Friday, January 25, 2013

they just cant help themselves


2013 PROGRESS WITH TELECOM

John,
You have advised in your latest response that
Telecom received two verbal complaints from customers which you were given the opportunity (which was taken) to respond to. The details of the verbal customer complaints (and your responses) were summarized in writing by Telecom during the process.
so based on that statement, the original notes that were summarized , which would have mentioned myself by name...should have been provided as part of the frequent requests under the provisions of the privacy act..They were not..May these now be promptly provided.
There will be an expectation that the reason for the non delivery of these documents at the first request be explained in full.
For clarity I will reiterate.
My frequent requests were specific and required information in all and any format to be provided
Including but not excluding any other form of communication.

“Including any and all recipients/participants of any emails, memos, note voice call one on one meeting that are pursuant to the above concerns”
“All information gathered on myself by your department in relation to all details presented to me at the initial meeting that occurred with Shaun Hoult my team leader on said Sunday night in late 2009

The exact and complete detail in how when, why and in what context , has not been supplied but rather redacted versions; which could by omissions not give a complete and accurate picture, and may thus influence external judgement s.
so to avoid further confusion for each instance can the following be provided
audio copy from Telecoms system of the complaint in full
time stamped
extension number it was received on
person whom received the call so its veracity can be established
the complete and original copy of notes taken, in whatever format, including hand written, memo screen but not excluding any other form of communication.
correspondence between that person and management in whatever format
correspondence of management pertaining to the specific complaints in whatever format
correspondence in regard to what actions were taken by whom within management
indication by time and date stamp that it was addressed to/with myself within 48 hours of the “incidents” occurring as is required
What action was taken by senior management with the individual customers to resolve their complaints, and the context my name was mentioned in whatever format or communication medium?
Any other relevant information in the paper trail, or procedural process from reception of the compliant to its satisfactory conclusion with the customer.
Advice that the customer was satisfied with the resolution.
The absence of all this normal and required process and the associated paper work with details continue to place their existence in doubt. Indeed it is the core of the concerns
Going forward it will be required to be presented; it will be a detail within the intended petition.
Of particular interest is the audio of the calls from the intellectually handicapped person, as the intention is to have the content of my initial call with her and her compliant call compared...both will be available via Telecoms recording system, the language and terminology advised as used in the complaint call, is clearly not that of the person with whom I originally interacted.
No doubt they would have been transcribed in full and filed...and the subject within that and other formats; of numerous discussions between, Shaun Hoult, Michelle Young, Bridget Dalzell, Ian Galloway Hannah Sullivan. Each would have listened to same as part of their assessment of actions going forward, thus associated paperwork and process will be easily obtained from the numerous inter related actions of all.

Further you advise that you were given the opportunity (which was taken) to respond to
Part of that response was repeated requests from myself; as referred to above it wasn't attend to and they failed to provide it
It was disappointing; if not offensive, to become aware that not all of my responses within these meetings were included in the meeting notes, which were sworn off as true and correct...my witnesses in attendance, can attest to this.
My only option at the time was to refuse to sign.

I therefore request the name of the person that has given that assurance so I can refer the appropriate person investigating and/or the petition to them.

Your choice of the word representations is ironic given the reality.

ANOTHER REQUEST
John,
In reference to the previous requests
To be quite clear I require for my intended petition going forward
Individual audio tapes or audio files and associated accurately transcribed hard copy, sworn as a true and correct record, of both of the original conversations that initiated the first contact with telecom by each of the customers concerned
Individual audio tapes or audio files and associated accurately transcribed hard copy, sworn as a true and correct record, of both original complaints by each of these same customers concerned; that lead to my disciplinary/performance review action.

By cob Friday as these will be required for subsequent meetings scheduled post Friday.

4 tapes and associated 4 transcriptions, sworn as true and correct in total by my estimation

I expect that Richard Lowe would have sighted, reviewed and commented on each of the same as part of his investigation, (as indeed all of management would have).

My expectation is that these views from Richard Lowe will be available at the conclusion of the latest Privacy request for information with the commencement date of August 20th 2009 5pm previously advised

Apologies for being pedantic but I’m over the obfuscation which signals to me perhaps these documents where never available these are simple steps which should have been done as a matter of course at the onset

In spite of repeated requests I never got them you have to ask yourself WHY???

That being said they should now be able to be made immediately available to you with by close of business today (ie find the file scan to pdf email to you)

If they can’t then your client has got a lot of explaining to do and has perhaps been acting dishonestly from the outset, unfortunately the unintended consequences of their actions coupled with the petition involving the ceo and the board  will/may  perhaps impact unfairly on yourself ,

STILL  AWAITING A RESPONSE FRIDAY  WHAT ON EARTH COULD BE THE PROBLEM  I WONDER

 NEXT MONTH A PETITION TO PARLIAMENT  ADDRESSED TO CEO AND BOARD
THIS MEANS THAT IN THE NEXT SITTING OF PARLIAMENT QUESTIONS WILL BE ASKED ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE

THAT RIGHT 100%RIGHT 100% OF TIME ARE WE HAVING DIFFICULTY MAINTAINING THE STANDARD  I FEEL YOUR PAIN
 


Be very aware  some if not all of the names below are the subject of a still open complaint for fraud with the Hamilton police

Bridgette Dalzell :current head of outsourced customer care at telecom New Zealand whom is Michelle Young's direct report at time of incident



Michelle Young :call centre manager Hamilton call centre, whom is Shaun Hoults direct report at time of incidents



Shaun Hoult: team manager weekend team Sat-Tues Hamilton



Iain Galloway HR representative for in Hamilton



Hannah Sullivan HR representative head office
 

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

letter to editor published waikato times 08/01/2013


Barry Ashby letter 050113 a time for ethics echoes a heartfelt plea which until recently fell on deaf ears.

Profound personal experience has shown that whenever people in management or, high office or rank profess to support codes of ethics or conduct, their word is of little substance.
Lies proliferate.
Truth fails initially to compete.
Laws are broken.
Morality ignored.
For they succumb to the effects of power, ego and “position” blinded by their perceived but false grandiosity.
Failing in every case to recognise that absolute power doesn’t build character it exposes it.

Look no further than the behaviour of a number of those in parliament (or public office, financial sector or corporate), and the stance each took, typically first the truth was ridiculed with disingenuous replies, then violently opposed until once displayed in the proper forum; it is accepted as being self evident.

So Barry I applaud your wishful thinking, and the desire for your voice to be heard, it is the stuff of revolution,


now who the hell am i actually talking about 


Thursday, January 3, 2013

Good morning

Good morning Mr Evans-McLeod

Thank you for your email. It has been forwarded on to Detective Sergeant Andrew Bubear of the Hamilton CIB.

Regards - Linda 

bugger i dont know you private address i wil have to direc them to your work place if the complaint goes forward from here

no fun being micr-managed is it

Things have reached a interesting stage.with telecom 

The simplicity of the scenario is as below.

Telecom has a set of ethics and guidelines that all are held to account to, including the board.

Richard Lowe, Senior fraud investigator no less, has acknowledged that written complaints used in my disciplinary action do not exit
(Note: Having now identified the fraud and false declarations, surely his job description and ethics (both personal and Telecoms) require him to act )

Some of the five participants involved in this sham disciplinary action, Shaun Holt, Michelle Young, Bridgette Dalzell, Ian Galloway, Hannah Sullivan attested to these written complaints in meeting notes sworn off as true and correct (another act of fraud to compound the first act), then using same, they knowingly entered into a mediation conference with myself, the conclusion of the disciplinary procedure, another abuse of employment laws and process and numerous acts of parliament.

So when placing my petition before the house of representatives, requesting the documents , jointly and severally of both Telecom and the above named participants, (and now Richard Lowe),their individual replies to Parliament will be scrutinised. Richard Lowe will no doubt cross check the documentation, and identify further deliberate omissions from the meeting notes, and discrepancies between the participants. All of which will become part of the parliamentary record...and the irony of it all, all levels of management and all participants had multiple times to put it right, they had the knowledge due to my constant correspondence with all parites

and yet they falied to act.


no fun being micr-managed is it

People keep asking
What was it all about?
In essence it started because among others things Michelle and Bridgette wanted to chastise me with regarded to some misdemeanors Shaun had brought to my attention which had already been resolved.
When i challenged both of them advising them you can’t be punished twice for the same offence .they didn’t like being challenged and commenced to micro manage me out I HAD TO BE 100% RIGHT 100% OF THE TIME
In the end it became all about the truth
Why am i still fighting they tarnished my brand for honesty and integrity i am holding them to account
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.
Albert Einstein
If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.
Mark Twain
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against.
Malcolm X

Read my petition and the blog it refers to and make up your own mind
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/right-to-justice
By their own words you shall know them

to their detriment


I was required to be 100%right100%of the time, an impossible target, to achieve the participants that required it of me could not even achieve it themselves to their detriment

Richard is telecoms senior fraud adviser
John Rooney is telecoms lawyer  

By their actions you shall know them please take time to revisit telecoms code of conduct and code of ethics as part of the management team your are required to be across ALL the laws of the land







Richard,

I refer to your correspondence forwarded by John Rooney.

You have it completely wrong
I strongly suggest you that take the police approach (as I have) in you further investigation which is
A -accept nothing
B –believe no one
C - Corroborate everything

I am delighted you have reiterated, for us that the document never existed, it is better than the disingenuous answers of previous correspondence.

Your conclusion has provided further evidence for the case going forward and thus will become part of it.

This is interesting given the document trail, in which it was constantly referred to as a written complaint” this in copies of meeting notes signed of as true and correct by some if not all of the participants., fraudulently 


Perhaps apply the following basic criteria (amongst others) to the investigation,
  • It’s representation of an existing fact?
  • its materiality
  • its falsity
  • the speakers knowledge of it falsity
  • the speakers intent that it shall be acted on by the plaintiff (that’s me)
  • the plaintiffs ignorance of its falsity
  • plaintiff reliance on the truth of the representation
  • the plaintiffs right to rely on it and
  • consequent damages suffered by the plaintiff
  • they all went into mediation knowing full well it didn’t exist
That is a serious breach around many employment laws it is also a breach of good faith honesty and integrity.

Your presumption that I have relied on a particular section of the act, is a view but that does not conclude the action or the intention to have the matter addressed by the relevant courts

Given that my course of action has in part been decided on guidance from Ministers of the Crown, the Police and others whose counsel I trust...I can respect that you have an opinion, but I will not personally rely on it. Indeed some of these individuals have expressed a firm view as to the impact of employment law of the implications that which has occurred. I was instructed to bring the matter to the attention of police whom have accepted it as a compliant, by a minister of the crown. Thus validating my claims of fraud

So in plain English, the five telecom participants in the successful attempt to exit me from the company are the ones that have committed the fraud .not me. Using a nonexistent complaint (you have just reaffirmed to me its non existence) in a disciplinary process .entering into a mediation conference with the full knowledge that their body of evidence was tainted by it falsity

You as senior fraud advisor, need no further prompting from me to hold them accountable, indeed have them charged ,the breaches inherent within their acts are to numerous to table and will definitely bring Telecoms reputation into disrepute

However I suggest you move extremely quickly, as unless this is resolved, it will, with the support of a Minister of the Crown, a sitting MP will be coming to the attention of the media early in the New Year

We are well involved in the process of organising a petition to parliament requiring questions to be asked in the house around this very issue at the commencement of the next session of parliament mid February I believe

Warm regards
 Paul

Nb this process leads to a select committee I may well require your attendan