First topic message reminder :

PLEASE READ AND DIGEST THE FOLLOWING - particularly para.4.2
TAKEN FROM: Dispute Resolution Procedure for NHS Continuing Healthcare & NHS Funded Nursing Care.

4. Funding during Disputes
4.1 Service Users should not be involved or concerned by any dispute between the Partner Organisations and should not be involved in the application of this Policy. Pending resolution of a Dispute, the Partner Organisations shall at all times at in the best interest of the Service User and, in the spirit of partnership and co-operation, will ensure that the Service User is being cared for in an appropriate environment and that their assessed needs are being met at all times.

4.2 Pending resolution of a Dispute, there should be no delay to the provision of appropriate care for the individual Service User. At no point during the process may either the PCT or the Local Authority unilaterally withdraw from an existing funding agreement.

4.3 Where a Dispute arises, the Partner Organisation funding the arrangements in place at the time that the Service User is assessed by the MDT will continue with the funding on an interim basis (and without prejudice to their position) until the Final Resolution Date.
4.4 If no funding arrangements are in place at the time that the Service User is assessed by the MDT, the Partner Organisations will agree in writing responsibility for interim funding of the care required without prejudice to their position until the dispute is resolved.
4.5 Unless otherwise agreed, costs incurred by either Partner Organisations (“Paying Partner”) pursuant to interim funding arrangements made in accordance with 4.3 or 4.4 will be reimbursed by the other Partner Organisation no later than 28 days from the Final Resolution Date where that dispute is resolved in favour of the Paying Partner.

E-mailed Steve

Steve,
At this present point in time, why on earth would anyone want to join this forum let alone spread the word about it.?
You are letting the other forum members down by doing nothing about FinnMickey’s despicable posts.

S/V

Let's just stick to the main issue of getting the interlopers and destructive elements off the board asap.

Not something I freely subscribe to but "Least said soonest mended" would seem a good maxim right now.

Has he gone?
Was he pushed?


And now, back to business.

maryjo wrote:Has he gone?
Was he pushed?


And now, back to business.

Well, I spoke too soon. VM has disappeared, also.

Steve: who is responsible for this? Did he jump or was he pushed? If he was banned by you this is an outrage.

I hope that certainly isn't the case.

Apparently Patrick and VM have been banned by Steve. This is outrageous. The two people who have always worked tirelessly for others here have been banned due to the Idiocy of FM. We all asked long ago for FM to be banned from making such nasty comments here, but low and behold Steve has banned Patrick and VM. Well, I for one will think very seriously about coming here again now. FM has achieved exactly what he set out to do, and that was to break up this forum. Absolutely disgraceful. I really don't understand how Steve has let this happen. FM has been offensive for so long now to so many others yet FM has now got the ' pat on the back' !! A fair outcome, not at all.

I thought this forum was about principles and justice Steve.
This is certainly not what I am seeing now.

It is despicable that VM and Patrick should be banned for speaking up for the rest of the forum in trying to get something done about the FM insulting members.

You are at fault for not acting as a proper moderator and issuing warnings to FM in the first place.

I am really pissed off.

As I advised VM AND 'FinnMickey': - "A reluctant decision but I have received as many complaints regarding your squabbles with 'FinnMickey' as I have received regarding his with you and in my view you and he are equally to blame. I cannot permit this totally needless disruption to continue.

I advised Patrick: "In your case I have only banned you for 30 days as I will not tolerate abusive and threatening 'phone calls from anyone". Steve.

Esquires wrote:As I advised VM AND 'FinnMickey': - "A reluctant decision but I have received as many complaints regarding your squabbles with 'FinnMickey' as I have received regarding his with you and in my view you and he are equally to blame. I cannot permit this totally needless disruption to continue.

I advised Patrick: "In your case I have only banned you for 30 days as I will not tolerate abusive and threatening 'phone calls from anyone". Steve.

Steve: the most important word in this post is 'permit'.

Think about it.

I have sent you several complaints about FM but NONE about VM or anyone else.

maryjo - I assure you that I have received as many if not more PM's demanding VM's removal from the forum. I therefore believe the action I took to be justified. Now perhaps we can return to normal! Steve.

PS: The 'solicitors from Hell' website is nothing to do with me or this forum and my 'solicitors sticky' does not mention it!

Steve, Who since this forum started has given the most valuable information and support here, Answer VM . Who has worked tirelessly for free for others on this forum Answer VM
I find it absolute madness you have banned VM because of a clash of personalities between you VM and that moron FM. You have known for a long time that FM was trying to destroy this forum, yet you let him carry on and on with him bombardment of abuse. He only came here to insult and cause mayhem. He has won now hasn't he, because VM can certainly not be replaced either with the knowledge that has been provided and the selfless input for others. I feel sick to the stomach that you have taken the action you have regarding VM. Many people will suffer due to your actions because they will not be able to get the fantastic help and support that has been given freely by VM. Shame on you.

Hello Steve and everyone

So Steve you fell for it, you who are supposed to be so aware of everything, the man with all the contacts, all the knowledge. Finn Mickey is a plant whose agenda was to bring this site down. Consider the people he attacked all those who contribute the most, people who are successfull in acheieving what this site is supposed to be about.

The very people who are the most dangerous to the NHS/SS/LA and you are so blind you cant see it?
You may hate solicitors and especially Hugh James, but Hugh James is successfull, victories, publicity, all the very things we should have. Hugh James is also highly dangerous in the eyes of the NHS/LA/SS and in the government eyes. Wake up before it really is too late?

You have failed to control the situation and you have made contradictory statements about abusive posts; you cant allow one person to do so and then ban someone who reacts. I have repeatedly said on this forum that its reputation going down. Theres already been one person on this forum who has won CHC but didnt want it to be published on this forum because this person didnt think we were bothered enough with this case.
This person is still on this forum and I am in contact with that person.

Agreed no one should be abusive regarding telphone calls to you but Mick has had enough. You do realise that some of the comments that FM made are unlawful in a number of contexts. Reasons that could get the provider of this forum to take steps.
You have made a wrong move Steve. I urge you reconsider the Ban on VM and Patrick11 now you are clearly wrong given the circumstances of the situation that existed to have taken this course of action.

If you really want to get justice for people for CHC dont get rid of those people who are the most likely to achieve that aim. THE NHS AND SS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES MUST BE LAUGHING THEIR HEADS OFF.

Very kind regards Ian

Esquires wrote:maryjo - I assure you that I have received as many if not more PM's demanding VM's removal from the forum. I therefore believe the action I took to be justified. Now perhaps we can return to normal! Steve.

PS: The 'solicitors from Hell' website is nothing to do with me or this forum and my 'solicitors sticky' does not mention it!

Steve, it just doesnt add up?? Only a few days ago you wrote

"Stephen Squires wrote Please note that I have locked this topic due to the personal, offensive and off-topic nature of some posts and I will delete it completely if that is the wish of those who have posted on it! I note that so far NOBODY has cared to send me a PM voicing their concerns!
Steve".

You said NOBODY had cared to send you an email voicing their concerns about FM, yet now you have said you received more PM's demanding VM's removal than you did FM's. So it wasnt true then that you didnt recieve NO PM's voicing their concerns about FM when you must have because you have stated it above??? I think you received them but chose to ignore them.

Pussycat wrote:

Esquires wrote:maryjo - I assure you that I have received as many if not more PM's demanding VM's removal from the forum. I therefore believe the action I took to be justified. Now perhaps we can return to normal! Steve.

PS: The 'solicitors from Hell' website is nothing to do with me or this forum and my 'solicitors sticky' does not mention it!

Steve, it just doesnt add up?? Only a few days ago you wrote

"Stephen Squires wrote Please note that I have locked this topic due to the personal, offensive and off-topic nature of some posts and I will delete it completely if that is the wish of those who have posted on it! I note that so far NOBODY has cared to send me a PM voicing their concerns!
Steve".

You said NOBODY had cared to send you an email voicing their concerns about FM, yet now you have said you received more PM's demanding VM's removal than you did FM's. So it wasnt true then that you didnt recieve NO PM's voicing their concerns about FM when you must have because you have stated it above??? I think you received them but chose to ignore them.

To members interested, the post from Esquires came about after my 1st phone call to him he only swung into action after today's phone call from me, yes Regretfully i let off steam. But at least the Troll has gone, Sadly the innocent party Victoria Meldrew has suffered as a consequence

Mick

Steve your actions are not just.

Please!!! I urge you to take note of the above posts.
For goodness sake and for the sake of the forum,
swallow your pride and reinstate VM and Patrick.

VM had little choice but to defend herself since you
continued to ignore abusive posts from Finnmickey.

Thinking about it, I don't think FM did destroy this forum, You have Steve.
You have by falling for the destructive abuse he put here,then banning the people who have injected more constructive advice here than he ever did. He set the trap and you have walked straight into it. I thought you would have seen that coming but you didn't.Hoodwinked Yep, respected now Nope.

Hello everyone

Steve there is no reason to ban VM BECAUSE THE CAUSE OF THIS HAS GONE.

If you can answer this one question Steve are you really prepared to lose everything that VM gave to this site because of what in any court of law would be classed as a justified response to personal attacks..

Personal attacks that are in contradiction to the rules of the providers of this forum and are a contravention under Article 10 2. of the European Human Rights Bill.

FM refers to Mick in terms of identity which constitutes race hate. FM also made several references on sexuality that are contrary to Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. Comments that also come under British law.

Perhaps Steve you should ask your solicitor about all that.

VM hasnt made any adverse and abusive attacks on anyone. VM has been critical about certain things but thats the purpose of a open forum. If thats not the case then we are all wasting our time here.

Again I urge that you re-consider your decision immediately. Your actions given all circumstances of the situation are contrary to the rules of the provider of this site. By allowing FM to continue as you did you broke your own agreement with the forum sites provider. In law VM was justified to respond.

If VM is re-instated you know there will be no more problems because the problem has gone?

Ask yourself another question look at the person you are banning, not an extremist, a 98-year-old person who has dedicated everything to your cause. IS this how you reward dedication.?

Change your mind now Steve so I can feel respect again for you and before this matter goes further.

Very kind regards Ian

Re. Post No. 65 above:
"Steve, it just doesn't add up?? Only a few days ago you wrote "Please note that I have locked this topic due to the personal, offensive and off-topic nature of some posts and I will delete it completely if that is the wish of those who have posted on it! I note that so far NOBODY has cared to send me a PM voicing their concerns!
Steve"

That was posted under the topic 'Theme for FinnMickey' on January 7th! It's now the 24th. Hardly 'just a few days ago'. Obviously I have received many PM's since then! Steve.

But many people said they had emailed you and you didn't reply???? so something somewhere doesn't add up ???? I think it may be selective email collection .....or pressing the ignore button .... You have made an error banning Mick and VM. Everyone knows they have been very helpful on this forum, and because FM made many rude remarks to them, they ( VM and Mick) have now been eradicated! That really doesn't make sense at all to me, not one bit.

This is outrageous - like a headteacher apportioning equal blame to a bully and his victims. Not only is it totally unfair, the action also has the effect of gagging people who have put so much effort into researching and analysing relevant documentation, not for their own benefit, but to assist those fighting PCTs etc. Please put it right.

maryjo wrote:Pussycat: yep, emails stick in my outbox for days before Steve picks them up - there's one there now (although I posted it on the Forum). ....
maryjo

OOPS - my message to Steve, also posted here, has been deleted. Seems, Steve, you are spending a lot of time in deleting things and people.

maryjo - if emails are stuck in your outbox then they won't be sent or received! If you press 'send' then check that they appear under 'sent items'! If not then highlight the item in outbox and press the 'send/receive' button and check 'sent items'.
'Computers would be very useful if they actually worked!' Steve.