today rss twitter

Letter of complaint to Local Government Ombudsman

17 March 2012

The Local Government Ombudsman.
PO Box 4771

17th March 2012

Dear Sirs,

I wish to make a complaint about the London Borough of Bexley and in particular its Chief Executive Will Tuckley. Unfortunately it is too complex a case for your on-line form and as I hope you will appreciate when you read on, it is not something amenable to a “Dear Mr. Tuckley” style complaint. He has steadfastly refused to answer FOIs and every piece of information referenced below has been obtained via the Information Commissioner or, in one case, police sources. The effect on me is that I have lived under constant fear of arrest for the past 12 months.

This is not paranoia. By making similar false allegations against another Bexley resident, Mr. Tuckley has succeeded in having him arrested twice, jailed overnight, and declared Not Guilty by a District Judge twice. I suspect the only reason I have not suffered a similar fate is because I have been supported by my MP and the Minister for Crime & Security, James Brokenshire has taken an interest.

I should explain that both I and the other Bexley resident have made regular comments about Bexley council on the web. This is frequently critical but is to the best of my ability, accurate. My MP has said in the past that I am the best source of council news and a Bexley councillor wrote to praise my “scrupulous accuracy”. Because I have been critical of Bexley council I was formally put under threat of arrest last April for “criticising councillors on a personal level”. The IPCC has provided evidence that this was in contravention of police operating procedures and I await the official verdict.

Thanks to the intervention of the Information Commissioner I now know that the pressure on the police to overstep their own guidance came from Bexley’s CEO Will Tuckley.

He told the police that I had advocated “descending on Councillor Teresa O’Neill with flaming torches and pitchforks, as it would seem that she and her scheming cohorts are impervious to reasoned argument”.

Leaving aside the fact that that is an obvious metaphor and pitchforks would be hard to come by, I did not say it at all. The comment was made by the local neighbourhood watch organiser on his website to which I linked.

The second accusation was that I had suggested launching a petrol bomb attack on Bexley council. This was an outrageous lie by Will Tuckley. It is true that I had heard someone say that “petrol bombs might be the only language Bexley council understands” and reported that fact, but I specifically indicated it would be a very bad idea.

Nevertheless it prompted Mr. Will Tuckley to report both things to the police as if I was directly responsible. Neither of the originators of those comments was approached which logically can only mean that no one thought it a real threat and as the originators are not on record as Bexley council critics no action was required against them. It was an act of total dishonesty by Bexley council and its CEO designed only to have me arrested on the basis of their false statements.

In May 2011 someone associated with Bexley council committed a crime against me. Whoever it was posted obscenities to the web alleging that I had committed homosexual acts on council property. The police accepted it as a hate crime and their investigations are now complete and [redacted]. I reported the facts on my website. Mr. Tuckley wrote to the police suggesting I be arrested for publishing obscenities. What I had posted was an edited version of the council’s own publication. It is difficult to envisage how I could be charged with a hate crime against myself but Mr. Tuckley was becoming desperate that all sources of criticism must be stopped and he would stop at nothing, however absurd.

All of the foregoing was obtained by FOI and only after ICO intervention, some of it only within the last couple of weeks.

I complained to Mr. Tuckley about the obscenities posted by Bexley councillors, staff or associates and he carried out no local investigation (FOI/ICO intervention again) but claimed to have referred the matter to the police. He did not ever enquire as to police progress (FOI/ICO) and claimed (FOI/ICO) that the police had never made any investigation involving Bexley council. I have a signed statement from Bexleyheath police that they met with Mr. Tuckley to discuss the matter on 7th July 2011.

All the documentation for the above is available on request, some is enclosed. I maintain that Mr. Will Tuckley and Bexley council have made a concerted attack on me in order to have me arrested and imprisoned by making allegations which were either entirely false or gross distortions of the truth and that Tuckley is guilty of abusing his close relationship with Bexleyheath police and attempting to pervert the course of justice in order to protect himself and others from criticism and exposure of the criminal activities of his friends. I believe it is generally known as malfeasance in public office.

I would be grateful if you could look further into this matter at your earliest convenience and provide me with further support for having the threat of arrest under which I live daily removed and perhaps remind Mr. Tuckley that sheltering criminals and abusing residents is not part of his job description.

Yours faithfully,

Malcolm Knight


False allegation regarding pitchforks and petrol bombs.
Formal warning of harassment and threat of arrest.
Mr. Tuckley’s suggestion that I should be arrested for reporting the obscenities which his own people had written.

The obscenities are not included to protect your own sensibilities but may be viewed on the password protected webpage

The user name is teresaandwill and the password is mustknow - all lower case.

Return to the top of this page