MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT

“TRUTH IS MIGHTY AND IT SHALL PREVAIL”

THE LEGAL THREATS AND DEFENCE OF JUSTIFICATION

PART TWO........

On the 19th of June 2009 the web sites www.councilanddeveloper.net and www.notraydenengineering.co.uk and www.name-n-shame.co.uk and www.rottenborough.org.uk were simultaneously threatened with legal actions in the High Court of London for defamation if the allegations made against Mr Richard Hayden of Rayden Engineering Ltd was not completely removed from all four web sites by the three web masters responsible for publication by the deadline of 4pm on the 3rd of July 2009.

There has been an inordinate delay of 32 months from the initial allegations, 20 months with two of the web sites and 16 months with the main source of complaint  in orchestrating these legal proceedings which is an abuse of process.  In 32 months, Mr Hayden has abysmally failed to provide one shred of evidence to counter these claims and there is no case to answer which is also an abuse of process

I do not consider the tone of this legal threat  to be in keeping with the essence of the pre-action Protocol for Defamation as it abrasively constitutes  a  series of “Do as I say or else” threats without proper consideration of the issues. The letter also contains a number of serious factual inaccuracies in Mr Hayden’s version of events. As the letter contains no restrictions on publication, it has been published in its entirety.  

THE 19TH OF JUNE 2009

LEGAL THREAT

JUST TWO OF THE INACCURACIES CONTAINED IN THE LEGAL THREAT

“You know that the  damage to established trees and vegetation did not happen, that our clients did not do it and that our clients did not try to blame McAlpine or anyone else for it.”         Photograph taken on 8 Nov 06

A “did not happen” just  starting to “crudely hack  down” the “fictitious” trees to lay storage hard standing on the flood land.

“You know that the established trees and vegetation were fictitious” and “There was no copse of mature trees”. “”There was a single mature apple tree” which “Mr Hayden was saddened to find... had been crudely hacked down on the morning of Monday 11 September 2006”.          Photograph taken on 14 Sept 06 after                                   installation of 11 Sept 06 security fencing.              

“As for the dust, fumes and smoke that supposedly emanates from our client’s site, these are fictitious.” “The smoke was not emanating from our client’s premises but either......the car scrap yard” (wrong position)  “...from land in McAlpine’s control on the new road construction site.”

“...or the Environment agency burning  overgrown shrubbery from the flood barrier.”

Alfred McAlpine plc being accused yet again? They have no need to conduct an internal investigation into these allegations as both photographs pre-date the “new  road construction site” which also discounts the EA. as they  burnt Japanese knotweed once during construction.

Friday 17th July 2009

The “dishonest and misleading impression” of the level of noise accredited by UKAS ISO 14001 was quite audible  outside Focus on the Waterside  Retail Park and was recorded!

THE COMPLETE DEFENCE OF JUSTIFICATION HAS BEEN LODGED AND MR HAYDEN IS NOW COMMENCING A CIVIL HIGH COURT ACTION FOR DEFAMATION.

It is notable that Mr Hayden now wishes to also pursue me for the costs of pursuing me through Nominet legal processes for 8 months when in January 2009 he terminated the free mediation service which was offered preferring instead to pay the unrecoverable Experts costs and the unrecoverable costs of the subsequent Appeal.

It is also notable that Mr Hayden enjoys the privileged protection afforded through his legal representative in which to once again make libellous, unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations against a member of my family in an attempt to justify his own continuing unjustifiable actions against his residential neighbours. But Mr Hayden did not enjoy privileged protection when he independently wrote libellous letters of  disparagement. Mr Hayden should confine his spuriously libellous statements to the source of his animosity and not direct his venomous backlashes toward someone who has been chronically ill and has nothing to do with this web site.

In a High Court civil action full judicial scrutiny of the evidence will prevail, including those in public positions of trust who belong to the same social, sporting and business organisations as Mr Hayden which has enabled the complainant to thus far evade responsibility for his unmeritorious conduct to the detriment of his residential neighbours.

I have a right to peaceful enjoyment of my home and my home is of no less importance than any other person’s home. I also have the right to defend my home and my peaceful enjoyment of my home and possessions without fear of reprisal and without undue harassment for exercising my fundamentally basic right to speak truthfully in defence of my home.

“Many men stumble across the truth ... but most manage to pick themselves up and continue as if nothing had happened”.

                                                                                Winston S Churchill