'No further action' My case has been NFA'd. I received a phone call at about 9 a.m. today from Basingstoke Police Station to say that I do not need to surrender my bail at noon as my case is now marked 'no further action'. So my prediction turned out to be correct: I have now spent seven months under police investigation because of this lying DWP employee (five previously plus two because of this latest malicious complaint). I still have a clean police record. Look, here come those cheerleaders again ... :cheer2::cheer2:

Thanks san_d. Sorry, could not find a message from you in my inbox. Would like to talk more with you.

Thanks san_d, I just tried to send you a private message, but was unable to. Can you message me?

My arrest and interrogation At 5.30 am on Thursday 10 May, the police came banging on my door and shouting. I ignored them. I am not going to have the police snatch me sleepy, hungry and mentally unprepared for an interrogation. They came again at 5.00 pm, and on Friday (12.30 am, 8 am, 8 pm), and Saturday (12.15 pm, 8.30 pm). Eventually, I got a card asking me to call Basingstoke Police Station. On Wednesday 23 May, I phoned Basingstoke Police Station and spoke to xxxxxxx, the investigating officer. He confirmed that the former guard had made a complaint of ‘harassment’ against me. I told him about my DWP letter and my reply to it. He asked me to bring it with me. I asked him if he was familiar with Inspector xxxx (see above). Interestingly, he said he had read an opinion of the former guard by this inspector. I arranged to go to Basingstoke Police Station the next afternoon. At 2 pm the next day, I was just getting into my car to drive to Basingstoke, when a police car came tearing round the corner. I was arrested, handcuffed, and taken to Basingstoke Police Station in the police car. Upon being arrested, I said, ‘Miss [name] is a serial liar with a history of making false accusations against innocent people.’ I handed the arresting officer a card with the words written on it so that he could copy them into his pocketbook without any mistakes. (I did not want him later claiming I said, ‘You got me bang to rights, governor. I admit it, I harassed her just like you said.’) I was processed at Basingstoke Police Station. The police asked me for my ethnicity and I replied ‘English’. But English is not on their officially approved Home Office list of ‘self-defined ethnicities’, so they put me down as ’09 Any other ethnic group’. I was then slammed in a cell for the whole afternoon. At 6 pm I was given a short menu to choose my evening meal. I selected shepherd’s pie. I ate the pie before noticing the ‘halal’ label on it. I was angry to have just eaten halal meat, because I object to the cruel way the animals are killed. At 5.45 pm the police collected CCTV from the jobcentre. I presume they then watched it. (It must make very boring viewing as it only shows me in the jobcentre looking at leaflets and using jobpoints. I do not speak to any jobcentre staff, and none of them speak to me.) My interview started at about 7.20 pm and lasted for about 2 hours. I was interviewed by xxxx and xxxxx PC xxxx was not on duty that day. My interviewers were hostile to me. They were very dismissive of the letter from the DWP that I read to them, saying it was not relevant. When I spoke about the former guard having made false accusations against other people they kept interrupting me. I pointed out to them that the real problem was that a British government enquiry had concluded that the former guard lied in police statements but that the Hampshire Constabulary had failed to charge her with any criminal offence. The crimes she might be charged with are making false statements, attempting to pervert the course of justice, perjury and wasting police time. They insisted in going in detail over the petty details of my visits to the jobcentre. Bizarrely, the female officer tried to claim that my mere presence in the jobcentre constituted ‘harassment’. Frankly, the interview was very tiresome. The male officer seemed to be in a bad mood. I was released from police custody at about 9.30 pm, bailed to return on 9 July 2012. My custody record reads, ‘D[etained] P[erson] bailed to allow outstanding enquiries to be completed. Statements from staff on site.’ Afterwards On Tuesday 29 May 2012 (six days after my interview), xxxxxxxx phoned me. He asked me to send the DWP letter I had taken to the interview, saying the other officers should have taken it from me, because it is evidence that ‘potentially stands in your favour’. I posted it to him that afternoon. I said I would see him when I surrendered my bail. He replied that I might hear from him before then. My guess is that this is not going anywhere. I do not expect to be charged withany criminal offence. But if I am, I will fight it all the way. It will be interesting to see what happens…

Background to my arrest 1. My letter from the DWP On 2 May 2012, a woman named xxxx of the DWP wrote me this letter: ‘I am writing to you about the incidents that took place one 19th April, 30th April and 1st May 2012 at our Basingstoke office. As far as we can determine you do not have any business with that office so there is no apparent reason why you were there. You have been observed looking around the building, looking through windows, and loitering outside. In most circumstances just looking around the office would not attract any attention, but in view of your past history with a member of staff, who works at Basingstoke, this in unacceptable as it is both intimidating and harassing. This must stop immediately. ‘I must inform you that such behaviour towards Department for Work and Pensions staff, both on or off our premises is unacceptable. Should there be any repetition of this behaviour the police will be called and, in addition to any criminal proceedings they may take, civil action may be taken against you. ‘If you would like to speak to me about this letter please ring me … [etc].’ You will notice that the DWP ask me not go to Basingstoke Jobcentre again, saying they will call the police if I do. I did not go again to the jobcentre, yet still I was arrested. It suggests to me that the former guard’s police complaint is her own, not officially sanctioned by the DWP. 2. My reply to the letter This is my reply to the same letter (before my arrest). Dear xxxxxx I have read your letter of 2 May 2012. The purpose of the letter appears to be to make unexceptional events sound sinister. I will comment on it a sentence at a time. I am writing to you about the incidents that took place on 19th April, 30th April and 1st May 2012 at our Basingstoke office. My visits to Basingstoke Jobcentre were not ‘incidents’. As far as we can determine you do not have any business with that office so there is no apparent reason why you were there. I often go to Basingstoke and sometimes drop into the jobcentre, which is a public building. I first visited Basingstoke Jobcentre in 2008 and have been there many times since. When I am in Petersfield I sometimes visit the jobcentre in that town. You have been observed looking around the building, looking through windows, and loitering outside. The only part of the jobcentre I went to was the lobby area on the ground floor, where the information leaflets and jobpoints are situated. I used the jobpoints on the days you list, something you fail to mention in your letter. I still have two job sheets that I printed from one of the jobpoints (timed 15:46 and 15:48 on 30/04/2012). In most circumstances just looking around the office would not attract any attention, but in view of your past history with a member of staff, who works at Basingstoke, this is unacceptable as it is both intimidating and harassing. I have not harassed or intimidated anyone at Basingstoke Jobcentre. I have never approached or spoken to any staff at Basingstoke Jobcentre. The ‘member of staff’ you refer to is [name], formerly security guard at Alton Jobcentre (2007-09) and now a frontline member of staff at Basingstoke Jobcentre. I was, I must say, somewhat surprised to see her in Basingstoke Jobcentre recently. Her ‘past history’ is that she has persecuted innocent people with false statements to the police. In a police statement of January 2008, she falsely accused me of calling her a ‘f***ing foreigner’ and jobcentre staff ‘f***ing women’ and of threatening her. Her statement was ‘partially inaccurate and not completely truthful’ and caused me ‘embarrassment, severe distress and inconvenience’. Those quoted words are not mine; they are the words of the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus in a letter of apology to me dated October 2010. [she] also persecuted xxxof Alton. In a police statement of December 2008, she falsely accused him of threatening her in the jobcentre, and she bore false witness against him at Alton Magistrates Court in July 2009. She caused xxx ‘gross inconvenience’ and ‘gross embarrassment, humiliation and unnecessary personal intrusion’. Again, those are the words of the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus. In both my case and xxx [she] twisted innocent words we had spoken to give the deliberately false impression that we had threatened her; and she deliberately made up extra words we had never spoken to make our speech sound criminal. Impartial witnesses corroborated our accounts of having spoken innocently to her. [she] has also falsely accused me of harassment, her malicious complaints rejected after lengthy and time-wasting police investigations in 2008 and 2009. She also falsely accused Mrs xxx, jobcentre manager of Alton, of harassment in 2008, that complaint rightly rejected by police. I am not the only one falsely accused of racism by [her]. In offensive internet writings of May 2008, following the rejection of her ‘harassment’ complaints against me and xxx she accused the Alton police by innuendo of being racist and homophobic. According to two police officers, speaking in 2010, [she] made numerous complaints against Alton police officers, including accusations of racism, all of which were rejected after formal investigation. I have no paperwork to confirm these reports but have been told that Inspector xxxx dealt with some of her complaints. [Her] false accusations are invariably backed up with feigned indignation and other fabricated emotional responses. To take just one example, in January 2008 she claimed to be ‘extremely offended’ by ‘racist’ words that where never spoken to her and which she herself had made up. Playing the race card is the favoured tactic of anti-white racists and has proved remarkably effective in our politically correct society. The Hampshire Constabulary automatically give ‘top priority’ to complaints described to them as ‘racist’ or ‘homophobic’ and claim to be the most ‘gay friendly’ police force in the UK. This has given [her] a field day. The police co-operate with her and are afraid to stand up to her. I have never ceased to be amazed by [her] audacity in lying, even about things independently witnessed by others or captured on CCTV. Nonetheless, following the DWP investigation of [her] in 2010 and the ruling against her This must stop immediately. What is it that must stop, my ‘harassing and intimidating’ of staff? I challenge you to produce CCTV that backs up your accusations and confidently predict that you will be unable to. I must inform you that such behaviour towards Department for Work and Pensions staff, both on or off our premises is unacceptable. What ‘behaviour’? Do you refer again to my non-existent ‘harassing and intimidating’ of staff? Should there be any repetition of this behaviour the police will be called and, in addition to any criminal proceedings they may take, civil action may be taken against you. I remind you that wasting police time is a criminal offence. Give the police CCTV if you like. CCTV showed that xx was innocent, and it will also show that I am innocent. If you mount a civil action, your chief witness against me will be a woman that you, the DWP, officially judge to be a liar. It seems to me that your letter misses the real problem here. In 2010, when [she] spent six months being investigated by the DWP’s HR Investigation Service Team, she was under temporary contract at Totton BDC, working in a clerical position where she had no face-to-face contact with the public. At Alton Jobcentre she had had day-to-day access to members of the public whom she bullied, persecuted and lied about to the police. Following the judgement against her in October 2010, upholding serious complaints that she lied to police about jobseekers, the DWP has moved her to a frontline role at Basingstoke Jobcentre. Thus the potential for her to cause trouble – diminished when she was at Totton BDC – is now greatly increased again. Really, it is quite amazing. I had naturally assumed that the DWP, having upheld such very serious complaints about [her], would let her temporary contract expire and quietly part company with her. Michael Mates MP was unhappy to have [her] causing trouble in his constituency when she was at Alton Jobcentre. I shall of course let Maria Miller, MP for Basingstoke, know that [she] is now working at Basingstoke Jobcentre. I shall also inform Basingstoke CAB. Yours [etc] * * * Interestingly, of course, Maria Miller MP is a junior minister in the DWP. I have written to tell her that the former guard is now working at Basingstoke Jobcentre.

I am arrested again (24 May 2012) I have been arrested again and am now on police bail following the latest malicious complaint against me by the former guard of Alton Jobcentre, now New Claims Adviser at Basingstoke Jobcentre. The former guard claims that my recent visits to Basingstoke Jobcentre are criminal harassment. As I reported above, she is still working for the DWP, despite the ruling against her by DWP investigators in 2010. On 24 May 2012, I spent seven and a half hours in police custody, mostly in a cell at Basingstoke Police Station. I was interrogated by two police officers trying to make me confess that my recent visits to Basingstoke Jobcentre (where I never spoke to any jobcentre staff and no jobcentre staff ever spoke to me) were ‘harassment’. I have been bailed till 9 July 2012 while police take further statements from staff. They have already taken statements from the former guard and another member of staff, and have seized CCTV, but evidently have no evidence to bring charges. The former guard has formerly made false accusations against me of swearing, racist and sexist abuse, and threatening words (Jan 2008), racial harassment (April 2008), homophobic harassment (Jan 2009), stalking (May 2009), homophobic harassment (June 2009), intimidation and breach of police bail (July 2009), and harassment (Oct 2009). I have spent five months under police investigation and have a clean police record. In October 2010, I was compensated £400 for my persecution by her. In April 2008, she falsely accused xxxx Jobcentre manager, of harassment. The complaint was rejected by police in May 2008. (xxxxx, no longer works at Alton Jobcentre.) In December 2008, she falsely accused my friend of threatening words and behaviour, and in about Feb 2009 of breach of court bail. He cleared his name at Alton Magistrates Court in July 2009. In November 2010, he was compensated £600 for his persecution by her. I will give fuller details in my next postings.

Thanks, I will definitely do this. But see my next postings ...

I guess the security checks would be for a criminal record, which she does not have. All the same, her own employer investigated her and judged her to be a liar. The sensible thing to have done would be to have let her temporary contract expire and quietly part company with her. One of the bizarre things about this case is that government investigators have concluded that this woman lied to police, yet the Hampshire Constabulary have never charged her with making false statements or attempting to pervert the course of justice. Those, most surely, are the offenses she has committed.

Some new information. The former guard is now a New Claims Adviser. At the time of the DWP investigation in 2010, she was under temporary contract at a DWP office where she had no face-to-face contact with the public. After the DWP investigators judged her to have lied to police about jobseekers, I had assumed the DWP would keep her at Totton BDC and let her go after her contract expired. Amazingly, the DWP not only moved her to a frontline role in a jobcentre but in January 2012 they gave her a permanent contract. The potential for her to cause trouble is therefore increased. Back in 2008, a police officer in Alton said to me 'She shouldn't be working with the public.' In 2009, my friend told Alton magistrates the same thing after she had lied about him in court. At Alton Jobcentre she was known as a bully who caused nothing but trouble. Now it is bad luck for anyone who signs on at Basingstoke Jobcentre. I am going to inform Basingstoke CAB and Maria Miller, MP for Basingstoke, of the situation.

The former guard is now working at Basingstoke Jobcentre, Hampshire. At the time of the DWP investigation in 2010 - which concluded that she had lied to police about me and another man at Alton Jobcentre - she was on a temporary contract with the DWP at Totton BDC (Benefits Delivery Centre) in Hampshire. She has been working at Basingstoke Jobcentre since at least October 2011, and in January 2012 her DWP contract was made permanent.

It's the front page story in today's Daily Mail as well: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104539/Emma-Harrison-4-staff-David-Camerons-work-tsar-arrested-fraud-inquiry.html?ito=feeds-newsxml It'll be interesting to see what developments follow. In 2009, A4e lost a DWP contract following a fraud investigation, and in 2010 they were fined £60,000 for losing the unencrypted personal data of more than 25,000 jobseekers.

Update This thread has told the story of a scandal at Alton Jobcentre Plus, Hampshire where between 2008 and 2009 a malicious security guard persecuted two innocent men with false accusations to the police. I was falsely accused by her of racist abuse, swearing, racial harassment, homophobic harassment and much else besides between Jan 2008 and Oct 2009. I was arrested and interrogated several times but never charged. My friend was falsely accused of threatening her in the jobcentre in December 2008 and convincingly demonstrated his innocence in a case at Alton Magistrates Court in July 2009. After we both cleared our names, the discredited guard left the security industry in October 2009. In 2010, the scandal was the subject of a major investigation ordered by Yvette Cooper (who grew up in Alton), then Work and Pensions Secretary. After six months of investigation, the investigators upheld our complaints that the guard had persecuted us with her lies. We both received compensation and apologies. In October 2010, the same month that the investigation concluded, it was announced that Securitas, who had employed the guard and backed her in making her false accusations to the police, had lost their contract to supply guards to UK jobcentres, terminated 8 years early. I do not know whether this was directly related to the investigation, though the investigators were certainly critical of Securitas and police papers show that the police were dissatisfied with the conduct of the same company. In 2011, we registered appeals with the Independent Case Examiner. Our aim was to get a fuller acknowledgement of our suffering, which was only partially acknowledged by the DWP. The appeals remained in a long queue until recently. ICE Appeal We have recently learnt that our appeal to the ICE has been allocated to an Investigation Officer. She is likely to complete the investigation in about 3 months and then report to the Independent Case Examiner himself. It goes without saying that our appeals concern more serious and complex matters than they usually handle. Our Investigation Officer has asked me for copies of all my correspondence with JCP and Securitas. The correspondence does not make JCP or Securitas look good. The attitude of JCP was always that the guard's conduct was nothing to do with them because 'she is not a DWP employee' and they consistently failed to act despite overwhelming evidence that she was a serial liar carrying out personal vendettas against innocent men. Securitas did not properly investigate my complaints about her in 2008, failing even to speak to important witnesses. After I wrote to them on 16 Dec 2008, they employed solicitors to tell me not to write to them any more. That same day, they authorised her to make her police complaint about my friend, allowing her to persecute another innocent man. Securitas handled things very badly. They could have prevented my friend's ordeal in having to go to court if they had heeded my warnings about their malicious employee. When I started in 2008 out I was trying to have one Securitas guard removed. In 2010, Securitas lost more than a thousand guards after their contract was cancelled. I will update further with developments.

Baroness Flather exposes the milking of the benefits system by Muslim immigrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037998/UK-immigration-Polygamy-welfare-benefits-insidious-silence.html She highlights a serious problem. Her politically correct opponents have predictably called her 'racist', though the Baroness is herself Pakistani.

Yes, there is a very unfortunate strain of anti-intellectualism in British society. I have been told by various people to avoid mentioning on my C.V. that I have a first-class honours degree. A lot of stress is placed on having 'experience' in job advertisements, as if this were some great leveler, but ability is a far greater quality. * * * Staff at my jobcentre do not like the contracting of A4e by JCP, believing that it is taking work they should be doing. They are pretty amazed that A4e, after losing its previous contract over the fraud scandal in 2009, were then awarded a new contract for the Work Programme. 'Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?' Fortunately, I have arranged my own placement at the local second-hand bookshop so will not be dumped in a cleaning job by A4e.

I have been placed on the Work Programme with A4e and yesterday was seen by an A4e ‘recruiter/client adviser’. He decided that he was going to rewrite my C.V. and ended up giving me a new one littered with bad grammar and untruthful statements about my previous employment. He began by cutting and pasting the Personal Profile from his own C.V., saying it was a ‘generic’ that he always uses for A4e clients. It goes: A motivated, conscientious and meticulous individual who performs to high standards at all times. With high level organisational and instructional abilities in a fast changing and complex environments. Multi-skilled, versatile and methodical with a hardworking and enthusiastic approach to achieving goals. A self disciplined team player with proven skills in high-pressure environments with excellent communication abilities. A grammarian would have a field day with this semi-literate drivel. It’s the kind of writing that Kingsley Amis liked to quote when lamenting the falling standards of English usage. Of course, this so-called Personal Profile is not a personal description of me. It’s the adviser’s inflated and poorly expressed opinion of himself which he sticks willy-nilly on other people’s C.V.s. He even thinks he has ‘excellent communication abilities’. After putting his Personal Profile on my C.V., the adviser then asked me for details of jobs I had done and began writing descriptions them. Here is part of what he wrote about my work at an engineering company (here fictitiously renamed Rontgen): Whilst working at Rontgen I was responsible for all aspect of administration work, I was also responsible for stock ordering and oversee shipment of Rontgen products. The description of my duties is accurate, but he blunders the grammar, unable to get the parts of the sentence to agree with one another. Here is his description of a telemarketing job I once did on a short contract. Now the grammar is better, but he has said things about my employment that are not true, blatantly making things up: Whilst working at Techno I was responsible for appointment booking for external field sales agents. I was targeted on making 100 calls a day with a 5 hour a day talk time. While I was at Techno I helped secure 3-4 dental plans a week. I generated over £40,000 a week in revenue which enabled me to be the highest performer in the office. I said nothing about ‘making 100 calls a day’ or ‘a 5 hour a day talk time’, details he never asked me about. I certainly never claimed that ‘I generated over £40,000 a week in revenue’ or that I was ‘the highest performer in the office’. I have no idea how much revenue was generated by my calls, which were merely to book appointments with sales agents, but the invented figure of ‘£40,000’ is clearly ludicrous. If a telemarketing operator were generating ‘over £40,000 a week in revenue’ the annual revenue he generated would be about £2,000,000 – and on my 13-week contract I would have generated about £500,000. He invented this preposterous figure to sound impressive, not because it is true. The adviser was unable to spell correctly without the help of the spell-checker. At one point he wanted to write the word ‘priorities’ but spelt it ‘prioritys’. He noticed that a red line had appeared under the word so he added an apostrophe to make it ‘priority’s’. The spell-checker removed the red line. I wondered whether he would realise it was still spelt wrongly, now as a possessive instead of a plural, but he left it spelt with the apostrophe. My original C.V. says I am a ‘good communicator’, which I believe is true. But the C.V. written by this A4e adviser is illiterate and mendacious. I do not mind that some people cannot express themselves well, but I object to such a person being employed by A4e to rewrite C.V.s in this abysmal manner. The adviser claims that he has ‘excellent communication abilities’, but he wrote a C.V. for me that is full of grammatical errors. He claims to be ‘a conscientious and meticulous individual’, but he made up things about my previous employment, blatantly misrepresenting the truth. Of course, a good C.V. is valuable as it creates that all-important first impression to potential employers. It should be clearly written and an honest record of an individual’s record of employment. I am fortunate to have had a good education and so can easily spot the errors in the C.V. written for me yesterday. But there are unemployed people who struggle with the English language and genuinely need help, and A4e’s employment this illiterate adviser is a sad case of the blind leading the blind. I would like an A4e adviser that I can trust and respect. But I do not have one. Today, he phoned to tell me that he wants to put me on a job placement as a cleaner. It's regrettable that the government have seen fit to use A4e for the Work Programme. A4e were investigated for fraud by the DWP in 2009, leading to the removal of several corrupt employees, and were fined £60,000 under the Data Protection Act in 2010 for losing the unencrypted personal details of clients sent to them by JCP. The Times has described this company saying: ’A4e is a business consultancy that offers “to make millions from the unemployed by treating them as a commodity” to private and public companies.’