Also, as stated previously the lightning protection system for this school has been installed in accordance with the B.S standards and successfully tested 12 months following installation.
YOU FAILED TO QUOTE THE RELEVANT BS STANDARDS,HENCE PLEASE ALLOW ME. THE RELEVANT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO THE BUILD WERE BS6651 WHICH HAVE NOW BEEN REPLACED BY BS-EN 62305/2008 WHICH ARE APPLICABLE TO THE OPERATIONAL PHASE AND THIS STANDARD MANDATES A LIGHTNING RISK ASSESSMENT.WHICH YOU DO NOT HAVE.
IN THE EVENT YOUR SCHOOL IS STRUCK BY LIGHTNING AND SUBSEQUENT FIRE THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE WOULD BE REVOKED DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF LIGHTNING RISK ASSESSMENT.
I am sorry that you consider my previous response was inappropriate and that you wish to make a complaint about me. I can therefore confirm as requested that I am a solicitor and a member of the Law Society. Similarly I would also be grateful if you could inform the Council of your professional qualifications, current employment etc so that the Council can consider the appropriateness of arranging a meeting as you have requested to discuss technical points regarding the construction of a school.
IN REGARD TO MY PERSONAL DETAILS AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS, THEY ARE COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT
AND I DO NOT INTEND TO PROVIDE ANY PERSONAL DETAILS OTHER THAN MY NAME.
I do however hope that the above and the answers to the previous requests shows how the school and the Council have taken health and safety matters very seriously with regard to the School. You have made repeated requests for a number of items which have previously been answered and the Council respectfully asks you to reconsider the number of requests you make in the future about this building as the Council is concerned with regard to the amount of time that is being spent answering repeated requests with regard to this matter that is diverting resources from other matters. If the issues that you raised uncovered serious concerns about the construction or operation of the school then the Council would have taken a very different view to these requests but this is not the position.
I HAVE MADE REPEATED FOIA REQUESTS BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO PROVIDE THE SOUGHT AFTER DATA.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS LETTER WHICH CONVINCES ME THAT YOU OR THE SBC OR THE SCHOOL ARE TAKING h7s ISSUES SERIOUSLY.
If you wish to make a complaint against the Council as you have requested, then you can follow the Council’s complaints procedure which can be found at:
http://www.stockport.gov.uk/services/councildemocracy/yourcouncil/complaintsabouservices/corporatecomplaints/complaintsprocedure
This attached link has a ‘Compliments and Complaints Leaflet’ attached which shows how you can make a complaint against the Council. If you wish to follow this procedure please complete the attached form and send it to the Improvement & Performance Officer (Complaints), who is nominated by the Chief Executive who will deal with the complaint under Stage 2 of the procedure.
THANK YOU FOR THE COMPLAINT DETAILS AND I WILL IN DUE COURSE BE SUBMITTING A FORMAL COMPLAINT.
Kind regards
Barry Khan


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email sent by Alan Dransfield on 17th February 2013 17.02

Dear Mr Khan

I am sure you will agree with me that we appeared to have reached an impasse on the subject title and you have failed to convince me that the Valve View school in Stockport is NOT operating in a legal void.  I am 110% certain that the school is operating in a legal void owing to numerous health and safety Ffailings, which I have listed to you. You are also aware that I am not satisfied with the manner you have dealt with my complaint and do believe at best you are being evasive and at worst,obstructing justice. I did advise you sometime ago that I would submit a formal complaint against you to your line manger. That time has now arrived; hence, please elevate this complaint to the CEO of Stockport Borough Council.

Unfortunately, the safety and the welfare of pupils, staff and the general public is COMPROMISED by your delaying and obstructive tactics.

I look forward to hearing from the CEO.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

NB OFSTED Wistleblower Team Leader Mr Paul Dye.
I strongly urge OFSTED to make an unannounced visit to this school to ensure the safety and welfare of the children. In the event you do decide to take action,please advise me and I will accompany your inspectors and show them first and the Health & Safety issues.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Email sent 14th March 2013 at 20.52

Dear Mr Khan

Would you be so kind as to send me a photograph of the External Changing Rooms which would confirm if they have been built or not.

Your FOI department have been in touch with me again but are making false statement,hence, I would be most grateful if you would take these issues up.

1.At no time have I received any Lightning Risk Assessment reports other than the recent LRA which contains false and misleading information,i.e the report claims the School is under 5 mts in height

2.At no time have I received any Asset Management Plans.

Please sort this matter out Mr Khan as I find your FOIA department very frustrating.

with thanks

Alan M Dransfield

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




 
Back to content | Back to main menu