Mr John  170811 20:00
 
Firstly I sent the second copy of the email below on the 15th of August and the first one was sent on the 4th August so correct me if I am wrong but according to my maths of which I qualified ‘O’ level on,  it was 11 days, 1 day outside your published standard of 10 days to respond which I might add turned into 13 days! If you cannot do the maths Mr John how do you expect my mother to trust you with over 1 million pounds. 
Granted that if you do not work on a Saturday then there are 4 days to be removed but my problem with you in particular Mr John is when you do respond you do not answer the questions fully and therefore to get a second letter responded to takes another 14 days so and so forth, weeks pass by and before one knows where one’s at WAR’s have been won REGIME’s have fallen etc and still MARTIN JOHN has not answered the questions. DO I MAKE MY POINT.
Realistically your published standard should also state that you will respond to all the questions asked FULLY and of that you clearly are not responding to properly within the 10 days, due to your avoidance of the issue’s raised and this method I have made aware on the website that the court in general only serves to wear people down in this manner, of which you are first class at!
 
We are happy that your deputies are asking further questions of HUGH JONES but can we trust that this might become transparent as my mother has authorised the release of all documents/accounts by written consent (click the link Letter) as we no longer want any confidentiality, I would of thought that this was obvious with what has been published on our website www.opg.me
Our lives have become an open book, thanks to your grotty little organisation, an open book for all to look into, and that's the way we want it to stay until some justice is seen to be done.  If your grotty little organisation of PREDATORY GUARDIANS has deemed my mother as incompetent and thereby forcibly administrated by you then how do you expect her to check on whether or not you are stealing off her without some other relevant family member taking a close interest into what you are doing with her money and property!
Do you seriously just believe you should be able to do as you please without some other family members checking, because if parliamentarians can thieve then so can you! What you are talking about is “trust” and that I have absolutely none of where you are concerned, the government or HUGH JONES least of all I can firmly speak I believe for the rest of the country where solicitors are concerned.  Your organisation has treated each and everyone family person  associated with the PUBLIC GUARDIAN as thieves without them having anything against their names, upstanding members of the community.
 
How you can comment on the exchange rate risk being a lessor consideration to, I am absolutely taken aback, your deputy has cost my mother €100,000 where on earth can you place that amount of money as a lessor consideration, oh my god, where are you coming from?
Clearly had your deputy listened from the date we emigrated to Spain the current problems with regard to money running out would not be here today and for at least another 2 years. I think you are failing to answer or look into this because you have no answer really, without implicating your organisation and the deputy HUGH JONES.
YOU WILL NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY WILL YOU?
 
The current expenditure is not sustainable and nor was it supposed to be, the original award was designed to last 10 to 12 years not 20 or 30 we expected it to run out but there should not be the seeking to sell my mother s home to pay your grotty little fees or HUGH JONES’s, its absurd!  She has a right to live in a house that's clear of mortgage and or rent free till her death if she wishes, which is still under threat by your deputy. Her wishes going back years to transfer her property into our
JOINT BENEFICIAL NAMES IN EQUITY are being resisted and I might add is the only grounds on which she may return to live in the UK.
 
As regards forensically checking accounts I refer again to the request linked letter above, signed by my mother for her receiver HUGH JONES to release all documentation for us to have examined by our own forensic team, not yours, “OURS.”  We have no faith in your CLOSED DOOR, SECRET operations with no TRANSPARENCY. It absolutely goes against the grain of what being BRITISH is all about, unless of course there is obviously things to hide.
We DO NOT WANT IT.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND or would you like a signed letter in PDF from my mother.
 
Yours
Mike and ANN CLARKE
 
 
 
 
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 3:48 PM
Subject: RE: 2nd email copy
 
Mr Clarke
 
As has been explained to you before, this office does not routinely acknowledge correspondence. Unless your email is returned as undeliverable, you can expect to receive a reply within our published standard of ten working days.
 
My supervision teams are working with the Deputy and they have written to Hugh Jones to confirm the position with the points you raise below. The nub of your allegations, that some £200K has gone missing from your Mother's funds, appears difficult to point, but we have sought further information on expenditure from the Deputy.
 
It is unclear from your correspondence what level of contact your Mother is able to have personally with her Deputy, particularly as you live abroad and most contact and correspondence seems to be with you. I should note that the Deputy is bound by client confidentiality and he is under no obligation to disclose financial information to her family members without her direct and clear consent.
 
I cannot instruct the Deputy to act in one way or another regarding the exchange rate issue you repeatedly raise. He is empowered to act in the best interests of the Client. Given his stated concerns with the level of expenditure and whether the expenditure already provided is your Mother's best interests, exchange rate risk is a lesser consideration. From my information the current montly expenditure runs at approximately £5,500.00 and is not sustainable. I note you have indicated to the Deputy that you are considering a return to the UK to live in the property your Mother already owns. 
 
I have explained to you before the position regarding forensic accounts analysis. You are at liberty to apply to the Court of Protection.
 
If you remain dissatisfied with my response, and in line with our complaints procedure, you may ask a Member of Parliament to refer this case to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, who may choose whether or not to accept your case and investigate further. Their contact details are: Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, Millbank Tower, London SW1P 4QP or on the phone 0345 015 4033.
 
Martin John
Public Guardian & Chief Executive

 

From: Mike Clarke [mailto:mike@rake.net]
Sent: 15 August 2011 14:56
To: John, Martin
Cc: Pellonpera, Eeva
Subject: 2nd email copy

(2 weeks ago we sent you this email on the 030811 & no reply has been received not even an acknowledgement.  I am emailing it to you again because I can see on the internet where several people have in the past sent letters to you that you months later say you did not receive.)
 
150811
 
 
Dear Martin John
 
As usual your reply is a watered down response that clearly does not answer properly the full email listed below in BLUE.
 
In particular I think you are harping on about a previous investigation which clearly there are visible other issue’s raised that are new and the previous investigation does not cover. When you listen to the meeting with Hugh Jones he clearly is obstructive on matters that must be in breach of OPG guidelines so why are you defending his actions?
 
Additional, you have not answered yet again the question of being forced to live from an exchange rate that you also failed to answer with a letter to Euro MP Brian Simpson even though you hold a clear copy of a letter fully explaining our position on the 12th January, why is this?
 
You say that deputies are expected to share information requested countlessly by my mother to which you have been fully informed about and though you acknowledge this you go on to harp about a previous investigation to say you find nothing wrong! How dare you? Clearly things are wrong?
You are not supervising the deputy, which is and has been your job! WHY?
 
Clearly to us there is £200,000 missing as in a back calculation the figures do not stack up and without the accounts how can mother prove anything, this is theft, she wants the accounts and the deputy told her to write to you, now you are just sending her around again in merry dance routine effectively “taking the piss”, its a northern expression that shows your making fun of us, when its not a laughing matter.
 
Mr HUGH JONES needs to answer questions that have been asked by my mother and if he will not do that then clearly you do and your not doing any such thing, your just shirking responsibility and passing it back to HUGH JONES, it just will not do.
 
We repeat;
We want accounts for the entire duration of receivership?
Why are you defending a deputy in clear breach of OPG guidlines?
Why will you not answer the question about being forced to live from an exchange rate?
Why in your supervisory capacity are you not SUPERVISING?
We want to bring in Forensic accountants to examine and report on the entire funds/accounts?
Please answer properly this time, stop avoiding the issue’s, PLEASE!
 
Kind regards,
Mike Clarke.
Tel:UK Landline:0044 1614085008
Tel:UK 0044 7523287267
Spain 0034 648522123
31 Cherry Tree Road,
Blackpool FY4 4NS. UK
 
 
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: Your emails dated 2 June and 8 July

Dear Mr Clarke

Deputies are generally expected to share details of their costs, with their Client, upon their request. Mrs Clarke can therefore ask to see relevant costs certificates from Hugh Jones.

Regarding your concerns that some £200k is missing from Mrs Clarke's funds, you will know that my investigations team looked into concerns you raised about the Deputy. The investigation concluded in August 2010. My office found no evidence that the Deputy had acted inappropriately or that any funds were missing.

I should also note that I have no basis to instruct forensic accountants (as per your email to Ms Pellonpera of 26 July 2011). As has been highlighted before, you are at liberty to apply to the Court of Protection for an order discharging the Deputy or another direction you believe to be in your Mother's best interests.

Yours,

Martin John

Public Guardian & Chief Executive


From: mike@rake.net [mailto:mike@rake.net]
Sent: 19 July 2011 10:56
To: John, Martin
Cc: Pellonpera, Eeva
Subject: Re: Your emails dated 2 June and 8 July

Dear Martin John 19/07/11

I find it incredible that your not taking onboard the problem.

The problem has never been, being paid in euros or pounds, the problem is being tied to a UK pound thereby forcing upon us an exchange rate.

Click below to read a copy letter back to Euro MP Brian Simpson dated incidentally to note January 12th and this letter is published on the website you

are so far behind its untrue or is that just a court tactic;

Further to the above our problems worsen with yesterdays meeting with predatory guardian Hugh Jones.

We want to know what his charges were over 10 years since the start of this process.

We also want to know a complete breakdown of spend over the ten years with interest details paid as we have done a back calculation and

find that at least ?200,000 is missing, without the information we will be making a formal complaint to the police, which Hugh Jones has refused to supply information and suggested we contact the court.

At this moment we believe your Office of Predatory Guardians are another example of current ongoing corruption in the UK which will crumble, heads will roll.

A copy of the meeting recorded yesterday with Hugh Jones lasting 1 hour is available on the website click the link below, and I suggest you listen very closely;

http://opg.me/hughjonesmeeting180711.mp3

If my mother cannot claim that she has capacity it is your predatory guardians intention to sell her property to pay his bills.

You are the head, you are the boss, your are and should be accountable and transparent and responsible.

Copies of the current situation is being made public by way of several media outlets and also being forwarded to;

Euro MP Brian Simpson

David Cameron

Kenneth Clarke

John Hemming

Sky News

and others

You will not get away with what your attempting to get away with, whilst I'm alive and further, you might be able to do all these things to other helpless individuals but

I will be constantly on your back with this, what amounts to nothing more than CORRUPTION.

regards,

Mike Clarke.

Tel:UK Landline:00441614085008

Tel:UK 00447523287267

Spain 0034 648522123

-----Original Message-----
From: John, Martin [mailto:Martin.John@publicguardian.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 05:15 AM
To: 'mike@rake.net'
Subject: Your emails dated 2 June and 8 July


Dear Mr Clarke,

Please find attached letters from Mr John.

Kind regards,

Eeva Pellonpera | Executive Assistant to the Public Guardian

*: eeva.pellonpera@publicguardian.gsi.gov.uk

I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of Justice in any way via electronic means.



This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes
This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.



This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes


This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) In case of problems, please call your organisation's IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.


This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes