10/07/2020 To: email@example.com & Jonathan Drysdale @ highwaysengland.co.uk
Subject: IR 100848 & HLC case no. 26673904, my ref X01A304
I object to your post of today’s date, to the distortion of facts at: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_alteration_of_repair_images
I also refer you to mine on the subject of the image(s) yesterday – see below.
Please review my request. I have clearly written:
‘It appears someone has altered an image of a repair’
You have written:
In your e-mailed dated 17 February 2020, which was clarified on 19 February 2020, you made a request for information regarding the alleged tampering of images by Kier for a number of third party claims.
- Where I have alleged tampering by Kier (specifically)
- That tampering relates to a number of TP claims
The statement regarding ‘tampering’, ‘alteration’ (call it what you will) is ‘founded’; based on unequivocal evidence that I have supplied. The FACT is there is an alteration; the has been cropped, the images can be viewed here, together with the exif data: https://www.englandhighways.co.uk/image-tampering/ you will note the incredulous comment:
And aside from the image data uncovered, whilst not experts on the troposphere, the cloud formations in all 3 images look very familiar! And is that spring greenery we see (in November 2016)?
Your Authority’s failure to understand and act is part of the problem. Please look to your associates for evidence of vexatious conduct. I do not make unsubstantiated accusations, I go to great lengths to corroborate my statements – unlike your Authority. The evidence is in full public view (link above) such is the confidence I have in my statements. More can be found here:
Conversely, you misrepresent; I take exception to you stating that I have alleged tampering by Kier and await your response. I have been very specific as I do not know who altered the images. What I can tell you is that someone appears to have removed the date and I suspect this is to hide from another that the reinstatement image is from a different repair. It could be the case that the image was altered to have HE pay for 3 sperate incidents, rather than one.
You rubber-stamp invoices for payment to the detriment of the public purse, abuse should not be unexpected – we have demonstrated it countless times. It could be that the images were presented to 3 different Third Parties, all paying for the same repair; traffic management, materials etc. Just today, a matter has been repriced for that very reason … Kier again … and your Authority paid them in full, has had to reduce the claim … and will not seek repayment from the contractor?
I find it odd that when I sought the information to consider your one claim at the location, the images were sent yet when I identified an issue with these, an anomaly, you turn on me (again) and now data is information is not to be provided.
I have raised an issue about image(s) in respect of one claim
The complaint I have made to you about image tampering has not been addressed. It has been treated dismissively by others who it appears are similarly lackadaisical in their consideration of the serious allegations I present, that should enable you to put your own house in order. It appears your Authority is so compromised as to be unable to do this or to function meaningfully, to the extent that you are left with no alternative than to ‘attack’ me and continue to make false statements about my actions.
I trust I will receive a comprehensive response by close of business Monday