2012

HOME

Go to 20122011B  2011A  2010  2009  2008 2007 2006 2005 and 2004

JenaDesigns  for Building Plans on CAD for Planning Permission

Mrs. Monk's Would-be Diary should have been written by Mrs. Monk, since she is the "Writer" in the family.
However, since she is a writer only in the conceptual sense, I have undertaken to fill these pages on her behalf
If not by her, these pages will certainly be about her, and other important matters of the day Leslie Monk

Complain, Applaud, or Comment CONTACT Shoestringonline

Shoestringonline Channels VimeoYouTubeFlikr PhotostreamMovies Created by Monks on Vimeo twitter.com/#/monkfry

18 April 2012

The Adjudicator

 I tried and failed to get costs for the waste of my time in challenging and winning a small battle with the white van spy cams of Southend on Sea.

The story of what happened is on these pages.

I made an argument for costs and put it to the Adjudicator who shared my argument with the Council.

The Adjudicator has replied to me on this issue of costs, and it is hard to decipher the gobbledygook but I had a go. For example the Adjudicator implies that Southend Council has made representation to him or her about my claim for costs, but this has not been shared with me. In fact the Adjudicator does not rely upon these secret representations by the Council and is happy to admit to inferring what the council might have meant had they actually said it.

In this respect the Adjudicator is not acting as Adjudicator but as the advocate of Southend Council.

If that were the case, this would be a scandal that needs to be exposed.

Therefore, I have asked the Adjudicator to send me a copy of Southend Councilís representation to them on my claim for costs.

Let us see what happens. Watch this space.

Southend have not said a word to me about this. Not a squeak. Not a Miaow.

The Adjudicator has spoken for the Council and made a hypothetical argument on behalf of the Council confirming what they might have said had they said anything at all. This concerns Cat Flap Charlie who is not amused.

The adjudicator wrote.  "These are all areas that have been discussed in great detail in relation to numerous non-sentient items but not, so far as I am aware, in relation to a cat."

I am sure my readers would not need to look up that word as I did. Non-sentient means that Cat Flap Charlie is incapable of perception from his senses.

In other words Cat Flap Charlie is incapable of making a judgement upon what might be fair and reasonable.

Cat Flap Charlie may not understand gobblydegook, but he certainly does understand what is fair and reasonable, when it appears in his food bowl.

Here is the Adjudicators Decision.

I have responded to gobbledygook with gobbledygook, so beware.

Here is my response in full.

 

Cat Flap Charlie may not understand gobbledygook, but he certainly does understand what is fair and reasonable