*** ****** *********
Tel. ***** ******
16th November 2005
Head Benefits Department
Dear Mr Ferguson,
I apologise for the delay in responding. I don’t know where to begin. There are a large number of reasons for the delay, but I won’t list them all here. If you want an exhaustive list, let me know and I will be happy to provide you with one. I will though mention a couple of the most important reasons. Firstly, I am deeply frustrated by my having no access to important documents that I require to back up my explanation for the delay in my moving to ********. I have tried to locate these documents, but due to Renfrewshire Council’s refusal to allow me the one month’s help from the Scottish Society for Autism to get my papers in order prior to my moving to ******** (something the council repeatedly promised me from October 2003 until one week prior to the council’s forcible removal of my belongings to ********), these documents would appear to be untraceable, perhaps left behind at my flat in Paisley, to be trashed by council employees. At any rate, I won’t delay writing this letter in the hope of my, belatedly, tracking them down. I will refer to them in this letter though, and I do know that the council will have copies of these documents filed away somewhere. These documents constitute considerable correspondence between Renfrewshire Council and myself. They go all the way back to January 1999. In particular, I draw your attention to four letters sent to a Mrs Laird, at the time my housing officer and two (maybe three) letters to a Loraine Burns, a lawyer for Renfrewshire Council, who took it upon herself to address (or pretend to address) the points raised in my letters to my housing officer.
I further draw your attention to a medical condition I have which has been diagnosed as ‘autistic spectrum disorder’. Those who gave me this diagnosis suggested that I may suffer from a further condition: ‘attention deficit disorder’. They recommended to my GP that I receive further tests to see if I have that condition also, and that I be offered medication if the test proved positive. For reasons that have not been explained to me, I am still awaiting testing for this other condition. Renfrewshire Council has been aware of the problems that I face due to this/these condition(s). They know perfectly well that I require assistance from someone who fully understands my condition(s) to be present when I Renfrewshire Council officials insist on my meeting with them. My support worker from the National Autistic Society, Ruth Langford, has been absolutely invaluable to me in doing this, and I have complete trust in her to defend my rights when meetings with Renfrewshire Council are necessary. However, the council has been aware that Ruth has been too busy to represent me during many of the meetings the council has insisted upon. The council is fully aware that together we applied to the Scottish Society for Autism to support me in my dealings with Renfrewshire Council. They alone, we judged were in the position of providing me with the care I required, especially in my dealings with Renfrewshire Council.
We first approached this group in October 2003. In April the following year they offered me special accommodation at a flat in Maryhill in Glasgow, which I visited and approved. The head of Renfrewshire Council’s Social Work Department, however, refused to approve the funds necessary for my moving there. This individual did this although he knew that I had had a series of death threats going back to November 1998 from neighbours of mine, neighbours whose anti-social behaviour Renfrewshire Council had persistently refused to investigate. One of these neighbours was eventually sent to jail for sending me a death threat in January 1999. This death threat was in response to a letter I had printed in the local newspaper, the Paisley Daily Express attacking racists and homophobes in the British National Party, the Tory Party and the gutter press (specifically the political editor of the Sun). However, the day after this individual’s release from prison he graffitied around fifty further death threats on every floor of the block of flats I was living at. The ones on the front door of the building said: “Delargy you are lucky I was in jail or you would be dead by now I got out yesterday so prepare to die you black bastard. My front door had the messages: “Delargy is getting shot. Delargy is getting stabbed Delargy is getting it. Tonight.”
I have been making it as clear as I can to Renfrewshire Council officials since 1999 that all the smashing in of my windows, front door, and wanton destruction of my roof by these neighbours (at least two of whom are directly or indirectly in the actual employ of Renfrewshire Council) was a result of Renfrewshire Council officials doing the bidding of senior police officers (including a former head of Special Branch: Jim Orr) and others who were under investigation at the time by the Chief Constable of Strathclyde and the Regional Procurator Fiscal. However, when I raise these matters with Renfrewshire Council officials in letter, these points are entirely ignored, although I received letters in response to at least one such letter from one of the council’s lawyers! When I raise these issues with officials over the phone or face-to-face, these officials subsequently deny that the conversations ever took place! That is why I will now only talk to yourself or other Renfrewshire Council officials if I am permitted to bring with me someone I trust (such as a lawyer or journalist), or with the agreement of the official that I can tape our meeting.
If you agree to my taping our conversation, then I will agree to meet with you, but you must agree to discuss the points that I want to raise, points addressed in this and other letters from me to the council. Thus far, Renfrewshire Council officials approach arranged meetings with their own rigid agenda, then deliberately provoke me when I insist upon addressing the points raised by them in ways they erroneously deny are relevant. If I have a tape recording of our conversation, then investigative journalists in the broadcast and print media (and no-win-no-fee compensation lawyers) can determine whether the points I raise are or are not pertinent.
What I will insist upon discussing in any interview with you will include the following:
The council is aware that, as a direct consequence of its own criminal negligence (vis-à-vis my personal protection from thugs who had repeatedly threatened to murder me), on March 16 2003, my home was broken into by two thugs who told me that I had seven days to leave Paisley or they were going to return to kill me. They slashed my nose, smashed out my front teeth, and spent half an hour punching me in the face, kicking me in the head and testicals, and hitting me in these same sensitive areas with a metal bar. These thugs accused me of being a paedophile on the sex offenders’ register and said that they had been given this information from local police officers. I draw your attention to aforementioned letters to Mrs Laird and Ms Burns where I promised to sue Renfrewshire Council for its refusal to instigate an anti-social behaviour investigation into these neighbours who were daily calling me a pedo as I entered and left my flat. In these letters I drew the attention of Renfrewshire Council (and your lawyers) to the fact that one of these neighbours (whom I had previously told a housing officer that he had dropped a bottle on my head as I entered the building then ran into his flat at *** *** ********), not only was not made the subject of a council investigation; absolutely incredibly, the council actually took out a contract with the firm that employed this hooligan, and he went on to denounce me as a paedophile shouting this out in broad daylight while he was being paid by the council to work on my roof, which he criminally damaged leading to my being imprisoned in my flat for four days (see the six letters that I sent to the council at the turn of 2002-03)! In my letters to Mrs Laird and Ms Burns, I referred to this contract worker acting in concert with another neighbour living at ** *** ********, an individual who had previously kicked in the glass part of my front door, and whose kids regularly threw stones at my windows. Although I was not aware of it at the time of writing these six letters, I subsequently discovered that this second individual was not merely an indirectly employed contract worker for Renfrewshire Council. No, his partner in crime was (and for all I know still is) actually directly employed by Renfrewshire Council! I drew this to the attention of a series of council officials but not one of them agreed to launch an investigation into either of these thugs.
I have repeatedly protested at the inaction of Renfrewshire Council since January 1999, two months after these neighbours of mine first threatened to kill me. Between that time and February 15 2005, maybe as many as a dozen of your officials claimed that police officers were vetoing the council investigating my complaints, something I put to a series of police officers, all of whom are accusing these council workers of telling porkies. I have drawn the attention of all these officers to my intention to sue the council for not living up to your obligations, a promise I repeat once more in this letter. On the very first occasion I managed to speak to housing officials outwith Renfrewshire Council, however, their officials (at Glasgow Housing Department) told me they were absolutely outraged and disturbed at the way I had been treated. After a brief telephone conversation with someone at Renfrewshire Council, these Glasgow Housing workers got me a safe place to live that very afternoon (The theatre hotel in Glasgow). When my letters to the procurator fiscal and the chief constable were ignored after my house was broken into and I was given seven days to leave Paisley (almost two years before I got to speak to someone council workers outwith Renfrewshire Council), a demand backed up by a threat to my life, I came to the conclusion that both of these individuals (Regional Procurator Fiscal John Miller and Chief Constable Willie Rae) were themselves culpable in a cover-up of those senior police officers they were supposed to have been investigating since May 1999. Since absolutely no one was prepared to protect me from these police officers and these neighbourhood thugs that were actually employed by Renfrewshire Council, I reluctantly agreed to give these thugs what they demanded: I told the council I wanted to get out of Paisley. Despite my windows being stoned on a daily basis, and my front door being smashed in from time to time, and my having produced evidence that I had received death threats from neighbours who had subsequently been sent to jail, then immediately threatened to murder me the day after their release, and my being subject to a daily smear campaign of graffiti and verbal abuse (shouting of my neighbours that I was a paedophile), Renfrewshire Council criminally sat back and allowed all this to go on on a daily basis. If I had more time, I would list a series of specific incidents involving police officer with dozens of witnesses that could verify my version of events, but I will address them in further correspondence or in a taped interview with you or other council officials. The only reason I don’t go into details here is in order to get a letter to you ASAP.
However, I will state that I was promised by the council back in October 2003 that I could get help from the Scottish Society for Autism to get my possessions in order prior to my moving out of *** *** ********. That organisation agreed to help me with immediate effect on June 2004. Despite everything that Renfrewshire Council knew about my predicament (my provably life-threatening predicament), and despite knowing that I had every intention of suing the council for its refusal to protect me (as is its legal responsibility), the council refused to fund the package offered by the SSA. However, in March this year, one of your officials (Jan Nelson), told me by phone that the head of the Social Work Department had changed and the new head, a Rita Murray, had agreed that the SSA could be involved immediately in offering me the one month’s assistance I had been asking for in preparing my possessions for removal. Jan Nelson knew that I would only accept help from this organisation and no other. She was completely aware that I was alleging that the thugs who the council allowed to act so thuggishly towards me, and who appeared to have police protection, and who the council chose to actually employ to destroy my property, had stolen my mail and I had explained to the Regional Procurator Fiscal and the Chief Constable that the mysterious disappearance of forensic evidence (when in the ‘care’ of the Strathclyde Police Complaints and Discipline Department) proved, as far as I was concerned, that these criminals had illegally intercepted my mail was proof that those who were supposed to be investigating a series of senior acting and former police officers were themselves destroying evidence of their guilt because these thugs were in the employ of Special Branch. I told Jan Nelson, as I had told a series of other council officials that my flat housed several pieces of forensic evidence that could prove both that these senior police officers were corrupt and that Renfrewshire Council had specifically helped these thugs by housing them in close proximity to me, then refusing to investigate their anti-social behaviour in contravention of the council’s stated policy. I told Jan Nelson that the council had employed two of these thugs, and then hired contract workers to make adjustments to my home in such a way as to help the police obtain an excuse not to turn out when I report daily crimes committed by these thugs, thugs who freely admitted to be acting with police approval.
I told Jan Nelson (and all subsequent Renfrewshire Council officials that dealt with me between February 15 2005 and one week before I moved into *** ******* ******* that I would not trust any others employed by the council to lay a finger on my property, since I would take it for granted that these officials were, once again, doing the bidding of police officers who would search my belongings in order to trace the forensic evidence that I had hidden in my flat and then to destroy it. Jan Nelson never once objected to my insistence on getting help from the Scottish Society for Autism rather than a different agency selected by the council. Not, that is, until around a week before the council’s officials told me that they were going to move my belongings from *** ******** to ********* ***** with or without my permission. I never would have signed the contract placed before me by Jan Nelson had she told me that I (unemployed for thirteen years and homeless living in what was little more than a prison cell without even a toilet) would be living for months under these conditions but paying rent in a flat I could not occupy. Why would any sane person live as I was living in Glasgow if I could move into that flat in ******** and apply for full rent rebate and council tax rebate.
The fact of the matter is that I was pressured into signing that contract on the basis of false promises. I was told not to bother myself about what it actually said. I was told that Jan Nelson had special discretionary powers not to enforce my having to pay rent or council tax the week after I was given the keys. Nelson told me that she appreciated that the Scottish Society for Autism were unable to start to provide me with the one months assistance in preparing my belongings for removal until a week after I got the keys (this is what I had been told on the phone by one of their staff). Nelson knew that if I signed this contract I would still not be able to move into the flat for at least five weeks. She told me that she accepted that this delay was not my fault and I would not be forced to pay either rent or council tax because of this. She also told me that, since I had first applied for this one months’ assistance from the SSA back in October 2003, and she had personally promised me that this assistance would begin immediately in March this year, that any further delays in my receiving assistance from the SSA would fall under this “special category” of delays beyond my control. Nelson told me that I did not have to sign this contract, but if I did not, I would have to accept whatever flat next was offered to me. Nelson told me that this was a brilliant flat, and the next offer is likely to be much, much worse. Nelson told me that I was not to trouble myself about the wording of the contract she was asking me to sign. Despite my having little reason to trust her competence (for reasons I will not go into due to space considerations), Nelson did convince me that she had my best interests at heat. This was a very serious error of judgment on my part. That is the only reason why I caved in when she told me that I could trust her not to enforce this contract at its face value. But if Ruth Langford or a representative of the Scottish Society for Autism had been present (or a lawyer), I would probably have been convinced not to sign such a contract, until it was redrafted to incorporate the verbal guarantees that she was giving me. Renfrewshire Council is aware that I am vulnerable due to my medical condition, and knows perfectly well that I was taken advantage of by Nelson who did promise me that she would see to it that this contract did not mean what it appeared on paper to mean. Unfortunately, it is my word against hers. She is denying my version of events. But she is the one who insisted on meeting me without representation from Ruth or the Scottish Society for Autism. Besides, there is no way any reasonable court would agree that I would have signed a contract believing I would have to pay full rent for a flat in ******** from May (with no prospect of a rebate for rent or council tax) while I happily languished in a virtual prison cell in Glasgow until October. No sane person would do that. And, being sane, I did not do it. I simply was too naïve to believe that I could take the word of a Renfrewshire Council official who insisted on seeing me with no witnesses present, and making promises she saw no need to put on paper. That is not a mistake I will make again.
This letter omits very many important facts that are omitted for reasons of space and no other. I will fill in these blanks in a taped interview with yourself or in subsequent correspondence. The choice is yours.