• TMO Chair cheerleader letter received 03.03.2008. A couple days after receiving the "official" notification for the TMO Emergency General Meeting to be held on Tuesday, 18.03.2008, I received this rah, rah chanting letter from the TMO Chair.

• Suspended TMO director responds to the charges. He addressed board election rigging and the rigging of the elections for directors which apparently put him into the bad graces of the power elite among the TMO Board of Directors so that they pulled out the figurative knives which he addresses by a rebuttal letter sent out to the TMO members at the eleventh hour.

1. TMO Chair cheerleader letter received 03.03.2008. On Monday, 3rd March 2008, I received a letter from the Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) Chair, Juilet Rawlings, in support of the dismissal of the two directors from the board and their dismissal as members of the TMO. I did not like receiving this letter. Its mere receipt had the appearance of a gang of bullies trying to thump this pair into oblivion. The letter read like that too. The have really rolled out the heavy weights to stomp on these two TMO directors including the Leader of the Council as I noted yesterday. The letter with only a date of February 2008 (no day was included) consists of a series of one sentence paragraphs as follows:

"Let's get on with the job" it opens in bold face type. What job is that I asked myself thinking about what I've experienced for the past 12 years as discussed in this web journal and my web site.

"Your TMO has a lot to get on with in the next year or two." I continued to read this as I note that my balcony has been in a state of disrepair since the first week of June 1998 almost ten years ago. Oh, there was something done in October 2006, but that was never completed. The 84 tiles were not put back onto the balcony floor although it was covered in concrete over a sealant base. What exactly is this TMO to get on with in the next year or two? I do not consider this to be "my" TMO. Is this a con?

"We have to improve the service to tenants and leaseholders, while at the same time meeting tough financial targets." I haven't noted that the TMO has done much in the past 12 years except send out glossy magazines and brochures about Fun Days and, "gee whiz," just how great "they" were doing. Then they post a £200,000 deficit at the end of their last fiscal year.

"The TMO needs everyone pulling on the same end of the rope." Which end of the rope is that? Is that the end where everyone has found surveillance technology abuse carried out against one person for daring to report child abuse and tenant management failures?

"But we're being distracted because two of our board members refuse to abide by the Board's majority decisions." I am interested in finding out what those miscreants have done to incur this wrath from the other board members. What precisely have they done in not abiding by the "majority decisions?" Why have they refused to be a part of the bully mob that uses surveillance technology as a weapon 24/7 against someone it does not like for almost a decade? What is the distraction, and why are they being distracted?

"They have refused to undergo a Criminal Records check to verify they don't have a criminal past. This is important because Board members have contact with vulnerable people, including the elderly." Oh, really? Does the TMO Chair mean that such contact involving 24/7 surveillance technology abuse of the most extreme kind causing grievous bodily harm while attempting murder is not really contact, and that it is OK to make a person vulnerable with the use of surveillance technology in order to carry out sadistic abuse? Elderly, huh? This has been done to me during the past decade from the ages of 55 to 65, and everyone is still going to strong with the most extreme abuse. Has the Criminal Records check agreed to by board members stopped this kind of behaviour?

"The pair have been suspended from the Board but frankly while this carries on the Board can't do its work properly." Is this blackmail? Is the TMO Chair telling the tenants and residents of the 10,000 social housing units in Kensington & Chelsea that the Board of Directors is refusing to work and carry on as it has done before until the matter is settled in their favour? I don't see any difference. The surveillance technology abuse continues and nothing is getting done about the serious antisocial problems I keep addressing. Is the TMO Chair and the TMO Board of Directors threatening to continue to do nothing and spend more money with no effect as they have been doing for years? Are they using antisocial behaviour as a weapon to sustain their power?

"That's why there is an Extraordinary General Meeting." In a letter dated 13th February 2008 included with a mailing whose cover letter by the Company Secretary does not have a date which I received on 1st March 2008 (just two days before receiving this letter from the TMO Chair) there is the statement "Supporters of Mr and Mr have called an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) to question their expulsion." This statement was signed by 19 members of the TMO Board of Directors including its Chair. The fact that TMO Board Chair claims that no work can be done properly by the Board is a red herring. Those suspended have every right to challenge their suspension in this manner, and the TMO Board of Directors through its Chair cannot misconstrue and blackmail people into submitting to their wishes in this correspondence as is being done.

The rest of the letter continues in one-line sentences like a pep rally chant repeating the same thing over and over which is called psychic driving (emphasis and capitals not added):

"We are asking members to vote YES to four resolutions outlined in voting papers sent by the independent Electoral Reform Society."

"19 of 21 members of the Board support the resolutions. The two that don't are the two that are suspended."

"Please ensure you vote either by postal ballot or at the Extraordinary General Meeting on 18 March."

"Please support the Board by voting YES."

"Your vote and your voice is vital. Please don't waste them."

"Say"

"YES"

"And support your TMO Board."

"Say"

"YES"

"To the four resolutions on the EGM voting paper."

I kid you not. This is exactly how the letter from the TMO Board Chair ended with this ranting rah, rah chant for voting for the Board and its four resolutions to dump these two directors. There was nothing of substance in this letter to convince me about what they had done. All it said was that 19 board members had ganged up on these other two and suspended them. Don't waste your vote. Support the Board. This is not really "your" Board although 14 are elected by TMO members and the other five are Councillors appointed by the Council. These people are out for themselves.

This sounds like a cheerleader chant at a sports game yelling for their team. The way I've entered it above is exactly the way it appeared in the letter. There is no closing or signature to the letter. Just this repetitive chant. Who wants this lot as a Board of Directors for 10,000 social housing units in Kensington & Chelsea? Where is the responsibility displayed in this letter that is essentially blackmail and changing nonsense? I think the whole lot should be disbanded with the Council taking over the management of its social housing stock once again.

This sounds like Lt Harry Bird and BS who continuously engage in nonsense abuse and psychic driving with false allegations 24/7. They have been commenting continuously while I have writtenthe above.

2. Suspended TMO director responds to the charges. After everyone went after these two suspended directors pending the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Tuesday next, 18th March 2008, including the initial alarm bell from the Company Secretary received 6th February 2008 and the official mailing received almost a month later on 1st March 2008 followed by the TMO Chair's cheerleader chant of a letter received 3rd March 2008 and than the Leader of the Council's letter received 14th March 2008, there finally arrived a letter by one of those suspended directors forwarded by means of a cover letter from the TMO Company Secretary which was received by me on Saturday, 15th March 2008, This was an eye opener. No wonder they delayed it.

The letter from this so-called miscreant director was dated 7th March 2008. It should have been forwarded immediately but was not. It's arrival is only three days before the EGM while everyone else (except the Leader of the Council) got in their punches a couple weeks before this. What about those of us who are denied participation by being subjected to surveillance technology abuse 24/7 for almost a decade who have to vote by post and must send in our votes in time to get them counted?

1. This so-called miscreant uncovered and had proof of vote rigging for the TMO Board of Directors. No wonder they want to get rid of him. No wonder they want to maintain their own power and control. They cannot have someone in their midst who would insist upon proper voting standards so that director elections were fair and represented the real will of the TMO members instead of the power and control of the few who count the votes. I believe that what he uncovered is criminal and that those involved should be sacked forthwith. They cannot be trusted to uphold the trust and confidence placed in them by the TMO members, can they?

There were apparently two kinds of voting "irregularities." One involved internal board voting and the other voting for directors. With respect to the latter, this suspended director was part of an audit concerning this most serious of allegations. They were brought to the attention of an MP, and those who were interviewed for these "irregularities" were the TMO Chair, its Chief Executive, the Company Secretary and himself. As a result the TMO board elections are outsourced to the Electoral Reform Service (ERS) and are no longer run in house. Who can say how long this was occurring or what the board might look like had there been fair and honest elections of directors?

The other point regarding elections or voting within the board itself are somewhat complicated and seem to involve a convoluted system of addressing this problem. He said that he had proof that the TMO cheat at elections to a group. He had evidence. Although there was an enquiry, he was not included. The determination in his absence was made that only mistakes occurred not any wrong doing. Apparently, somewhere along the line he was given a final warning without any preceding warnings.

This director goes on to say that he was advised by the Chair to appeal the final warning. There was to be a "special disciplinary appeals panel" set up in which, he says, he was supposed to "have some input into its composition." The TMO Chair also admitted to him, he says, "that when she issued the warning she did not really know what she was doing as their was no due process."

The appeal process went ahead, he describes, with the panel including "at least two board members who were involved in the cheating allegations." He did not attend this panel appeal hearing and was found guilty. I think his absence was a mistake, but evidently he judged this panel to be a kangaroo court especially since at least two of its members were alleged voting cheaters. Who could have confidence in anything like that?

Apparently, there were four other miscreants who had received final warnings. He writes that all four were named although only two offences were noted. These were a sexual offence and a racial remark. The other two offences for the other two people were not disclosed he says. It sounds very much like there are some serious problems at the TMO.

After this first most critical point, this suspended director goes on to address the other allegations against him in nine further points:

2. Discussing confidential TMO business outside Board Meetings.

I maintain that there can be no confidentiality about TMO proceedings of any kind since this is not a competitive enterprise and its supposed objective is to serve the best interest of the social housing tenants and residents along with the community. There is no justification for hiding anything.

3. Compromising the TMO and the impartiality of those working for it.

4. Undertaking actions to bring the company into disrepute.

5. Voting against a board resolution and encouraging others to do likewise contrary to collective responsibility.

6. Continuing to refuse to do a CRB [Criminal Records Bureau] check.

He replies: "This is not true." "I have not refused to do a CRB check." "I have just not done one yet." He goes on to cite instances where several staff have come forward to describe that they have not been checked. He says that this has come from "people who regularly come into contact and enter the homes of vulnerable residents."

7. Failing to treat Board members with respect acting in an intimidating and domineering and aggressive fashion and expressing adverse views as to the competence of some Board members.

He replies "but as to the competence of some Board Members is being questioned I would have to say the incompetence and arrogance of some of the elected board members beggars belief."

8. Bullying staff of the TMO and undermining their authority.

He claims to have a letter of apology from one such witness against him who evidently falsely claimed to have been "threatened and intimated." This letter resulted from a complaint he made about this false allegation.

9. Acting contrary to the interests of the TMO at meetings of the Senior Citizens Forum in September and October and not treating TMO officers with respect.

He claims that this is "so untrue as to be outrageous." He states that he intends these allegations are to be investigated by the Council.

10. Acting in a threatening and intimidating manner towards a number of elderly or vulnerable residents, particularly when seeking votes on Board elections in June.

He says that this is "again completely outrageous." While running against four other candidates, he received more than twice the votes of his nearest opponent. He states that "bullying and intimidation" are no way to win votes. And, he goes to state "I certainly have the confidence that the TMO members have trust n me and will always support me. They know that I support them."

In his concluding remarks he states "I feel that when mistakes are made and things go wrong a veil of secrecy is not the answer." He concludes with ". . . now we have a proper elections process I am in no doubt that we will not have to rely on spin and statistics."

All of this will have to be worked out in Tuesday night's TMO EGM, but information has been scarce with regard to facts. If members are to vote meaningfully on the issues raised, they must be fully informed at the earliest possible date. This has not occurred. TMO appears to be quite mismanaged and subject to maladministration which puts into question its existence as an ongoing organisation.