• ISF~LFRS win their Pensionable Pay battle;

• A ‘Competent Court’ or just clerks at TPO?

• Meanwhile back at ‘Toad Hall’;

• The LFRS new ‘shy’ solicitor Howell.

Under their own steam; the elected leadership of ISF~NC & KC; one hundred and fifty four plus, In-Service Firefighters(ISF) have engaged with the LCFA, aka cWarren/DeMolfetta,  in a pensionable pay dispute associated with Day Crew Manning.

This dispute has its origin in 2010 with the introduction of Day Crew Manning.

The LFRS Pension Scheme manager and local pension scheme ‘expert’ cWarren decided he would introduce his very own legislation(who needs parliament when you have cWarren?) in which he decided that the additional salaries paid for DCM were not pensionable thus saving the LCFA from having to make its annual shared contribution to the accruing ISF’s and general Pension Fund.

Stealing the LFRS ‘silver’ from the Pension Fund is a big greedy mistake which will get them jailed.

When challenged last year the ever mendacious, slippery, and true to his criminal form cWarren  made panicking false claim after false claim that he had a LCFA/Lancashire FBU local ‘pension agreements’ whilst insisting that the  Day Crew Manning personnel’s pay was not pensionable, but when put to the test neither the local  complicit FBU, nor the Fire Authority~Frankie ‘Mafia’ DeMolfetta could produce a single document purporting to be such an local’ agreement’.

Big expensive mistake looms out of the murky depths…

There is little doubt that the current generation of ISF are less trusting in matters pension at the LFRS given its scandalous history of deceitful underpayments to active Pension Scheme Members and their Beneficiaries from its Pension Fund since cWarren’s arrival in 2002 and indeed for decades before under Drinkall.

Vigilance and distrust of the LCFA should remain their watch words until there is an outbreak of decency and honesty within the 25 Elected Politicians of the LC Fire Authorit,y but first they must awaken!

A guide might be pigs flying past the window of the station…

As usual these false fabrications of ‘agreements’ with a

complicit and malleable Lancashire FBU ‘leadership’, were a complete criminal fabrication for which co-conspirators cWarren and CC DeMoletta  the Labour Chair of the Fire Authority claimed authorship and existence of, but which only ever existed in their wishful thinking within the  ‘minds’ of these ‘Funny Farm’ dwellers.

The ISF can be certain that forging the necessary ‘agreements’ documents will have crossed their collective/complicit minds, a practice which they have all engaged in before, but such criminality with over 154 suspicious ISF viewing their antics would have been a leap too far ending in jail; a prospect which they have yet to escape from when accounting time comes…

Big sinking feeling in pit of stomachs or LFRS budgets…

In the interim other Fire Authorities had been challenged on DCM pensionable pay by the FBU nationally and in dispute after dispute in the High Court the FBU won.

Locally the Lancashire ISF, legally supported by a local pro bono Barrister, a pension expert of national note, forged ahead and launched an attack on the LCFA through the aegis of The Pension Ombudsman, in spite of offers of special ‘local’ deals under the counter, handshakes, etc.

It is interesting that cWarren and Frankie the Mafia always seem to think that everyone shares their ‘morality’; their cheapskate  price; and think and act corruptly like they do?

The day of personal accounting in the dock will surely come, and come soon…

This attack on the LCFA via TPO was based in part on the newly established case law allied with their local Barrister Mr.J.M.C~B and therein the matter rests with the TPO who have been regularly updated with this expanding case law.

Though it is inevitable that the TPO will have to bow to the decision of a ‘proper’ High Court, after the usual procrastination, as though deliberate delay in some strange convolution enhances TPO’s ‘credibility’, when in fact this well practiced instutionalised  delay, simply lends weight to the growing public opinion that TPO is a complete waste of Taxpayers money and ought to be wrapped up, or amalgamated with TPR.

Recently Mr.Arter the TPO did a wonderful series of pas-de-deux as he pirouetted his way through the minefield of a media challenge about whether or not the TPO could be regarded as a ‘competent court’, which judging by its own ‘performance statistics’, that is, its fail rate at the High Court of Appeal, it is not.

In justification, and clutching at straws, by going back to 1995 when ‘tribunals’ (tribunii) were a ‘new’ re-invention during Blair’s era, Mr.Arter points to ‘Peach Grey and Company ~v~ Summers’ where a Court ruled that ‘tribunii(plural third declension Latin), in a broad brush statement,  are recognised as a ‘lower court’ and have ‘associated’ powers.

Whatever that might mean in jurisprudence though in reality it amounts to less than a ringing endorsement by the Lord Chief Justice.

What Mr.Arter failed to point out in undermining his own position, but which the Bugler will not ignore, was  that about this time, at the sweep of a Blair pen, all the morons previously chairing such trubunii suddenly became ‘Judges’ overnight even though most, if not all of them, had not the vaguest background in judicial knowledge or practices.

A circumstance which continues to be disdainfully regarded by ‘proper’ Courts of Law and sitting Judges as the lowest grade of ‘courts’, if even in reality, they actually ever make that grade…

This question mark of vulnerability of, whether or not it is a  ‘competent court’, has hung over TPO for decades and is a perennially recurring question which any ‘wised up’ Pension Complainant will routinely challenge again and again because TPO leaders and staff regularly trot out  the regurgitated nonsense that TPO has all the powers of ‘real’ courts and ‘real’ judges implying , if not stating, that their decisions are final, inviolable, and beyond Appeal.

It is on such tripe and sand that such organisations founder and sink and TPO is well on its way to the bottom.

Mr.Arter grudgingly has to admit when pressed that “someone can appeal my decision to a higher court” and indeed for once he is correct .

But any Appeal must be based on a point of law which if

TPO’s ‘performance related’  failure at the High Court is anything to judge by, they are not very good at Pension Law either.

Furthermore, Mr. Arter inadvertently confirms these perennial weaknesses;  and though God might love a trier He hardly loves Mr.Arter who continues to attempt to mislead by his even more grudging admission that…

 “The higher court can’t change that decision; they can remit it back to me. They can overturn it, of course, but in many cases they remit it back for me to reconsider the case.”.  

In plain English the Court of Appeal regularly sends TPO’s ‘Determinations’ back because they are wrong in Law …Q.E.D(Quod Erat Demonstrandum~the Theory is proven or demonstrated)…

Finally, Mr. Arter states dismissively  “For me, that really was a non sequitur by the judge. It’s not worth worrying about.”, as in many things Mr. Arter is , once more wrong about this as well, because he really ought to worry about it…

Non sequitur in classical Latin(of which I was a much abused student) means that logic does not necessarily follow a particular statement and is sometimes used for comedic purposes to, in Mr. Arter’s opinion illustrate the absurdity of it all.

Well he has just illustrated the humorous absurdity of his ‘logic’ particularly when he states it is not worth worrying about it, when he clearly and rightly does because by such matters hangs his recently extended appointment(2.5 years why not 3 years?-Retirement?).

How can it be that the Bugler thought he was the only observant Irish Leprechaun reading such double dutch comments, given in one notorious case a Pension Complaint was sent back down from the  Court of Appeal no less than 3 times to the Deputy Ombudsman Jane Irvine (a civil servant) to get it right in Law.

Whilst Mr. Arter might optimistically conclude that it is all not worth worrying about the pragmatics are somewhat different.

His opponents at Law are getting smarter; they get more accomplished by the day after their experience of dealing with TPO; as they explore and exploit his organisation’s self evident weaknesses at Law.

The newly appointed LFRS CFO Justin Johnson was on a visit to a particular station when he was asked the dreaded question, what his intentions were regarding this industrial dispute over  pensionable pay involving the ‘uniforms’ and cWarren?

Surely Justin knows  that cWarren will always stand behind him, not alongside in support, which is his favoured modus operandii, simply  because being the weak narcissistic wretch he is he enjoys the et tu Brute moment, the ‘stabbing in back’, particularly of those he has complete, poorly hidden, sneering disregard for.

This is what cWarren does best and as the lack lustre Deputy at the LFRS for some considerable ineffectual time past Justin now ‘carries the can’…and before anyone reaches for their tissues…he knows it goes with the rank and pay grade.

Shortly, if not already, he will also have demonstrated to him the price of taking the handshake from the Brotherhood, the first of many in the years which lie ahead because he is not his own master much as he, and others, would like to think he is…

A rather lugubrious, ill at ease, and rather depressed looking Justin stated in response to the awful question … “we are looking at this situation and where we will find the money from”…please note the plural… rather than I am looking at it.

When he took the rank it is was ‘I/me’ but when the proverbial hits the fan it is ‘we/us’…such fascinating leadership.

This ‘finding the money’  is going to be an accountancy exercise, par excellence, going back, as it does,  9 years, times 150+, and an early question will surely be if the ISP paid full tax on their DCM pay instead of the proportionate Tax relieved pensionable pay they ought to have been getting, the LFRS are going to have to proportionally pay them all that Tax back, at commercial interest rates, due to ‘loss of amenity’ of their accruing pension investment growth rate which ought to have been accruing within the LFRS Pension Fund during all these 9 lost years; and that is just for the hor d’oeuvres …

Justin’s nightmares are only beginning and with the reality sinking in that a repayment figure in the £2-3mil region which will most certainly lead to the removal of fire engines from the front line service of the LFRS, which is already balanced on the knife edge of bankruptcy, with such a paltry cash in hand sum left to daily run their 24/7 service.

On wonders if the LCFA will suddenly waken up and ask how have ‘we’ got ourselves in such a horrible mess and, glaring collectively around, who put us there and who is responsible?

Perhaps they might think that the Government ~ Her Majesty Treasury might bail them out?

The Bugler had better break the bad news to them because on previous form HMT is simply going to say, well you made the mistake, you find the money, and then promptly walk away…

Well done that clerk Warren, the only one of two men who walk around SHQ with their very own self immolating financial suicide vests hanging round their worthy necks, because the other,

the Finance Officer Keith Mattinson who holds equal responsibility for this calamity agreed  to cWarren’s money saving ‘scheme’, effectively raiding the Pension Fund in the first greedy place.

Now a really happy ‘Godfather Frankie’ will try to present/explain the truth of all this to the 24 other Elected Members of the LCFA and then the big challenge to the Community Charge payers of Lancashire when their local FRStation is forced to close or reduce further?

Try the broken English stunt  Frankie baby, it always has the women on the LCFA plucking their heartstrings for you, it works, nearly, every time…

Finally, as a continuing member of the FBU for half a century the Bugler notes with dismay the disgraceful and  complete lack of leadership and intervention exhibited to the Lancashire FBU membership by the Lancashire Chair; the Honorary Secretary; and Committee Members who are clearly carrying on the Harman tradition of complete and abject obeisance to cWarren and the LCFA to say little of the failure of the  ‘presence’ of any Regional officials from the Executive Council during their battle.

All the more appalling given that the FBU nationally  is hemorrhaging Membership, perhaps this is an example of  the reason why?

Should the Lancashire Membership not simply stop paying their wasted dues which are being used to betray and neuter  their local representation, or better still, take back their Lancashire Branch, throw out these disloyal FBU Reps if only to further demonstrate to the LCFA that ‘Unity is Strength’ and that there is much more resistance to come…

Normal solicitors of integrity (if there is such a species) are ‘regulated’ by two organisations. The first, being the ‘Law Society’ which is a ‘solicitors club’ run by solicitors to protect the interests of solicitors and thus for public accountability or ‘regulation’ not worth even a glance at their website.

The second, the Solicitors Regulation Authority(a supposed ‘independent’ Statutory authority) was formed as an arm of the Law Society in 2007(perhaps the Bugler should stop at this point?)  and was instructed at an early point by the then government  to put blue water between itself and the Law Society but even today 12 years on it has so many members of the Board with vested interests mostly in solicitors businesses and legal academia, but few of tough regulatory background, that it is difficult as Morecambe and Wise used to say to see the joints in the hairlines.

Plenty of grey lines but not many black and white.

Frankly worthless, should a little old pensioner have been short changed by a solicitor, as they regularly are, and/or seeks redress or the disciplining of a criminal solicitor…a depressing vision of a depressing organisation.

For all the difference it will make Dear Reader the Board is chaired by Ms. Anna Bradley

but its one saving grace we hope given his background of integrity may well be Mr. Paul Philip the Chief Executive.

It should be a matter on interest to this Board and the Public at large that as a former member of the Parole Board the Bugler was perpetually amazed at the number of solicitors in jail mostly for stealing clients’ monies but then when the amazement wore off the question arose why are not more of them in jail?

The route to becoming a solicitor is frighteningly simple and not at all encouraging.

Take a three year ‘arts’ degree at some non-descript ‘soft university’ of which the last 8 or 9 months can be taken at a law college, usually to learn reflexive denial, a polite euphemism for learning to lie and there you go…certified(and most of them ought to be)… to practice on the innocent.

So if you have more money than sense employ a solicitor.

In the last few weeks in this maelstrom of anger and dismay at cWarren and cMattinson’s latest joint financial fiasco(they will have to go) a new ‘boy’ quietly appeared at SHQ who signs himself off as “Solicitor for the LFRS”, but time and espionage will tell all.

Mr. Dominic James Howell a resident of East Lancashire does not claim a post nominal LLB which means he is the lowest form of ‘solicitor’, as one might expect if employed by the LFRS.

Undoubtedly white , male, and a Freemason all preconditional to this ‘appointment’ but we must give him the benefit of the doubt, must we not?

He might, in stretching incredulity, be an honourable person of integrity might he not?

Ever eager to welcome this new replacement for a much relieved Harold(Solicitor), last seen in Manchester fiddling his parking tickets again, and in the perpetual absence of Boy Wonder Nolan(Part time clerk/solicitor to the LCFA)  who has distanced himself for survivability reasons from cWarren.

Leaving cWarren badly legally exposed because outside ‘Warren’s Law he knows absolutely nothing about the law most of which he disregards anyway, most criminal do.

One of the Pension awkward squad a fellow resident in East Lancashire took it upon himself to send Mr.Howell a cheery greeting particularly as he has already taken an interest in disabled FSV~FG’s Pension Complaint at TPO deputising, one assumes, for a rather busy money collecting cWarren, but deliberately without cWarren’s brief on the Bugler et al, prancing in like a  Spring lamb to the slaughter as cWarren likes to have his career ‘shields’ behave, in complete ignorance, until the moment arrive when he sacrifices them.

Given the issue of the DCM pension pay and the necessary legal documents that this will generate Mr. Howell has probably about 6 months before cWarren’s knife will be wielded

Now whilst all this is happening these greedy solicitor fools, usually driven by the greed/need for a local authority pension do not realise that they are walking straight into a swamp of corruption and ‘back stabbing’ intrigue at the LFRS SHQ usually orchestrated by their ‘boss’ cWarren.

This is not a ‘normal’ place where normal people work, though decent there are, though it is in the unusual manner in which they have obtained their ‘appointment’ that they may just have an inkling that all might not be well, and they might just need a flack jacket and having a care about where they tread.  

An ‘appointment’ which is usually obtained by slithering in under the back door at SHQ without the tiresome adherence to Equality Opportunity or some such trivia, but it always comes with a price, and so to the opening dialogue with Mr.Howell solicitor registered to practice on the Rolls with the Law Society since 2003 and thus ‘An Officer of the Courts’ with all the legal integrity requirements this duty demands from him.

—–Original Message—–
From:
Sent: 02 July 2019 17:32
To: SHQ – Howell, Dominic
Subject: LFRS Solicitor

Dear Mr. Howell,
Would you be kind enough to forward to me your SRA ID for my records, please.
F M G MIFire E
Assistant Divisional Officer (Retired)

—–Original Message—–

From: “SHQ – Howell, Dominic” <DominicHowell@lancsfirerescue.org.uk>
Date: 3 July 2019 at 07:59:13 BST
To:
Subject: RE: LFRS Solicitor

Dear Mr G,
I am unsure how you got my contact details, what this request relates to or what records you are referring to? Please could you explain the nature of your request?

Many thanks
Dominic  Howell

Dear Mr. Howell,
I apologise for the delay in responding to your E mail. Now that you are dealing with my Pension complaint at the LFRS on behalf of Mr. Warren and you sign yourself off as Solicitor for the LFRS I thought I would look you up to see the cut of your jib, so to speak.
Unfortunately I could not find you on the SRA which means one of two things
1. You are not on it or,
2. My skills on the technical front are sadly lacking (which is probably the case)
Should it be that No.1 applies I feel sure that you aware of the repercussions that may follow and if No.2 applies I feel sure you will help me out by furnishing me with your SRA,ID.
Of course I can always take this up with the SRA to assist me in my search if push comes to shove.

 Yours, FMG M.I.Fire E.
Assistant Divisional Officer (retired)   

—–Original Message—–

From: “SHQ – Howell, Dominic” <DominicHowell@lancsfirerescue.org.uk>
Date: 10 July 2019 at 07:21:39 BST
To:
Subject: RE: LFRS Solicitor

Dear Mr G,
I find the tone of your email unpleasant and vaguely threatening .
I am under no obligation to respond to your demand for personal information but if you search my name on the find a solicitor section of the Law Society website, you will find all the publicly available detail about me. Please do not contact me further in this regard.
Dominic Howell

Disabled FSV~FG’s enquiry revealed that the Solicitors Regulation Authority(SRA) has indeed Mr. Howell’s ID Number listed but their records only go back to 2008 and a further inquiry was lodged to establish Mr.Howell’s disciplinary record back to 2003 and has produced the following official search result.

Mr Dominic James Howell (SRA number 316518) was admitted to the roll of solicitors of England and Wales on 1 July 2003 and holds a current practising certificate free from conditions.

There are no Findings and Orders that have been made by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) against Mr Dominic James Howell. If a matter is due to be heard before the SDT, details may be found on our solicitor check. We are unable to discuss the matter with you.

I have checked our records and there are no findings under section 43 of the Solicitors Act 1974 against Mr Dominic James Howell.

But one wonders, for the moment, where Mr. Howell has been in the intervening years from 2003 until 2019, but further time and sleuthing will as usual reveal all, and crystal ball gazing shows, it will not be good….

Now it may well be that Mr.Howell will have the integrities required to be an ‘Officer of the Court’ and if that is so then he will not in the slightest hesitate in continuing to demonstrate those fine ethical virtues by answering the following 11 Questions concerning his ‘appointment’ to the LFRS which the unfortunate forebears in the post he now holds, failed to do…

Q1. When and in what public media publications was this vacant appointment for the post of ‘Solicitor’ to the LFRS advertised in compliance with the LFRS own stated policies of Equal Opportunities and in compliance with the general principles and laws of Equal Opportunity as directed by the Equality Commission which guarantee by law open competition and fair play all of which is reflected in the Equality Act 2010?

Q2. Please indicate the media source from which you obtained this initial information and the date you applied for the vacancy ?

Q3. Which sub-Committee in 2018/19, or Quorum, of the CFA was appointed to oversee and manage the appointment of this vacant post of Solicitor to the LFRS and who were its constituent Elected Members of the LCFA?

Q4. How many applications were received for this vacant post ?

Q5. Who selected a short list for interview and did this panel have Elected members present with LFRS ‘officers’ advising them whilst this task was accomplished? If so, name all of them ?

Q6. What were the written terms of reference issued to this panel for selecting individual applicants for the short list and in particular the examination of legal qualification credentials?

Q7. How many candidates were selected for the short list based, on what written criteria, including legal qualifications compliance, their ethnicity, and gender?

Q8. What was the date of the shortlist interviews ?; How many candidates attended ?; and who was the actual interviewing panel of Elected Members attending on the day ?

Q9. When and where was the name of the successful candidate publicly announced and published by the LFRS Press Office and in what periodicals and local media?

Q10. Have the panel’s individual assessment notes all been retained(as required by law) and will they, after suitable redaction, be made available under the FOI Act requests to unsuccessful candidates ?

Q11. During a period of ‘Non-recruitment’ policy at the LFRS please explain how you were able to obtain this appointment?

It is anticipated that Mr. Howell, as the successful candidate, will have no difficulty in obtaining this information and if he does not then he should anticipate receipt of a Freedom of Information Act 2000 request because this is a publicly funded appointment and the appointment with its details is , or ought to be, a matter of Public Record.

It is also a supervised and monitored public post by the Equality Commission.

Now it just remains to say welcome to the Funny Farm and your brief sojourn…