• The Beat of the Drum – The Rumble of the Tumbril ;

• The Roosting of the Thieving Magpies ;

• Lister’s Responsibilities and Qualifications ?

• A Mistress of Economy of Truth – Pension ‘Expert’ Lister ;

♦ The Audit Commission ;

♦ The LCC Pension Fund Administration Sub-Committee ;

♦ The NFI Report to LCC YPS for the Year 2010/2011 ;

♦ The NFI Report to LCC YPS for the Year 2012/2013 ;

♦ The Bugler Raises the Alert ;

♦ The Recovery of Monies-The Blatant Cover up ;

• Rising to the Challenge of another Pension Scandal ?

Now that pension corruption, fraud, and general criminality with its human effect on an individual disabled FSV-RRB has been exposed directly in the form of an official Complaint  to the Chairman of the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority CC F.DeMolfetta(Lab),copied to the political Leaders of the Lancashire County Council Coalition Leaders CC J. Mein(Lab) & CC W. Winlow(LibDem); to CEO Ms. L. Titcomb-The Pensions Regulator; the Serious Fraud Office(recommended by TPR); HM Treasury~Public Pensions(recommended by TPR);the Local Government Ombudsman; and to the Minister of State for Pensions Baroness Altmann CBE, there still remains much to be done by these legally responsible authorities.

There is one inescapable duty laid upon those who administer pension funds and this is that above all else they shall constantly act to protect the saving and investments of those Scheme Members who through a life time of hard work have placed their pension trust and invested income in the hands of these administrators and managers…

The Bugler will continue to expose the culpability of individuals who have unforgivably breached this pension trust and good faith. Those who were enthusiastic, blameworthy, co-conspirators in these criminal cover ups, because as we shall see there was more than just one cover up at the LFRS, there was in parallel, a cover up at the LCC ‘Your Pension Service’.

The guilty will, with their equally corrupt supporters, be in denial as ever and will say that this Complaint is the product of a fevered or embittered mind. But of course the prima facie guilty would say that, would they not? What else might be expected? Plain honesty, or even mea culpas?

The facts contained in this Complaint are simple evidential facts far removed from any theorems. Facts which the Morning Bugler has simply published and will continue to publish as more conspiracies are revealed by disabled FSVs scrutinising the contents of their own released PRFs.

A scrutiny which is usually reserved for unmentionables which lurk under the cesspit stones of the LFRS.

The guilty, with their well-practised and accomplished mendacity, will of course protest their innocence whilst blatantly ignoring the facts of their inescapable wrongdoing and guilt; but that is to be expected…

What follows is an interesting study in the techniques of duplicity and criminality by comparing just two principle criminals, Lister and Warren.

But as we shall see there are others to study later.

Both achieved the same end result though by the application of different levels of subtlety, or none, within their direct spheres of pension control. For the moment it is sufficient to continue by studying the dubious activities of Lister.

In complicity they jointly conspired to cover up of their pension ‘management’ failures simply to selfishly preserve their employment and careers thus avoiding discovery and accountability.

Deceitful actions which were to the detriment of Scheme Members in what were simply immense and coolly calculated breaches of trust.

Breaches which conveniently ignored their Statutory legal duties which included reporting their massive failures to the Pensions Regulator; to the elected Members of the LCC/LFRS to whom they had an especial duty of trust; and their deliberate breach of good faith in their failure to publicly report substantial financial losses to pension Scheme auditors whose Members benefits they were all legally and morally bound to protect from such losses.

Opinion is once more insufficient, only hard evidence and fact will do.

So once more the Bugler must look in evidential terms at those who, like Lister, who have individually and in complicity supported Warren, the prime mover and architect, in the application of his infamous ‘Hardship Route’ and are worthy of their seat in the tumbril as they listen to the beat of its drum carrying them on their way to Justice.

Mrs Diane Lister, currently Head of the Lancashire CC ‘Your Pension Service’ (formerly known as Lancashire CC Pensions Services-renamed in 2011) was in 2001 employed in the pensions department at BAE Systems, Warton, in Lancashire. When she left in January 2002, bound for the LCC Pensions Services, it remains unclear, depending upon who you speak with, whether or not she was pushed, or jumped.

It was only a short time later in April 2001 after Lister landed at the LCC that Warren slithered in under the back door of the LFRS at CFO Holland’s informal invitation whilst ignoring Employment law and the transparent open competition such a public appointment demanded.

This unlikely confluence of sinister ‘talents’, who were to be the architects of their own misfortunes, led to the subsequent melt down of pension Schemes under their direct control and accountability, to say little of the unfortunate disabled FSVs who fell victims to their collective secret LFRS ‘Hardship Route’ policy.

Shortly after her arrival at the LCC Lister found a kindred spirit and willing vassal, which she remains today, in the person of Ms. J. Wisdom( the LFRS pension ‘expert’) who later was to become, in grateful promotion no doubt by Lister, the LCC YPS Performance Manager.

Wisdom was actually the original pension ‘expert’ who claimed credit in 2007 for ‘discovering’ the collapse into maladministration of the LFRS Firefighters Pension Scheme the alleged consequences she said, of ‘overpayments’ which she and these other talented pension ‘experts’ had made to 167+/- disabled LFRS Fire Service Veterans.

In fact it was she who was the ‘technical expert’ and Performance Manager in daily charge of this particular pension Scheme, and 9 other pension funds. This claim of vigilant oversight was of course just so much more opportunistic mendacity but it seemed to be the point at which ingrained falsehood became institutionalised.

The historical reality was that this ‘Journey of Truth’ actually commenced in 1996 in Lancashire in the old LCFB when a very young disabled FSV-DH began asking questions about his pension and his DWP benefits after his compulsory ill health/injury discharge in 1996.

Two years prior in 1994 FSV-DH had received near fatal injuries during a farm fire involving propane cylinders one of which exploded and scythed itself into FSV-DH making him permanently disabled. Sad of course, but that is a Firefighter’s life, and that is why he was a fully paid up

Member of Lancashire’s Firefighters Pension Scheme which would bring the reassuring benefits his young family would need at such an appalling time, or so he thought…

LFRS secret internal emails between Hamilton/Warren/Holland revisited this pension issue with the DCLG in 2009 without solution, by which time they were fully aware of the appalling fiasco which had taken place on their watch in respect of the maladministration of their entire Pension Scheme.

A situation which they were quickly at pains to find a plausible excuse and victims for, any victim, to justify and explain their complete pension management melt down under their direct control and accountability.

But the golden rule for such amoral people is always to blame the victim.

This melt down was further confirmed in March 2007 by disabled FSV-DW who innocently raised queries affecting his pensions but who had the greatest difficulty in getting anyone to pay the slightest attention, or to act, at either the LCC or the LFRS.

His statements (held by the Bugler) made during his terminal illness confirm the facts of this second failed alarm call to these so called ‘pension experts’.

It is unimpeachable that Lister, Wisdom, Warren, Hamilton, Harold, Hutchinson, and the LFRS Finance manager Mr. K.Mattinson were at the absolute centre of this shared knowledge in March 2007, knowledge which they deliberately failed to impart to their political masters, realising at this very early point that their employment and careers were at stake if they did not find a plausible excuse and the ‘victims’ to pin their pension and financial mismanagement failures on.

Lister and her cohorts, not unlike Warren and his, have a particular penchant for falsehood, a disease which seems to be contagious in the higher echelons of the LFRS, indeed it is probable, if asked, that they are collectively incapable of elucidating the truth in any matter pension, or associated finance.

Hindsight now confirms why this cohort of conspirators acted from this early point in 2007 in such a belligerent and aggressive bullying manner, a manner which it was hard for disabled FSVs to contemplate never mind comprehend because these scandalous attitudes were simply the product of collective panic by all these ‘experts’ who actually viewed the prospect of rightly getting the sack for their pension malfeasance, to say nothing of their direct responsibility for the Firefighters Pension Scheme potential financial losses running at £2.0+ million

To ascertain Lister’s role and responsibilities in pension administration (not just for the LFRS) the Bugler made an initial FoI Request in January 2014 supported by a further follow up Request in February 2014.

The LCC responses provide the following information which shows the magnitude of responsibility for the Public Purse which a completely unqualified Lister currently holds:

“ Further to your email of 30 January, in which you request the disclosure of information under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, I am now in a position to respond and answer each of your questions in turn below.

Q1. In total how many pensioners does the PS administer pensions for?

A1. 62,627 as at 31/3/2013.

Q2. How many Schemes does the PS administer and who are they?

A2. 10

• The Local Government Pension Scheme on behalf of Lancashire County Council

• The Fire Pension Schemes (Old and New) on behalf of Lancashire’s Fire and Rescue Service

• The Police Pension Schemes (Old and New) on behalf of Lancashire’s Police & Crime Commissioner

• The Teachers Compensation Scheme on behalf of Lancashire County Council

• The Local Government Pension Scheme on behalf of Cumbria County Council

• The Fire pension Schemes (Old and New) on behalf of Cumbria County Council

• The Teachers Compensation Scheme on behalf of Cumbria County Council

Q3. What is the total gross budget that the PS administered in the year 2012/2013?

A3. £2.85m.

Q4. How much Net was paid out to pensioners?

A4. £302m during 2012/13.

Q5. What is the number of staff the PS employ directly to administer these PS?

A5. 66 FTE.

Q6. How many are staff are allocated to each Scheme?

A6. Approximately 25% of staff are involved in the administration of Scheme’s administered on behalf of Cumbria County Council.

Approximately 75% of staff are involved in the administration of the Scheme’s administered on behalf of the various authorities in Lancashire.

Q7. What was the gross expenditure in staff salaries and expenses for the year 2012/2013?

A7. £1.9m.

Q8. How many members of staff hold specialist pension management qualifications including the Head of the Service?

A8. 13 staff hold specialist pension management qualifications 5 staff are part way through qualifications.

Q9. What are the nationally recognised qualifications which are desirable in members of the pension administration staff?

A9.  CIPP- Foundation Degree in Pensions Administration & Management IPPM – Diploma in Pensions Management

CIPFA – Certificate of Payroll & Superannuation Administration.

Q10. When was the last occasion the Audit Commission inspected the PS and where can a copy of the Report be obtained?

A10. The Audit Commission did have an inspection role (as distinct from its audit role), but it never used its inspection powers in relation to Lancashire’s Pension Service.

I trust my response is to your satisfaction, but if you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely, Mr M Sayles

Access to Information Manager Access to Information Team Lancashire County Council Tel. 01772 531116

++++++++++++

I write further to your email of 20th February, in which you ask some further questions regarding the Pensions Service. My responses to your questions are set out below:

Q11.Please specify the number of employees who would be regularly employed in the administration of the LFRS Fire pensions and what are their qualifications?

Please specify the number of employees who would be regularly employed in the administration of the Cumbria Fire Pensions and what are their qualifications?

Identify if the same staff are used holding the same qualifications for both Schemes?

A11. It is not possible to provide this information, as it is not held; employees within the Pensions Service will work on different schemes and move around within the department, for example, when workloads necessitate.  Information about the number of employees regularly working on a particular scheme is not therefore held.

Q12. Please specify from published budget statements the annual salary of the Head of Service including and identifying, if applicable, bonuses.

A12. The annual salary of the Pensions Service Manager is not contained within ‘published budget statements’. However, I can advise that the post is at Grade 14 (£60,764 – £66,612) and  that bonuses are not paid.

Q13. Please specify the pension management qualifications of the Head of Service Mrs.D.Lister and how long held?

Please specify the pension management qualifications held by Ms. Wisdom LCC PS who advises the LFRS and held for how long?

A13. Qualifications of individual employees constitute their personal information and such information is absolutely exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) of the Act by virtue of section 40(3)(a)(i).  This is because disclosure into the public domain of such information would be against their legitimate expectations and thus unfair, and a breach of the first data protection principle as set out at schedule 1 to the Data Protection Act 1998.  However, I can confirm that employees are appointed appropriately, based on their qualifications or relevant experience or a combination of both.

Q14. When was the last Audit carried out by the AC and where is a published report to be found?

A14. The Audit Commissions in-house auditor’s last completed an audit of the Lancashire Pension Fund (not the Pensions Service) in 2011/12. Since then all audits have been outsourced and subsequent audits have been completed by Grant Thornton. The report following the last audit completed by the Audit Commission was presented to the Council’s Audit and Governance Committee in September 2012 and can be found on our website at http://council.lancashire.gov.uk/documents/s13543/Pension%20Fund%20Appendix%20B.pdf. The report for 2012/13 was completed by Grant Thornton and went to the September 2013 meeting of the same Committee, details of which are also available on the County Council’s website:  http://council.lancashire.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=728 “

It should be borne in mind that whilst it was Sayles who replied it was Lister and he who supplied the ‘facts’.

The Bugler has previously reported on Mr. Sayles, a close colleague of Ms. Lister, who also has a degree in economy and flexibility in his concept of truth which you will notice in his inability to quote Lister’s ‘qualifications’ for a public appointment whilst hiding behind his law and of course he also conveniently ignores the role of the Audit Commission and its sub-department  the National Fraud Initiative as we shall see.

Both of these particular questions were Bugler traps of veracity which Sayles fell straight into because the Bugler already knew the answers.

This seems an appropriate point to record that in answer to the first question posed to Lister in the Witness Box under Oath in the County Court in January 2013 by the Litigant-in-Person when she was asked to outline to the Court her formal national pension management qualifications for holding the appointment of Head of the LCC Pensions Services, she replied, “None”.

Her salary scale was £66,612.0 without bonus for the year 2013/14.

By 2012 Lister with Warren was fully involved in the debacle of the LFRS Firefighters Pension Scheme. She was after all the Head of the contracted agency LCC YPS required to deliver pensions to LFRS Fire Service Veterans, their Widows, and Beneficiaries.

Lister had watched the pension war of attrition in the LFRS develop since 2007 and had also watched and learnt how Warren had attempted to deal with it. In effect he tried to cover it all up and make it all go away but in this he was signally unsuccessful.

Lister’s approach, perhaps benefitting from Warren’s self-evident failed strategy, was to use a much more subtle approach probably best described as smearing the innocent victims, Scheme Members, whilst using soothing words of deceit, the ‘soft cop’ approach, and indeed in this she was notably successful until the Bugler’s FoI requests exposed her deceit for what it was, simple base criminality.

The perception of a pension mugging by a disabled FSV, is no less a mugging, regardless of the subtlety of the ‘technique’ used.

But are all these statements just so much defamation and hyperbole?

Let the evidence, as ever, speak for itself as Lister in the period 2010 to 2012 set about protecting her employment and career prospects by scheming, falsehood, and manipulation during which she deliberately misled the Elected Members of the LCC Pensions Administration Sub-Committee to whom she had a duty of honesty as an LCC ‘officer’ reporting on the 10 Pensions Schemes for which she, and she alone, was responsible in law.

The Lister example, if ever one was needed, simply confirms the case for Mandatory qualifications for all pension Scheme managers and Mandatory  pension law/management education for all Trustees or those like these LCC County Councillors who currently sit on their local Pension Scheme Management Board, a la Hutton.

Regrettably Hutton failed to mention ‘probity’ but in fairness to him he had the right to assume this, but then he never heard of the activities in Lancashire obviously.

Ironically Lister’s downfall was brought about by a sub department of the Audit Commission(now abolished) which operated a pension Scheme health audit under the title of the ‘National Fraud Initiative’.

The Audit Commission, which was abolished in 2015, had a sub department called the National Fraud Initiative. The function of the NFI was, every two years, to monitor the performance of local authority statutory pension Schemes and its managers to prevent waste and fraud and whilst primarily aimed at the anticipated nefarious activities of Scheme Members it cannot have imagined that instead it would inadvertently catch fraudulent Scheme managers, which it clearly did.

The NFI monitored by obtaining the data records of pension payments made to pensioner payees within Lancashire and Cumbria by the LCC who are the statutory pension providers under the Local Government Pension Scheme and for 9 other Schemes including the LFRS Firefighters Scheme as we have seen.

Next in this data matching exercise the NFI then compares these records with other database records which are accessible to it in law. Bases which include the DWP etc, ; and the national births, marriages, and deaths(BMD) records; and the LFRS pensions etc,.

If, for example, a ‘mis-match’(error) appears, which shows that the LCC are continuing to pay a pensioner who is listed as deceased in the BMD then there is a mis-match which clearly requires prompt investigation and remedial action.

Equally, if there was an anomaly between the DWP records and the LCC/LFRS records this also required investigation and a public accounting on the part of the LCC and the LFRS.

One can only imagine Lister’s horror when in 2010 the Audit Commission(NFI) which she and Warren had smearingly used in 2008 against innocent disabled FSVs reported on her and Warren’s own failures in its data mis-matching reports of 2010 and once more in 2012, with little or no discernible pension Scheme management improvement in between.

Now Lister faced her very own visceral moment of Nemesis.

But it was not for nothing that she had willingly served an ‘apprenticeship’ under Warren and she decided that by using his ‘techniques’, albeit with a softer touch, that she could not only  preserve her own employment and career but in the process divert any criticism from herself, nay even enhance her own ‘reputation’, in the eyes of her gullible LCC Pension Administration Fund Sub-Committee.

Because cynically she believed, rightly, that she had the measure of her own County Councillors and therefore they ought not to present her with any particular problem in asking intelligent questions about pensions in which they knew even less than Lister, if that was a possible.

The LCC YPS administers 62,627+/- local authority pensions directly, or by contract to other Local Authorities.

Public accountability is held by the LCC Pension Fund Administration Sub-Committee which consists of just 6 members which surprisingly only meets once per year to monitor a multiplicity of 10 Schemes to the value of £302m during 2012/13 which is, by any standard, a major pension function in the region, if not nationally.

The Head of the YPS, Lister, normally prepares an Annual Report for this Sub-Committee which, for example, was presented  on the 5^th July 2011,  and the following year a little earlier, on the 13^th June 2012.

The LCC YPS are required to have a Scheme of Delegation(SoD) which empowers their Statutory functions which is to assiduously create and maintain an accurate pension ‘account’ by means of a robust, effective, efficient, proactive recording and informing pension management system.

A system which is cognitive of impacting national legislation, in this case the Data Protection Act 1998 which now bars access to individual DWP records which Lister chose to ignore, though how she initially conned the DWP into illicitly obtaining some disabled FSV’s DWP records until the DWP was woken up by the Bugler is another entire story of deceit on its own.

In the LCC YPS case this SoD, Section 5.16e is the delegated power for Local Government Superannuation Regulations which contains a specific requirement for an annual review of the payee status by the LCC.

This could be by sending a payee a list of data held on them for verification which by the payees’ response would confirm their actual existence and thus confirm the LCC’s continuing liability to pay the payee their pension.

It is clear from events at that time that the LCC YPS did not carry out either, an individual monthly liability audit, nor indeed an annual individual audit either.

It was into this maladministration maelstrom that the NFI marched with its data matching exercise in late 2010 and again in 2012 finally producing it Reports which it sent to the LCC for investigation because, as it stated, fraud could not be assumed until after a detailed and individual pension investigation had been carried out, which of course Lister never did, nor instructed to be done.

In the year 2010/2011 the NFI carried out an audit of the LCC YPS and duly reported back mis-matches to the Lister on the 25^th January 2011 with additional mis-matches supplied in late March and mid April 2011.

This mis-matching data was never properly investigated by Lister nor reported to the monitoring LCC Pension Fund Administration Sub-Committee, or its Chair CC.Welsh, in any form, most particularly at its annual Meeting on the 5^th July 2011 when this Information had already been in Lister’s possession since 25^th January 2011, almost 7 months prior.

The failure to give an account at that time for this debacle, which has never been explained by Lister publicly since, can only have been to deliberately buy time for another year in a deliberate cover up. A time during which she could find a ‘solution’ to her maladministration which she could then glibly report in a sanitised form to her Committee 19 months or so, late.

These mis-matches were finally reported to the Committee on 13^th June 2012 to this Sub-Committee and even then it did not wake up. No explanation was offered by Lister in presenting this report why an urgent accounting had not been presented the year before, nor even dealt with as urgent business in the interim by the Chairman CC.Welsh using his discretionary powers?

In total these miss-matches which were eventually described in the local press by Lister as ‘overpayments’ were stated by the NFI as 2,215 of which 1007 were self-evidently paid to dead payees, namely, pension Scheme Members.

This left an unaccounted for balance of 1208 payees with errors; living one presumes?

According to this ‘sanitised and creative’ report finally presented to this monitoring Sub-Committee 19 months late in June 2012 a further 762 have been identified as former employees who retired and then were re-employed though it is not clear, whether or not, this was by their former employer the LCC, in a double dipping exercise?

This leaves an unaccounted for balance of 446 payees with unexplained errors. Though this figure is neither stated; accounted for; nor detailed in this public documented report.

The total value of ‘overpayments’ was currently reported as £98,436 for 31 payees which amounted to £3175.35 per payee though it is not clear what the total loss accrued was including the amount paid to the 415 unaccounted for ‘others’ on this ‘balance’ sheet.

It was alleged that there was one case of potential fraud involving £19,718 for which legal guidance was being sought  though no Part II(Public excluded) Meeting was convened by the Chair, or the Sub-Committee, to discuss this case, nor were details reported of the individual status of all the other 2,214 mis-matches which contained errors.

Thus the status of the balance of 414 allegedly ‘overpaid’ payees remains a complete mystery as does the final figures of losses or missing monies or even from which Scheme or Schemes, including the Firefighters Pensions Scheme?

From the Minutes of the Meeting of the 13^th June 2012 it is clear the Councillors present asked no questions; asked for no accounting why this had occurred; what changes were to take place to prevent a re-occurrence.

Indeed they state in a fascinating comment… “It was suggested that there should be a policy to recover overpayments where no actual fraud had occurred”… Well how were they supposed to know this if Lister did not report it?

Was this Lister’s subtle suggestion to Councillor’s how to balance her books without resorting to Court action and thus avoiding the potential debacle which subsequently occurred at the LFRS, in which she was a willing partner in crime in the County Court?

Given the figures reported, set against approximately 62,627+/- pensions paid out this amounts to an administrative failure rate of 3.53% which well in excess of 1.85% which is commonly regarded as maladministration yet no one on this Sub-Committee scandalously raised a single question regarding this palpable financial negligence.

Nor did Lister draw the Sub-Committee’s attention to her and their Statutory duties which was, and remains, to report this massive maladministrative failure to The Pensions Regulator.

The NFI once more undertook its exercise in 2012/13. Once more it produced mis-matches(errors) of 2,060 which was quite a massive improvement of 155 less errors since 2 years before, though unfortunately the payments to dead Scheme Members increased by 5 to 1012…

This was another outstanding success illustrated by the maladministration falling from 3.53% to 3.28% which is unfortunately just below maladministration times X 2…

The Bugler wrote on the 27^th June 2012 to the LCC and LFRS political Leaders including the Conservative Chairman CC.Welsh of this LCC Pension Sub-Committee which included a co-opted Trade Union Official Mr. B. Harvey under the title ‘Pension Maladministration-Paying the Dead?’. This letter detailing pension maladministration in Lancashire was based on carefully researched factual documents, reports, and Minutes obtained from the LCC and the Audit Commission/NFI.

It was a belated attempt to draw attention to Lister’s pension failures and more importantly to highlight her deliberate deceit in misleading the Elected and co-opted Members of the  LCC Pension Fund Administration Sub-Committee on which sat our old ‘friend’ CC F. DeMolfetta today’s Chairman of the LFRS Fire Authority.

One can only say that at least DeMolfetta’s ignorance of matters pension remains consistent.

Indeed, after no one responded or even acknowledged, the Bugler spoke directly to Mr. Harvey as an independent Trade Union (Unison) member of this Committee whom one might have assumed might be vaguely interested, particularly as both he and CC.M.Brindle on the Committee are embarrassingly both members of the LCC Local Government Pension Scheme?

Not only was Mr. Harvey completely disinterested in his Members’ pensions well-being, and clearly his own, but he was completely dismissive of the presented facts going so far as to say(clearly enthralled) that Lister had his complete confidence thus confirming the old adage that there continues to be one born every minute…

Lister had learned well from her ‘experience’ at the LFRS and from her chum Warren, another accomplished liar.

At this meeting on the 13^th June 2012Ms.Lister explained that all this maladministration and NFI mis-matching(errors) were clearly the fault of the payees…well now there is a surprise…

 “ It was noted that in most cases there was a straightforward explanation for non-disclosure and that the majority of cases were found to be genuine oversights rather than fraudulent cases.” .

The ‘soft smear’ touch, who it ludicrously seems includes 1007 who failed to inform the LCC YPS, among other things, that they were dead.

No payee, whether dead or alive, has a statutory duty or obligation to report anything to his pension authority. It is for the Statutory duty holder in this case the LCC/LFRS (read Lister and Warren)to ascertain their liability to pay a pension which they simply failed to do.

Lister had this knowledge of mis-matches in her possession for some 19 months during which in a clearly orchestrated cover up she had undertaken unauthorised ‘remedial’ action without this matter being publicly referred to her own Sub-Committee.

It is called ‘cooking the books’.

At no point was this Sub-Committee briefed with the legal framework within which she was actually operating and whether or not she was entitled to, and was recovering, the effects of her own ‘overpayment’ maladministration.

Nor in seeking restitution, whether lawful or not, had she supplied this same information to the payees if a query/objection was raised and if paid in error how she proposed explaining the legalities of how a dead payee’s estate was required to, should, or could, repay these monies?

Indeed it is not clear whether or not any of these monies were written off and if so how much, owed by whom, and on whose authority?

Put simply there remain a huge number of questions to be posed to Lister not only in the round but questions regarding the status of many individual pensions from which she makes it appear she has unlawfully recovered so called ‘overpayments’ without even the approval of her Sub-Committee who have chosen to remain in complete hand washing ignorance of her criminal activities.

It is doubtful if she will ever be in a position to answer such questions having left such a catastrophic debacle in her wake of maladministration. Questions which she has failed to draw to the attention of her Sub-Committee who themselves seem bovine in their acceptance of any ‘spin’ which Lister cared put to them.

A fact which she was well aware of, particularly in avoiding her and their Statutory duty to report all this debacle to The Pension Regulator.

In switching from the bovine to the equus the final horse laugh is that the LCC YPS was subsequently re-accredited with the national ‘Customer Service Excellence’ award.

The fact of the matter is that these were public monies the sum total of losses which are not known even today which still require a transparent accounting to the Public of Lancashire by a Sub-Committee who are directly responsible in law for the activities of the LCC YPS but who seemed happy at that time just to pick up their expenses and as they say in Lancashire …do now’t else…

Lister simply engaged in cynical criminality in the clear knowledge that she could and did engage in barefaced scandalous mendacity with a group of bovine County Councillors whom she knew she could deceive and she did so with complete aplomb.

This is far beyond a joke, or incompetence, or natural stupidity, it is simply calculated fraudulent criminality for which she and Warren should lose their individual freedom for in the end they both knowingly and wilfully acted in breaches of trust, good faith, and public duties which their public appointments demand from them as civil servants.

This was the same criminality, with the same aplomb, which Lister engaged in at the County Court in conjunction with Warren, Harold, and Drinkall the LFRS primary Witness who succeeded in successfully perverting the course of Justice by suborning their own willing Witness under Oath in the Witness Box, quite literally behind the back of the Litigant-in Person who was subjecting Drinkall and her evidence-in-chief to a cross examination, but that also will be the detailed subject of another future unmasking.

Lister is, like Warren, simply a criminal and both she and her willing vassal Wisdom know it.

It must be stated at this point that these criminal activities were, at that time, reported by the Bugler to TPR an organisation under different management than today. At that time TPR also exhibited complete disinterest instead encouraging the Bugler to report the matter to the Pensions Ombudsman which was simply a complete brush off.

Today, these appalling factual circumstances supported with independent evidence pose a direct challenge to the authority and credibility of this new Government in the persons of the new Pensions Regulator and indeed the new Pensions Minister.

It remains to be seen under this new and changed management if in building confidence within the UK’s community of pension saver/investors if both these ‘policemen’ of pension protection are seen to react vigorously and publicly with a firm hand.

Those joining pension schemes today and those who are continuing to contribute to existing Schemes must be reassured that their pension savings/investments are well guarded and ring fenced by this Government, its Departments, and the Minister responsible who is, quite rightly, vigorously campaigning for all workers to participate in new pension Schemes.

Whilst in reasonableness it might be anticipated that the financial/pension predators will come, indeed they are here already, the statistics simply do not support the theory that pension savers/investors will hazard their own pension by criminal activities. Who would be so foolish?

However the same cannot be said of unqualified amoral pension Scheme managers who have failed those most simple of tests, personal and professional probity.

In placing their trust in this Pension Minister disabled Fire Service Veterans, their Widows and Beneficiaries are calling for no more than they have always called for, fair play.

Nevertheless it is upon her prompt reactions to this palpable and scandalous example of all that is wrong in pension Scheme management with its confidence eroding fraud involving such blatant outrageous abuses of trust and good faith that her actions will be ultimately be judged and given her track record on such matters the Bugler remains confident that she will make the correct judgments.

Such criminality quite simply must be made an example of. There can be no other solution if the concept of a nationwide involvement in trustworthy pension Schemes and their mangement is to be achieved.