Report comment

I agree with the polluter paying especially where the complainer is the polluter; there are some areas of law which act as a sump gathering together deluded complainers. Working for the LeO seems a marvellously untaxing gig; the caseworkers seem to be frequently on holiday during most of the deadline periods they set one to do stupid things, such as cogently responding to nonsense. Last year I was right royally entertained by dealing with someone who allegedly packed their suitcases, and told the police they were going to burn the neighbours house down. The police bailed with a condition not to go to home address, which the complainer duly ignored and phoned police and told 'em they had gone straight home. Re-arrested, this time charged and brought before the court the DJ remanded them with like conditions whereupon the complainant got some temporary digs in a donkey sanctuary (IANMTU). Guess whose fault it was they could not go home? After 3 years had passed this acquitted arsonist manqué thought it was ours. So I try to get it struck out as being in effect vexatious and there being no conceivable case. The Ombudsman's considered response? 'The complainant really believes you have provided a poor service.' So it went on. The most I dared do with the caseworker was say, 'Have you spoken to them on the phone? Did they seem normal to you?' (I think the case worker would have recommended the complainant for a gun licence). It's a consolation to me that 4 years after our role in the criminal case concluded I am still living right high off the hog on the circa £500 we made. Old Hack.