Chief Constable Morgan of Staffordshire Police today sent a letter to former police officers, all of whom are disabled, either mentally or physically.
These pensioners have been under review for a considerable amount of time and have to date fully complied with The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 which govern them.
They have been sent this letter by Mr Morgan who has given them a week to comply.
Our advice is that these vulnerable and injured pensioners should politely decline his offer.
Watch out for a more detailed blog on this letter shortly.
Chief Constable Morgan sends letters to vulnerable pensioners
When this comes to an end, if Morgan walks away from this unscathed, and as everyone suspects Coley will disappear back to his real masters to reappear somewhere else to cause more dispair and uncertainty for more innocent, who will people think the real puppeteers are? H.O H.O H.O!
You must remember this, your reply in an interview?
“It isn’t part and parcel of the job and it is not acceptable,” says Staffordshire Police Chief Constable Gareth Morgan in reference to assaults on his officers.”
What are your thoughts on IODPAs, ah yes your Crimbo message of peace and good will, bless you guv!
Next is to make your own law, just gets better?
Goodness Mr Morgan , you are now elevating your omnipotent persona to a Mr Justice of the Courts.
Your I pessume will be wearing red for your fist and very disasterous new legal ruling to stop all IOD pensioners pension despite Regulations ,a recent ICO determination and recent Case Law regarding personal information.
Please ask your legal team again to make sure your new ruling has an sound foundation for it will have national implications.
I can see it now, CC Staffs exparte 380 Staffs IODs
To conclude. Query, how far away are Home Office when they decided to set this off?
Oh dear. As a member of the public reading your blogs and doing my own research, I fear for myself, my family and Oceana Airstrip one!
Mr Morgan and his buddies in the North, clearly think they are right so they must be above the law surely?
The current media inform us that crime is on the increase, investigations to solve crimes are dwindling because of lack of skills, knife crime is on the increase etc etc. Of course it might be fake news! However, those with reasonable intelligence have been predicting this for years. But it seems it either isn’t important or more likely it is beyond the ability of the Crime ‘commissioners to prioritise it! Well after all if you can concentrate on LGBTQ, and better still torment injured police officers, many of whom are too ill or vulnerable to fight back then there you go….boxes ticked and targets reached, a few pounds saved.
I think they tried ‘Reg 33’ with a former officer and were humiliated in court. The officer concerned lost £31, 500 during the time in which it took the permission hearing to be heard at the Royal Courts? I understand this figure had to be repaid to the officer concerned.
Any such threats today may lead to the same outcome.
Mr Morgan et al , what an absolute disgrace.
If it wasn’t for the decent people out there and ones who I had the pleasure to work with I would be ashamed to have worn the same uniform as Morgan.
Is it known how many of these summons, I beg your pardon invitations were sent, how many IODs have been subjected to this persecution? I would hazard a guess that some if not all of the IODs involved are NARPO members. Perhaps in that case Staffs NARPO would have an indication. I assume that Staffs NARPO have made enquiries with their membership, and where appropriate have offered support, reassurance and advice to those vulnerable members. Would NARPO be comfortable to share their advice as how to react. I notice from Mr Morgan’s letter that NARPO were summons/ invited to attend, if they accept what will be their stance on this, I am sure very informative lecture?
So Morgan would like to ‘”explain the next stage of the process” – Mr Morgan, that is entirely in your hands. You can either choose to follow the Regulations and case law i.e. ‘No decision = No change” or you can choose your own (mis)interpretation of Reg 33 and end up in court. There are NO other options.
Who was it that said “What if someone decided to start a war and nobody else turned up”?!
…..Have a nice meeting Mr Morgan……………….
On 13th July PSNI tweeted “Attempts to murder police in sixth night of trouble in Derry/Londonderry”
Gareth Morgan tweeted “Despicable & totally unacceptable behaviour attacking those seeking to serve all communities – solidarity from all @StaffsPolice”
This is the public face of Gareth Morgan.
Behind this facade of a caring Chief Constable, Morgan attacks those who have served and been injured in the course of serving the community.
Hypocrite?
‘Mum’. ‘Yes Captain, what’s up?’ ‘it’s those old people again mum, they’re being horrible to me’. ‘What have you been doing now? Have you been knocking on their doors and running away?’ ‘I haven’t done nuffink and they’ve gone and put a photo of me on their website and they’re saying horrible things about me.’ ‘Oh Captain, not that photo? The one with the hairdo and you looking a bit generous around the middle?’ ‘I paid a lot for that hairdo mum, it’s a posh place, one of the guys from NAMF told me about it.’ ‘Oh, that lot.’
‘So, come on you had best tell me all about it?’ ‘Well, you remember some of them wouldn’t hand over their medical records and fill in our questionnaire and our SMP didn’t know what to do and didn’t take away their pensions?’ ‘Yeees.’ ‘Well, Andrew had this really good idea, he said we could invite them to our place and tell them a story about regulation 33, you know put the frighteners on them a bit and then they would give us all the stuff and we could take their pension away. And here’s the best bit, if they still don’t give it to us then we can video them and ask them questions and then we can take their pensions away. What do you think mum?’ ‘I think I told you not to play with that Andrew, he’s a bad influence and he’s only a human remains assistant, what’s he doing telling you what to do? Haven’t you got a proper human remains person who he’s assistant to, doesn’t he mind him constantly sticking his oar in?’ ‘Mum, his dad’s got a home office or something like that, he’s important. We’re only doing our statutory duty you know’.
‘Oh, son, we know that’s not right, there are 43 forces in the country and there’s only two or three reviewing. Are the rest neglecting their statutory duty? And don’t you need permission to put people under surveillance? ‘I think you’d best start from the beginning.’
‘Well, if we can take their pensions away we can spend the money on proper projects like LGBT and BLT’s (I like them.)’ ‘But they’re all injured officers, injured in the line of duty? Don’t you have a duty of care towards them? I know you keep telling me they’re faking it but that one we see in the wheelchair, you know the one who lost his leg, he seems genuine and it doesn’t seem to have grown back. And when they were discharged presumably they saw a doctor then and he authorised it? Why do you need to do it again and again, I mean some of them had two reviews in six weeks. I’m surprised they didn’t complain.’ ‘Well a few did but we have a policy of ignoring such things. I think they all milk it a bit and it’s my job to root them out and take their pension away.’ ‘But Captain aren’t they just police officers who were injured doing their duty, injured permanently and unable to do the job anymore. Aren’t they heroes really? And this regulation 37 and regulation 33 business. I heard that all they have to do is attend for the 37 and regulations don’t make any condition or order to produce anything; and regulation 33 is for those that refuse to attend and then you can only use the evidence you have for the SMP to make a decision?’ ‘Yes mum, but the pensioners don’t know that and like I said there’s always video evidence and all that stuff.’ ‘And what about your SMP is he or she going to go along with that? Haven’t you had a few problems with them? I know you had a problem remembering what SMP stood for.’ ‘I expect they will go along with it, I mean why not at £700 a throw why wouldn’t they?’ ‘Well son, you know you’ve had two leave already despite the money; was it the stress or was it conscience? And talking of money, how much have you saved so far?’ ‘I don’t want to talk about it any more mum.’
Brilliant. Just as a side bar I should advise anyone who attends that I, a member of the RUC / PSNI, was declined a PTSD IoD on the basis that I considered myself fit to drive to the SMP assesment.
Mr Morgan seems to be infamous for his bullying tactics, I wonder how those tactics would go down in a courtroom? That would be a show worth paying to see, I don’t think that show will be long in coming.
Surely a CC should set an example to the force and look after those injured serving that force? He is clearly showing by example that it’s OK to bully and intimidate, commit disability and age descrimination, misinterpret the law and only apply what suits him, fail to reply to any correspondence and threaten anyone who stands up to him. God help the people of Staffordshire, those who serve there and anyone unfortunate enough to be injured doing their duty – something this person seems to have lost whilst trampling over everyone to his current position.
Hang on a minute – why is Morgan pestering pensioners when surely he should be having a robust conversation with his SMP?
He tasked the SMP with making a decision. The Regulations demand that the SMP makes a decision. The SMP can’t duck out of his legal obligations by telling Morgan that he can’t decide.
Morgan should be saying to the SMP, ‘I want a decision from you. If you have no evidence of any alteration in degree of disablement, then please produce for me a report saying that you have decided there is no alteration.’
It seems to me that both the SMP and Morgan are committing nonfeasance in public office.
Nonfeasance is a legal concept that refers to the willful failure to execute or perform an act or duty required by one’s position, office or law, whereby that neglect results in harm or damage to a person or property. The perpetrator can be found liable and subject to prosecution.
The harm here is to the mental health of any pensioner who has been put through a failed review and who has suffered stress, anxiety, financial uncertainty and discomfort as a result of there being no decision.
A truly shocking, bullying and intimidating letter which contains thinly disguised threats to remove the injury on duty pension element for those who do not comply. As has been pointed out by most other bloggers the people who this letter is targeted at have all complied completely with the regulations.
Morgan’s actions throughout what has become a personal campaign by him, have at every juncture, been completely out of kilter with the regulations.
His claim that he was not directly responsible for the starting of this mass review in Staffordshire is not swallowed by anyone. His bullyboy attempts at making a name for himself with this first kicked off in Avon & Somerset – failure!
It’s a tragedy that now Staffs injured pensioners have become cannon fodder for this lacking in ability, inexperienced, bullying egocentric excuse for a police constable (not to mention the word ‘chief’).
This debacle in Staffordshire being overseen by Mr Morgan says a lot about the man, but it may say a lot more about the man that appointed him. Who would want to appoint as Chief Constable of Staffs someone who has made such an expensive mess of it in his previous force. Step forward Mr Ellis PCC Staffordshire and take a bow.
More brownie points for Mr Morgan with his chums at the Home Office.
Strange, I can’t find a copy of the letter on the Staffs police website. I would have thought he would have wanted to share this with the general public as he did with his last outburst. Well it was I suppose only a temporary outburst and presumably he eventually saw sense, or felt that he had been silly. Will history repeat itself?
One thing I did find on the Staffs website was a reference to ‘The Herbert Protocol’ a new setup to help vulnerable adults who go missing. I wonder if he’s considered extending this protocol to include vulnerable adult police pensioners? Somehow I doubt it.
I have just re-read Mr Morgan’s open letter of 21st Dec 2017.
In his penultimate paragraph he said he, “.. had a duty of care to support IoD pensioners and we are fully committed to providing the support to the most professional of standards”.
In his final paragraph he stated: “Appeals, complaints and concerns should be submitted through formal channels…”.
Fast forward only 3 months to March 2018 when, through formal channels, I made an allegation to Staffs Police that the Force had committed a crime in relation to certain records. I received a response signed by DCC Baker dated 20th April 2018 when he refused to record the ‘crime’. I doubted Mr Baker had even been the author of the letter because the contact official was recorded on the letter as being Andrew Coley. Why would Mr Coley become involved when an allegation of a crime had been made and why would he put a letter heading of ‘Review of Your Injury Award’?
Having been dissatisfied with the response I wrote again to Mr Morgan (being the formal channel) on 2nd May 2018, when I outlined my reasons for my dissatisfaction. Being “fully committed to providing the support to the most professional of standards” (Mr Morgan’s words, not mine) I was expecting a reply. He did not even have the courtesy to acknowledge receipt.
Sometimes, letters may not to reach their intended recipient and so I gave Mr Morgan the benefit of doubt and wrote to him again on 3rd June 2018, attaching a copy of my letter to him of 2.5.18. Because I knew Mr Morgan was, “fully committed to providing the support to the most professional of standards” and him expecting, “Appeals, complaints and concerns should be submitted through formal channels” (per his open letter of 21.12.17), I was expecting a reply. He did not even have the courtesy to acknowledge receipt.
An opportunity arose for me to personally hand deliver a further letter to Staffs Police HQ on 3rd July 2018. My letter was again addressed to Mr Morgan and was marked ‘Private and Confidential’. I had attached copies of my letters of 2nd May and 3rd June, just in case they had not been received via ‘formal channels’ and knowing how ‘fully committed’ he was to providing support. Surely, there would be a reply this time. He has not even had the courtesy to acknowledge receipt.
The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Staffordshire has promised me a response, within 20 working days, to my official complaint to him about the Chief Constable.
Isn’t it ironic Mr Morgan now expects those Injury Award pensioners to respond to him within 14 days of his meeting of 25th July?
I am furious at this Chief Constable Morgans audacity and continued crass attitude and behaviour regarding his handling of this mass review of Staffordshire Police’s injured pensioners.
The action (mass review) of all injured pensioners started with written, not so veiled threats of removal of an IOD award pension for failing to comply with demands for a completed questionnaire and access to medical records (from birth). Those threats are unlawful and were ignored.
Chief Constable Morgan now expects injury pensioners to comply with his “invitation” to attend a meeting where, no doubt at all he hopes to personally attempt to further threaten and attempt to intimidate former officers to hand over their medical records FROM BIRTH.
Staffordshire Police had sufficient medical records to make an Injury On Duty Award and from all accounts “lost” them.
They refuse to explain where the missing records have gone, on a landfill somewhere ??
Now they seek to collect a pensioners ENTIRE medical records for what reason?
So you can loose them again ?
There is nothing in the regulations that say an Injury On Duty pensioner has to permit access to their medical records, nothing at all.
Go stick it where the sun don’t shine!
The man and his attitude and arrogance make me embarrassed to be classed as a male if he is an example that fellow humans would judge me by.
He appears to be an arrogant vindictive man with no moral compass or consideration for the his fellow officers who gave so much. Saving money is his only goal and in his efforts to do so he appears happy to abuse any regulations and considerations for former officers and the effect that this is having on them and there families.
I only dream of the day a dose of karma appears and bites back at him. Even if you give consideration as an IOD that he is be driven and having his ‘strings pulled’ from other senior powers that be he still has the opportunity to stand up against them and do the right thing. Two forces out of 43, Staffs and Northumbria can not be right, OR just as a consideration are the other Chief Constables neglecting their duty ?? It is strange that Avon and Somerset dropped the reviews on Mr Morgan’s departure (£600, 000 having been spent) however Mr Morgan chooses to continue the reviews in Staffordshire ? Now please correct me if I’m wrong but I’m sure Mr Morgan has a duty of care to the rate payers as to how funds are best spent something that I’m sure he has pointed out himself.
In my humble opinion I would question the use of funds in this way. Regards…!!!
This clown was involved in the review process in Avon and Somerset and saw first hand all the trials and tribulations the process caused to everyone involved. When he moved on to Staffordshire he had an ideal opportunity to say the process is flawed and we need to stop and get everything right. What does he do? Makes all the same mistakes again, now once is a mistake but twice is either stupidity or malicious, hurtful and Vindictive.
The regulations are simple, the process is straightforward but when you have the ulterior motive of saving the police service money with no care for right or wrong that’s when lines are crossed and rules are broken using ignorance cause we is the police and we do what we want.
Mrs May is the cause of this situation. Police services are just reacting to massive pay cuts. If the government start paying what’s right to all the services then all these cost cutting exercises can stop. Either that or get rid of Chief inspector and chief superintendent ranks and save money that way.
Avon and Somerset spent £600,000 trying to save money! The met don’t review because it costs more than they could ever save. Wake up Mr Morgan don’t blindly bumble along.
Utterly disgusted & shocked! I would like to see ‘minutes’ of the ‘meeting’. How dare Mr Morgan think he can bully vulnerable people into a cosy little chat, as he makes it sound. Surely, he has got a brain, and knows the Regs? Why would people give sensitive medical info out, for all and sundry to see, when we know it is not kept secure, which has been proven. I can only begin to imagine what extra stress and upset this is causing for IOD’s…
Stay strong everyone!
I was under the impression that police officers swore an oath to uphold the law not break it or bend it to their own needs. CC Morgan I am disgusted at the threatening way you are treating former loyal officers who served Staffordshire with pride and were injured in the course of that duty.
You are going beyond what the regulations and law of this land allows and you will be proved wrong. We IODs have never refused to attend any medical examination however we will not disclose any more of our personal information to you because and it has been proved you cannot be trusted to keep it safe.
If you acted within the regulations you would find this whole subject a lot easier, but as your are obviously not we will fight you to the very end and until we are proved right.
Heaven forbid you were to end up in the same situation I wonder if you would surrender to wrongful demands, threats and bullying!
We look forward to the battle, Do what you will but be careful you may be going down a path that lands you in hot water
What a supercilious clown! I suppose Morgan hasn’t read the regulations or most likely chooses to ignore them. It seems to me the IODs have complied with the regulations by attending the SMPs exam. The regs do not require you to do anything else.
The official side have brought this on themselves by hiring “Doctors” who maladminister IODs medical reports in the same way that the DWP have done to stop or reduce injury pensions that they are lawfully supposed to pay out.
There was a time when I used to jump to a command, or rose when a Police Snr Officer entered a room, however those days are long gone. Those Snr Officers had earned my respect, you Sir have not!
Let me make this clear to the present incumbent Chief Constable of Staffordshire. I will not be attending your meeting, nor will I be reconsidering my actions.
Finally, please address me as Mr, don’t use my first name, as you are not my friend & I expect to be addressed properly by a public servant.
I tell you now CC Morgan, that this nasty letter has caused me further distress and worry, but you don’t care do you. You have no loyalty to anyone but yourself.
It is certain, in any case, that ignorance, allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have.
James A Baldwin
How very true those words are in respect of the Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police and Police Pension Authority Gareth Morgan.
Here we have a man who clearly is ignorant of the Regulations and case law that governs the administration of the Injury on Duty awards and pensions paid to Injured former Police Officers who were simply doing their Job.
We all remember his famous Christmas rant of 2017 where he couldn’t even get the title of the SMP correct calling it the Senior Medical Practitioner. We know that his DCC Nick Baker previously issued not so veiled threats that failure to provide medical records and complete the questionnaire may even result in complete suspension of an IOD award. We know how the Fraud Act has been quoted in the requests to disabled Injured former officers.
We have mass data breaches, mass reviews where everyone will be reviewed apart from those of a certain age or with certain medical condition, unless of course they are on the lowest award when it is for the individual to decide wether to ask for a review.
We even have a lowest banded individual who has failed to provide medical records being told that without medical records the SMP was unable to make a determination and so that review was complete. Why’s that you ask. The answer is because the award can only go up for those on the lowest band, but as we have been told this is not about money.
We now have Gareth Morgan ‘inviting’ those same former officers to meet and discuss how he would be implementing Regulation 33 if they failed to provide medical records and complete the questionnaire to his satisfaction. This just confirms what most already knew that he has no understanding of the Regulations which govern his actions.
Each pensioner who has been reviewed where the SMP cannot make a determination has had a review. It is for the SMP to use all available information to decide if there has been a substantial alteration in the disabled former officers disability. Quite clearly the SMP’s have not been able to do that so it should be the end of the matter. Review completed. No change.
The only thing the former officer is required to do by law is to attend the interview and submit to a medical examination. That is what has happened to those receiving this letter and I’m sorry for you Gareth Morgan but they have complied with the law of the land. Show me where it says in the Regulations that they have to provide medical records and complete a questionnaire.
It’s about time you started to comply with the law.
An enemy of Justice indeed but your time will come. That’s not a threat veiled or otherwise. That’s a promise.
Another attempt to try and intimidate the disabled retired officers by threatening them with Reg. 33. All of these people attended the reviews as requested with the SMP. If the SMP could not make a decision then that means no decision and they should be left alone. There is nothing in the regs. that require anyone to produce there confidential medical records. If Staffordshire Police have destroyed there records that is there fault – nobody else’s. Those that attended did so in good faith, answered the questions asked of them and even provided evidence from there medical professionals of there conditions. Obviously the PPA didn’t get the answers they wanted to enable the reduction of these pensions and so are now trying another tact. Well Mr. Morgan you are barking up the wrong tree. The regulations have been followed lawfully by the retired officers. Is it not the police who are attempting to ride roughshod over these brave men and women and are trying to manipulate the regs for there own benefit. I honestly believe that the senior officers of todays police service do not give a damn about the welfare of either retired or serving officers. My message to serving officers is to give us injured ex officers your full support because tomorrow it could be you. I hope not but you never know. My message to Mr.Morgan is simple – follow the regulations lawfully then nobody can complain.
Does this Morgan person not realise how out of order this letter is? He is the one who is/will be held responsible for any unlawful acts in procedures regarding the Pension Regulations. He has, imho, just committed the largest bullying, threatening and unlawful act against those regulations in sending such a letter! It was bad enough that he has ignored/disregarded what has already happened so far, but he is also disregarding the laws written to ensure the correct and proper way of dealing with IOD pensions. What right does he think he has to ‘order’ the appearance of ill, injured and disabled IOD pensioners to hear what HE is going to do if they don’t attend that threatening meeting and then change their minds about their own decisions and meekly allow Morgan to do whatever he wants with their pensions? Is he not yet aware that most IOD pensioners now have access to far better and a lot more knowledgeable Legal representation and advice than he is supplied by his own Force? I guess he is about to find out the hard way!
The CC should just comply with the Regulations and show a bit more respect for officers injured on duty.
Sadly I am neither shocked or surprised by this appalling letter to retired injured officers. This shows the lengths that some C.C.’s will go to in order to harass injured officers. It is hypocritical for an organisation that is supposed to uphold the law, deal with tragedies and be true, honest, transparent to act in such a way! Clearly C.C. Morgan considers that ‘he’ is the P.P.A. I feel he is acting over and above his role and is oblivious to the rules and regulations that govern medical records and their release. C.C. Morgan needs to spend his time in a positive manner getting up to speed with the clear and well addressed subject of the ‘release of medical records’ and what retired officers are/are not obliged to disclose, as clearly he is still under some misunderstanding on this subject.
Northumbria and Staffs IOD’s being threatened and bullied again. The ICO have already said that Northumbria are breaching principle 1 of the Data Protection Act over the unlawful and unfair threats to use Reg 33. It isn’t lawful Mr Morgan, but you will find that out shortly in Court. If it’s not in the regulations, don’t do it, simples!!! I feel another CC retirement party coming. Stay strong guys and gals.
If Bully Boy Morgan would care to have another read of the regulations he will find that regulation 33 states –
“and the person concerned wilfully or negligently fails to submit himself to such medical examination or to attend such interviews”.
The regulations uses the word ‘himself’, that is the person, not medical notes or filing out questionnaires. As I understand it these poor disabled pensioners have been brought kicking and screaming to a corrupt and unjust process, but they have fulfilled their obligations under the regulations by physically attending a medical interview, in some cases twice!
There is there therefore no legal power to invoke this part of the regulations. Even if there was, the wording then goes on to say –
“the police authority may make their determination on such evidence and medical advice as they in their discretion think necessary”.
This means that the PPA has to consider whether there is EVIDENCE that there has been a substantial alteration in the pensioners disablement because the ONLY way in which the pensioner’s injury award can be altered through the regulations is via reg 37 which states –
“and if after such consideration the police authority find that the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has substantially altered, the pension shall be revised accordingly”.
So there you have it, the PPA have to find a demonstrable substantial alteration in order to reduce a pension.
Clearly Morgan has ‘invited’ these poor pensioners in, so that he may further bully or brow beat them into submission, by threatening to remove their pensions, which is unlawful and a disgrace to the office that he holds. His intentions are clear as nowhere does he suggest that their pensions may go up!
I’d love to see someone take up this invitation, and then video record it. It could then be played for all the world to see!!
On a final note, has he any idea as to the terrible psychological damage that he’s doing to these former officers, some of whom suffer from severe mental health issues??
The targeting of a disabled group under any other circumstances would be reported en masse as a hate crime, and this should be the case now.
Every individual that has been subjected to this lowlife’s threats and intimidation should attend their local nick with a witness to film their attempts to formally report his crimes.
Refusals should make their way to local MPs and local TV news and newspapers.
The BBC employs specific disability-issue reporters who I’m sure would be interested in this vile individual.
Let the bullying buffoon make a determination in accordance with Reg 33 PIBR and only in accordance with said Reg, it will be difficult to say the least. Don’t forget that MORGAN is also bound by rules and regulations as an attested constable however, he probably thinks said rules are no longer applicable to him. The next step for those concerned or affected by this man should be towards PSD over what is likely to amount to MORGAN’s politeness and tolerance, abuse of authority, general conduct and bringing the force into disrepute this would be a sure way for the PPA to save money, embarrassment and possibly avoid a CC’s pension.
Well well well! A Chief Constable has sent a letter like this to vulnerable injured officers. I find him abhorrent as it is clearly a veiled threat and an unprecedented step by a Chief Constable. Maybe he should understand that IOD’s do not have to consent to access to their medical records. He knows that he is fighting a losing battle because we have the law on our side.
I don’t think i would be attending any meeting with Morgan who should realis that his reputation as a bully is very well known. Perhaps he could put in writing what he intends to do with regard to reg 33. Maybe he doesn’t want to write anything down as he could easily deny saying things in a meeting but having written evidence is a whole different ball game.
Come on Bully Boy Morgan write down your interpretation of the regs we all want to see how you get around the fact that these IOD’s have already complied with the regs by attending the review, come on Morgan put up or shut up.
How awful – I’m not from that force, but I feel sick just reading it. how threatening it is. Everything must be in writing. Always. What a snide tactic!
It causes me to worry, now, that I have been forced into a rather unique situation, (without boring most of you) where I would not refuse medical details but I just COULD NOT comply with their requests because of my circumstances; I don’t have a doctor and the country where I, now, live, does not operate like our country does. How are they going to treat me??? I wish them all good luck and great strength. we all have each others’ backs.
There is only one way to deal with bullies like him. Treat him with the same contempt that he seems to consider as acceptable, make an official complaint to a higher authority and watch him squeal like a stuffed pig when he is brought to book.
Bullying, intimidatory, sinister, underhand and unfit to fulfill public office.
What a disgrace, what a bully!
I do believe he wants to change the regulations.
What a tantrum if everyone declines his invitation.
What a bully, “we will have a meeting because i can’t write it in a letter to you all because I know what I’m doing/saying is wrong”
The regulations are there for a reason, they are not flexible to suit, he can’t get his own way so he will carry on in his underhand, intimidating ways……disgraceful…..
It sounds like bully-boy Morgan has already made his decisions, The meeting is just intended to give him an opportunity to throw his weight around.
I’m betting he intends to reduce to band one all the pensioners who are standing up to him. Trouble is, he will have no evidence of substantial alteration, so his decisions will be Wednesbury irrational and easily overturned.
His behaviour has all the hallmarks of someone who is driven by ugly attitudes rather than by the rule of law. It amounts to disability hate crime.
I am very concerned that CC Morgan seems to be issuing veiled threats to vulnerable and disabled former Officers. As I see it, these persons have fully complied with the regulations by making themselves available for examination/interview by the SMP. There is no legal requirement for the disclosure of medical records and no legal requirement to answer a highly invasive and intrusive questionnaire. CC Morgan seems to have a very flawed understanding of the regs, in the absence of any evidence to support a substantial alteration, surely he has no alternative other than to determine no change. The continued use of intimidatory tactics is abhorrent and I am utterly disgusted that IODP’s are being treated in this way.
This individual and those who are doing his bidding must be held to account.
“Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly”.
Sounds like someone who is desperately trying to find reverse, or someone who is desperately stupid enough to threaten and bully a bit more than he already has done. Maybe his crass understanding of the regulations leads him to believe that his meglomaniacal views are correct and that he can defeat us in a law court. Personally I wouldn’t give him the platform. “Come on Morgan show us what you have got”.
Two words sum up this letter:
Arrogant
and
Threatening
His role as police pension authority is to see that the rules of the injury pension scheme are followed. Instead he has chosen to bully vulnerable disabled people. He berates them with veiled threats about the ‘impact’ the decisions will have on disabled former officers. He has transparently indicated those decisions have already been made.
The only purpose of this meeting will be to further frighten and threaten.
Time to go, Mr Morgan. You are a disgrace to the police service.
I think he is clutching at straws it’s costing the force a lot of money,and he isn’t getting anywhere.
Why does he need to call a meeting to explain a process that is already enshrined in law and with which the IODPs have already complied?
Unless of course, it is his intention not to put in writing what he intends to do next, knowing that he will be reducing IODP pensions illegally.
Who does this man think he is,his whole aim in life seems to be the total destruction of injured officers,those people who have given everything and more to the the job,but now being treated by this obnoxious bully as vermin. A disgrace, he has no right or obvious ability to be in the position he is in.
Sounds like he intends to say something that he will not commit to paper so that it can be understood in different ways.
Also by setting up such a meeting he can say I have consulted with those concerned when he actually means you will get what you are given.
I worked in the privatised sector and seen this many times as a prelude to detrimental changes
Here we go again! Who amongst us Staffs IOD’s can forget CC Morgan’s tremendous open letter tantrum last Christmas, just because we ‘naughty’ IOD’s dared to resist his bullying and stood up for our rights.
He forgets the Regs when it suits him, doesn’t like the Courts, MP’s, IOC, IOPC, or anyone else telling him what to do.
So here we go again! A growing number of IOD’s, lawfully, are refusing to answer a very invasive questionnaire, or hand over medical records. They do provide statements certifying that there has been no substantial change, something accepted without question by Band 1’s, who cannot be dropped, but in Band 2 and above, these statements are often backed up by their GP’s. This is not good enough for our classic bully, as it stops him doing what he wants, so he now wants to get us all together to give us ‘advice’, followed by a further 2 weeks to consider it! In other words, attempt more bullying and the threaten the future! Classic.
So here we go again! Not to this blatently biased meeting, but to Bristol in October, to watch him answer for previous acts in another force area and at this rate it will be a coach load of us going!
No, CC Morgan. You have treated us Staffs IOD’s disgracefully and we resist your blatant bullying.
One of the nicest threatening letters I’ve read for a long time – or is it just me? Sounds very much like meet me or else??
I think I would go and tell him where to stick his bullying attitude. No longer constrained by discipline he can go and F off.