PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

National Road Safety Support Ltd, Dream Team-Articles of Association
Lynnzer
post Sat, 8 Dec 2007 - 12:43
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



I've sent the full company registration details of this ACPO affilaite to Fredd who's uploaded it to this link.
For those who are facing expert witness evidence from Trevor Hall, Merydydd Hughes or anyone else in this company it may be very relevant if you draw attention to the fact that there is no impartiality of witness here as there is a clear conflict of interest.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 8 Dec 2007 - 12:43
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Dr Science
post Sat, 8 Dec 2007 - 21:48
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,396
Joined: 16 Oct 2006
From: S.Yorks
Member No.: 8,288



QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Sat, 8 Dec 2007 - 12:43) *
I've sent the full company registration details of this ACPO affilaite to Fredd who's uploaded it to this link.
For those who are facing expert witness evidence from Trevor Hall, Merydydd Hughes or anyone else in this company it may be very relevant if you draw attention to the fact that there is no impartiality of witness here as there is a clear conflict of interest.


Not only is there a clear conflict of interest, there is probably an untrue declaration, with a signature.

In the Articles of association, they declare that their "...objective is ... to assist safety camera partnerships and suppliers..." and in their expert witness statements/reports there must also be
QUOTE ([url=)
Criminal Procedure Rules, rule 33[/url] aka http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20062636.htm' ]
Content of expert's report
33.3 —(1) An expert's report must—

[snip]

(i) contain a statement that the expert understands his duty to the court, and has complied and will continue to comply with that duty; and

(j) contain the same declaration of truth as a witness statement.

Expert's duty to the court
33.2 —(1) An expert must help the court to achieve the overriding objective by giving objective, unbiased opinion on matters within his expertise.

(2) This duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom he receives instructions or by whom he is paid.

(3) This duty includes an obligation to inform all parties and the court if the expert's opinion changes from that contained in a report served as evidence or given in a statement under Part 24 or Part 29.


Only one of these can be true. So which one is false?
We could expect a company employee to place his loyalty to the court above his loyalty to the company sometimes, because the company does not own him, it just buys his time for a certain number of hours a week. But these guys are directors of the company, not employees. They are part of that "body corporate" and are no more able to go against the stated interests of that body corporate than (say) my own left leg is able to go against the interests of the rest of my body.

Dr.S


--------------------

Dr.S
Telephone calls may be recorded for the purpose of detection and prevention of crime.
I am an engineer/physicist, not a lawyer. My answers are based on The Laws 'O Physics (which ya' can 'ne change, Cap'n).
The law of the land is a much more slippery and changeable thing.

"The only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden violence" - Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary General of the United Nations
NOTICE The content of this post and of any replies to it may assist in or relate to the formulation of strategy tactics etcetera in a legal action. This post and any replies to it should therefore be assumed to be legally privileged and therefore must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to outside of the PePiPoo forum on which it was originally posted additionally it must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to by any person or organisation other than a member of PePiPoo appropriately paid up and in full compliance with the PePiPoo terms of use for the forum on which it was originally posted. The PePiPoo terms of use can be found at http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=boardrules. For the avoidance of doubt, if you are reading this material in any form other than an on-line HTML resource directly and legitimately accessed via a URL commencing "http://forums.pepipoo.com" then it has been obtained by improper means and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. If the material you are reading does not include this notice then it has been obtained improperly and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. Your attention is drawn to the Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional Work issued by the Bar Standards Board particularly under heading 7, "Documents".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 15:07
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,854
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



MOA point 3 bullet 3 seem not to have been proof read viz:-
"To provide technical to Operational Policing and..."

technical WHAT ?

But all the paras covering financials seem to have been proof read quite closely despite the increased complexity of the text there.
By my reading there is a cash 'tap' in there quite plainly.
Anyone got a copy of the filed accounts ?


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blackbird
post Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 16:50
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,181
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Member No.: 200



Accounts won't be available yet, however one little bit of their funding is!
QUOTE
A further order of
• £50k to meet an annual subscription payment and obtaining any ad-hoc services from
ACPO Road Safety Support Limited; will be placed following further discussion with
Essex Police on the service required

Certainly the first time I have ever seen the Scammers directly funding the prosecution!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 17:13
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,854
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



I take it that there is a typo in those minutes and that "ACPO Road Safety Support Limited" is actually NRSS.

Whoa !

Thats is a 50k Subscription from just one council.

So is it 50K from each and every Council ? ? ? hmmm, thats a nice income stream.
and what other entities 'subscribe' ??

4.f of MoA says they can do this (subscriptions) but just what do you get for your membership I wonder....

Will be interesting to see (eventually) what 'charitable trusts' they have gotten involved with...

everywhere you look in this whole speed camera ferrago there are LOADS of entities 'dipping their beaks'.
I still reckon that 'follow the money' is a good strategy.

This post has been edited by bama: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 17:13


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blackbird
post Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 18:34
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,181
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Member No.: 200



QUOTE
I still reckon that 'follow the money' is a good strategy.
thumbsup.gif .... including the dividends that are paid at year end ......................... I believe CC's are not supposed to have 'other jobs' ............... another direction that could prove 'interesting'.

Ad hoc services? the mind boggles biggrin.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 08:55
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (Blackbird @ Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 16:50) *
Accounts won't be available yet, however one little bit of their funding is!
QUOTE
A further order of
• £50k to meet an annual subscription payment and obtaining any ad-hoc services from
ACPO Road Safety Support Limited; will be placed following further discussion with
Essex Police on the service required

Certainly the first time I have ever seen the Scammers directly funding the prosecution!

This just has to be the silver bullet, the wooden stake through the heart. Thanks for pointing this out Blackbird. It completely takes away impartiality and independance.

I smell another series of FOI requests coming on. The problem I have now is that this funding appears to be provided from Essex County Council so where on earth would any FOI's be sent. I have in mind FOI'ing every potential contributor of funds to NSRR Ltd and already have all the police and Safety Camera Partnership details but should I now be including County Councils?

This post has been edited by Lynnzer: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 11:01


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hotel Oscar 87
post Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 11:29
Post #8


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 3,737
Joined: 23 Sep 2006
From: Way, way off-shore
Member No.: 7,833



Lynn

If the discussions have been with Essex Police then it is they who would have to foot any bill unless, of course, its ultimately decided that the "relationship" will actually be with the SCP (not-so-FOI'able). A very bland "Does Essex Police have any form of business relationship with NRSS Ltd (including the payment of any retainer or subscription)?" with a secondary "What is the nature of that relationship and its annual costs?" would suffice I think.

Asides:

1. Does the apparent slip in calling NRSS, ACPO RSS Ltd, give the lie to it being a completely independant entity?
2. And, if the above proves to be true, wouldn't the CC's and ex's being able to claim to their own Pol. Auth's that the whole matter is ACPO-linked thus avoiding the ban on other jobs?
3. At the very least couldn't questions be raised with individual Police Authorities about how appropriate it is for their CC to enter into a money making enterprise with a number of his previous colleagues without it being open to public tender? Perhaps separate FOI's to forces to establish the financial limits at which the tendering process kicks in and details of the tendering process generally.
4. Its pleasing to note that even after all his time in Brunstromia that MH managed to forget some of the most favoured revenue generating sites and got done at 90mph. He must view the system as being so important that he took that 56-day ban without an apparent whimper. Doesn't really help his, or indeed ACPO's as a whole, credibility any good. Now we have to wait for Steve Green to drop a cog or maybe someone can remember something from his past?


--------------------
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a tu.rd by the clean end.” - R.J. Wiedemann, Lt. Col. USMC Ret.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hotel Oscar 87
post Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 14:03
Post #9


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 3,737
Joined: 23 Sep 2006
From: Way, way off-shore
Member No.: 7,833



Further to the uploaded Companies House data, I note that the address, in Billericay, originally given by Trevor Hall (which is struck through) just happens to be one and the same as that of the Essex Police Camera Enforcement Office - no surprises there then. Directors, of course, are being increasingly obliged to declare their home addresses and can no longer rely on hiding out at their business addresses.

I also note that the declared registered office - Mayflower House, 128a High Street, Billericay appears to be the same address as that of Basildon District Council Housing Services although this is at Mayflower House which is at number 128 rather than 128a. Numbers 128 and 128a also have separate postcodes. Either way this is all rather close to the incorporating solicitors and may well be simply an accomoodation address of some sort. In any event, the postcode declared on the CH registration is incorrect and should read CM12 9DF not 9YB.

Reading further through the MoA the number of objectives that have a national perspective in terms of co-ordination, training and guidance suggests strongly to me that RSS Ltd (I don't see the word National in there) is a direct ACPO derivative and not just an affiliate nor just the brainchild of a small clique of CC's and ex's who simply see an opportunity to have their piece of the whole SCP gravytrain - although they will certainly see a chunk of it.

It will be interesting to see which firm is appointed as auditors. I wouldn't mind betting it will be the same as ACPO's

This post has been edited by Hotel Oscar 87: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 14:06


--------------------
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a tu.rd by the clean end.” - R.J. Wiedemann, Lt. Col. USMC Ret.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 14:41
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (Hotel Oscar 87 @ Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 14:03) *
Further to the uploaded Companies House data, I note that the address, in Billericay, originally given by Trevor Hall (which is struck through) just happens to be one and the same as that of the Essex Police Camera Enforcement Office - no surprises there then. Directors, of course, are being increasingly obliged to declare their home addresses and can no longer rely on hiding out at their business addresses.

I also note that the declared registered office - Mayflower House, 128a High Street, Billericay appears to be the same address as that of Basildon District Council Housing Services although this is at Mayflower House which is at number 128 rather than 128a. Numbers 128 and 128a also have separate postcodes. Either way this is all rather close to the incorporating solicitors and may well be simply an accomoodation address of some sort. In any event, the postcode declared on the CH registration is incorrect and should read CM12 9DF not 9YB.

Reading further through the MoA the number of objectives that have a national perspective in terms of co-ordination, training and guidance suggests strongly to me that RSS Ltd (I don't see the word National in there) is a direct ACPO derivative and not just an affiliate nor just the brainchild of a small clique of CC's and ex's who simply see an opportunity to have their piece of the whole SCP gravytrain - although they will certainly see a chunk of it.

It will be interesting to see which firm is appointed as auditors. I wouldn't mind betting it will be the same as ACPO's

There's never been any doubt on NRSS Ltd being independant from ACPO. It says it's an affiliate and even ACPO make mention of it inthat respect. It is however, still a company in its own rights. If ACPO was to be struck off tomorrow as a Ltd Co. NRSS Ltd would still be an ongoing concern. So affiliatation is by no other means than one of intent rather than legal necessity.
It's interesting to see that it is using the premisies of a Camera Partnership, however it m,ay be paying rent for this. Only by doing a FOI to the relevant Speed Camera Partnership, or police force could this be ascertained and maybe it's a useful exerceise for someone but my case is a little too near to be bothered with this right now. In any case, the perception of independance and unbiased opinion from anyone at director level in the company is well flawed already by the aims of the company itself, and now the known annual subscriptions from safety camera parterships.
I've sent out a few FOI's to various County Councils and Police forces on this today and will await with interest.
The wording I put on the emails is as follows: "
Dear Sir,
Freedom of Information request

Please provide me with information on any payments given, or authorised to be given at any future date, either as one-off payments or as annual subscriptions from the police to the benefit of ACPO affiliate, National Road Safety Support Ltd.

Please provide details/copies of any agreement entered into for an annual subscription to this company, details of all individual payments made, and copies of correspondence between the company and Northumbria Police in respect of such payment/agreement whether it was sent by yourselves or received from NRSS Ltd.

Please also include any other copy correspondence between the council and the Association of Chief Police Officers in relation to road policing matters during the last twelve months."

Remember, FOI's are argued as hearsay even though I have them supposedly allowed so if anyone intends to use them they better be well prepared for an argument in court when the CPS try to have them excluded.



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hotel Oscar 87
post Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 11:44
Post #11


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 3,737
Joined: 23 Sep 2006
From: Way, way off-shore
Member No.: 7,833



Have a look at this link (top of page 4 - para. entitled ACPO RPET/RSS Ltd) - Click Here

Whilst the minute has been prepared for those who have some knowledge of the background whatever the overall subject is, it is clear that ACPO RPET and RSS Ltd are indistinguishable from each other, indeed they are both represented by the omnipresent Trevor Hall.

One wonders how many days Trevor is allowed to be absent from his job as Ops Manager for the Essex partnership on representation duties? I suspect that he would have had this day off on the basis that he was representing ACPO Roads Policing Group (as assistant to Med Hughes) when in actual fact he was also representing RSS Ltd - a commercial enterprise of which he is MD! Isn't there also some form of conflict of interest between his day job and being a member of the Dream Team?

As a slight aside its also pleasing to note that the Dream Team are hardly that well organised given that they failed to contact W. Mercia SRP about 50% of the cases referred to them! Incidentally I suspect that the case referred to that was discontinued was this one: Click Here

A case that Dr Science may have an interest in. Another Gatso on a bend.


--------------------
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a tu.rd by the clean end.” - R.J. Wiedemann, Lt. Col. USMC Ret.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 12:19
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,854
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



Interesting Link HO87 !!!

hard to see from the photo if that scamera does fall outside the 1200m radius curve The Good Dr S knows so well.

but IF it does then this:-

"In addition, a report by Trevor Hall, national safety camera co-ordinator and managing director of Road Safety Support said the camera has been installed in accordance with Home Office approval."

could be fruitfull. can we get a copy of that report I wonder...


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 13:52
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (bama @ Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 12:19) *
Interesting Link HO87 !!!

hard to see from the photo if that scamera does fall outside the 1200m radius curve The Good Dr S knows so well.

but IF it does then this:-

"In addition, a report by Trevor Hall, national safety camera co-ordinator and managing director of Road Safety Support said the camera has been installed in accordance with Home Office approval."

could be fruitfull. can we get a copy of that report I wonder...

This is all bullshit anyway. I have the manual. It makes no comment at all about any curvature being allowed. In fact the only reference to roadside positioning is given by making a statement to the effect that it must be aligned at an angle of 20 degress to the axis of the road, this being accompanied by a drawing of the device shown "Correct positioning" facing a straight section of road with the correct angle of alignment.
Further "Incorrect Positioning" pictures show the device at greater or lesser angles than the 20 degrees.
In each of these it gives an error percentage for different wrong positioning angles.
Now, this handbook is part of the type approval process. Nowhere in it is anything that shows compliance to any agreed curvature so where in hell this fable comes from CPS God only knows


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 14:13
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,854
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



the 1200 metres comes from Dr S's thread (he refers to manuf instr). IIRC he says it is the main plank of his argument....


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 15:59
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (bama @ Tue, 11 Dec 2007 - 14:13) *
the 1200 metres comes from Dr S's thread (he refers to manuf instr). IIRC he says it is the main plank of his argument....

Yeah, I know but I have the manual now and DR S was as pleased as punch when I told him that this wasn't in it. Methinks the trial will be suitably enhanced, especially if the Gatso guy gives evidence that it is in the handbook, not knowing that Dr S has a copy of it!!!!!!!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
davepoth
post Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 16:16
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,701
Joined: 3 Nov 2006
Member No.: 8,716



A quick search in google turned this up which may be of some use.

http://www.lscp.org.uk/downloads/mins_mar07.pdf


[edit by Mod - also found by picko]

Minutes from Feb 07

included..... CPS admit to having insufficient staff to deal with "not guilty pleas"

March 07

Included..... staffing issues and back office problems causing delays in processing

April 07

included..... Monetary value of media coverage for LSCP

July 07

included.....conversion rates of COFP's not high enough and limited court spaces

An interesting read.

This post has been edited by andy_foster: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 - 00:17


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 19:52
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,854
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



QUOTE (davepoth @ Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 16:16) *
A quick search in google turned this up which may be of some use.

http://www.lscp.org.uk/downloads/mins_mar07.pdf


Nice find ! I take it by member they mean 'subscribe to'...

This also interesting:-

Speed Awareness Course Update
TD reported that the current level of referrals has reached 265 per day.
This falls short of the minimum 300 per day which is required to activate the admin charge.




--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 20:22
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,191
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (bama @ Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 19:52) *
QUOTE (davepoth @ Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 16:16) *
A quick search in google turned this up which may be of some use.

http://www.lscp.org.uk/downloads/mins_mar07.pdf


Nice find ! I take it by member they mean 'subscribe to'...

This also interesting:-

Speed Awareness Course Update
TD reported that the current level of referrals has reached 265 per day.
This falls short of the minimum 300 per day which is required to activate the admin charge.


Come on then Bama......
No FOI for information on this "admin charge" sent out yet?

It's incredible, yet expected that NRSS Ltd is going at it hammer and tongs for money making schemes. This is just another nail in the coffin for them though if they wish to keep "independant and unbiased" expert witness status.
It's a bloody disgrace that this is going on. I really don't think they know the strength of feeling out here and the public should be made aware of it, sooner rather than later.

I may very well draft a letter to the legal correspondant of the Times.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
g_attrill
post Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 23:41
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,248
Joined: 12 Oct 2003
From: Hants, UK
Member No.: 412



QUOTE (Blackbird @ Sun, 9 Dec 2007 - 16:50) *
Accounts won't be available yet, however one little bit of their funding is!
QUOTE
A further order of
• £50k to meet an annual subscription payment and obtaining any ad-hoc services from
ACPO Road Safety Support Limited; will be placed following further discussion with
Essex Police on the service required

Certainly the first time I have ever seen the Scammers directly funding the prosecution!


The CPS are partners in most SCP's though? edit: not sure how much money goes back to them, if any though? Even so, funding an impartial expert is different from funding the CPS.


This post has been edited by g_attrill: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 - 23:47


--------------------
Found anything useful? Become a BB&G!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dr Science
post Thu, 13 Dec 2007 - 03:09
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,396
Joined: 16 Oct 2006
From: S.Yorks
Member No.: 8,288



QUOTE (Hotel Oscar 87 @ Mon, 10 Dec 2007 - 11:29) *
Perhaps separate FOI's to forces to establish the financial limits at which the tendering process kicks in and details of the tendering process generally.


There is a European Union Mandated limit above which government funded bodies MUST put something out to tender (unless there is only one supplier - like you want to buy a patented widget and there is only one company in the world that has the patent). If something is not put to tender, there must be a record of the reasons why not. The tender limit is (I think) about 10,000 Euro, i.e a lot lower than 50,000 Pounds.

Just one more of the fun bits of bureaucracy that a hard-working academic (if there is such a thing) gets to play with.

Dr.S


--------------------

Dr.S
Telephone calls may be recorded for the purpose of detection and prevention of crime.
I am an engineer/physicist, not a lawyer. My answers are based on The Laws 'O Physics (which ya' can 'ne change, Cap'n).
The law of the land is a much more slippery and changeable thing.

"The only way to deal with bureaucrats is with stealth and sudden violence" - Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary General of the United Nations
NOTICE The content of this post and of any replies to it may assist in or relate to the formulation of strategy tactics etcetera in a legal action. This post and any replies to it should therefore be assumed to be legally privileged and therefore must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to outside of the PePiPoo forum on which it was originally posted additionally it must not be disclosed, copied, quoted, discussed, used or referred to by any person or organisation other than a member of PePiPoo appropriately paid up and in full compliance with the PePiPoo terms of use for the forum on which it was originally posted. The PePiPoo terms of use can be found at http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=boardrules. For the avoidance of doubt, if you are reading this material in any form other than an on-line HTML resource directly and legitimately accessed via a URL commencing "http://forums.pepipoo.com" then it has been obtained by improper means and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. If the material you are reading does not include this notice then it has been obtained improperly and you are probably reading it in breach of legal privilege. Your attention is drawn to the Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional Work issued by the Bar Standards Board particularly under heading 7, "Documents".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 18th February 2018 - 02:57
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.