'verdict' reached on Ged Hall phoning a member of the public's boss...

[DRiddle]

Hi David Riddle here,

As you are hopefully aware, I have maintained a dignified silence of this issue to allow due process to take it's course. However, as predicted by various members of the public who frequent this website, I received notification today that apparently when he contacted my boss in my workplace, Councillor Ged Hall was not doing so in his capacity as an elected councillor.

I believe is an absolutely farcical verdict.

I have written to The Deputy Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council in response to her verdict (see below). This situation with HBC has now reached a level few probably thought possible.

Dear Ms Carman,

I returned home today and opened your 'verdict' regarding my complaint against Councillor Ged Hall. As you are aware from my previous e-mails, I anticipated your somewhat predictable decision that Councillor Hall 'was not acting in his capacity as a councillor' when he telephoned my boss in my workplace.

I have studied your verdict in detail and frankly, your decision makes a mockery of our council, the code of conduct councillors are obliged to follow, and is actually an insult to my intelligence.

Firstly, you state in your verdict that Councillor Hall contacted my boss "on a personal basis".

The fact of the matter is, he called my school's reception and stated that it was  (quote) "Councillor Hall on the phone and (he) wanted to speak to Mr Lee" (my head teacher).

He then discussed comments I had made in a council meeting earlier that week. Later, Mr Lee said to me "Councillor Hall has been on the phone complaining about you", even the receptionist said to me "What did Councillor Hall want?"

Later, Councillor Hall gave two interviews to local newspapers and wrote a letter referencing me to The Hartlepool Mail. Each time, he made his statements and remarks as 'Councillor Hall' and all of his comments concerned his perception of my conduct in a council meeting, on council matters. 

For you to then conclude that he wasn't acting in his capacity as a councillor is utterly ridiculous. What capacity do you suggest he was acting in? That of accountant? That of a concerned citizen looking out for my welfare? or some such other capacity?

You go on to assert that the dispute between Councillor Hall and I is private in nature. If that is the case, then surely any contact with anyone on a 'private matter' should have been directly between Councillor Hall and myself.

If it was a private matter, what was the purpose of him contacting my boss?

Additionally, please do not patronise me by quoting the case of Livingstone v The adjudication panel for England (2006). This case is in no way a direct precedent which covers all actions by an elected member of a towns council, as well you know. 

I am fully aware I have no direct right to appeal this decision with either yourself or Mr Devlin.

Frankly, I wouldn't waste my time on such an appeal as it is fairly evident to myself, and indeed the rest of the town, that you see your primary responsibility as protecting our councillors, even when they appear to ride roughshod over the very people who elected them in the first place.

Rest assured, I WILL be pursuing this matter further and I will be  immediately contacting the Local Government Ombudsman.

Finally, as for your comment that you "hope that this decision  does not create more adverse publicity on this matter", I'm afraid you forfeited that privilege when you arrived at this verdict, which is utterly ridiculous.

You would do well to remember that your an official paid to represent the residents of Hartlepool. You are paid by the people of Hartlepool's council tax. You are there to represent me and the people of our town.

You are NOT there to defend the indefensible.

Yours sincerely


David Riddle

Roll on 2015...

[The Great Dictator]

Well said Dave, Hall is a tw*t and can be easily disposed of at the next election.

[steveL]

Not a great surprise from a degenerate and dysfunctional local authority with too many officers with one eye focussed on their career paths and not wishing to upset the governing party.

A man who introduces himself as 'Councillor' on the telephone can't feasibly then argue that he was not acting in his official capacity. Nor is it feasible to argue the same when the subject matter of the telephone call is a council meeting held the day before - had their been no meeting then there would have been no phone call.

It took a while for them to find enough wiggle room to believe that they have found enough space to get out of this one but it's too late. The public have already made their own judgement. Ged Man Walking.

The real loser is HBC who have proven, once again, that they are incapable of regulating themselves and have now taken one more step into that place headed Rotten Boroughs.

[Inspector Knacker]

A man who introduces himself as 'Councillor' on the telephone can't feasibly then argue that he was not acting in his official capacity.

It's like a policeman ordering a pizza ..... if he phones up, he'd probably order it as Mr Smith, whereas if he was phoning the pizza shop about a serious incdent, he'd introduce himself as Inspector Smith, .....the use of the title surely  defines the nature of the contact.....one is a purely personal  call, whilst one is on official business?

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

HBC - rotten to the core.

Good luck pursuing the matter further.

[allinthistogether!!]

What perseus said.

I don't know you Mr Riddle but i have followed this issue with interest. The entire situation is a disgrace and this Hall bloke strikes me as a bit of a tell tale tit. Anyway, the very mention of the local government ombudsman should have him worried....there is a lot to explain 

Keep up the pressure, and good luck. Keep us informed.

[rabbit]

I wonder if Ms Carman has considered that the phone call, was in fact a hoax perpetrated by some Australian D.J.?

[Brown sword]

I have always thought of Hall as an intelligent man who is by and large a decent Councillor. He has let himself down badly here, and I would guess that he has turned a lot of his own supporters against him, unlike Brash who has probably gone up in people's estimations.

[mk1]

The Twitter posts  from the SCAB's and Hall show they are completely consumed by a hatred of Brash and it has made then into demented stalkers.
Angie and her male co-conspirator are looting the public purse but the SCAB's and Hall think it more important to defame Brash...........madness!
Ged was a sneak and complete teachers ar*se-lick at school, not much has changed.

[testing times]

Is anyone really surprised here? The complaints procedure was hijacked by labour years ago and Carmen's role has long since changed from being an adjudicator to a defence lawyer for wayward labour councillors.

In short, you are not allowed to ask questions and you are not allowed to complain. That a reasonable summary of the state of play.

[Brown sword]

Sad to say that Testing Times is probably right. Having said that Hall has clearly tried to 'pull rank' and has abused his position that he has been elected to by the good residents of Burn Valley by trying to cause grief for a professional man. Good luck with your appeal Mr Riddle, I can't see many backing Hall on this issue.

[The Great Dictator]

Once you become embroiled in the Labour party at any level there's no escape from deception.

[DRiddle]

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/no-action-taken-against-hartlepool-councillor-who-phoned-a-school-to-complain-about-a-teacher-s-questions-1-5795509

An absolute disgrace...

[Private Fraser]

Do these people honestly think we are thick enough to believe this sh*te?

[marky]

Hard to see how anyone could argue that Hall wasn't acting as a councillor when the conversation that followed was all about a question to him as a councillor asked at a council meeting. It's harder still to see how anyone judging the matter could see it to be so.
That said, does it really matter? Whatever capacity Hall was acting under, he has shown himself to be a vindictive man who belongs to a wider band of spiteful and thoroughly nasty labour councillors.

Whatever the official outcome, your average Hartlepudlian will have already concluded that he was well out of order in phoning the Headmaster and that he is nothing more than a nasty little man.