When you get a bit hacked off withe the lies & deceit.
Names changed, but Cardiff is relevant 😂
Blogger doesn't seem to like word formatting, there may be errors that I haven't spotted.
Cardiff
I assume that as virtually all the emails from Charlie Chaplin, Stan Laurel &
Oliver Hardy regarding my grievance have come through
you, then you are the one pulling all the strings regarding my grievance. I am
aware that to assume can make an Ass out of You & Me. I have a feeling that
I know where that is going to go.
There are a number of points to raise from your emails
·
3/7/2025
o
Firstly I would very much appreciate it if you
could abstain from offering your opinion.
o
We all deserve to be treated
professionally and with respect
o
heard at the earliest opportunity
·
4/7/2025
o
The audio recording will then be transcribed and
shared with you for your reference.
·
7/7/2025
o
I am happy to support you in any way that I can
·
22/7/2025
o
Please explain. “appearing to be continuing
along the lines of making threats”. What have I threatened?
·
29/7/2025
o
Minutes will follow under a separate cover
·
4/8/2025
o
which I believe is being discussed via ACAS at
present.
o
Oliver Hardy is currently on annual leave,
returning next week and upon his return will make contact with you.
o
I am happy to aid you
·
7/9/2025
o
enable me to review and resolve
·
18/9/2025
o I am back from leave on Monday and will pick this up
All the above points have failed.
- Your use of “Firstly” on 3rd July 2025. It must be very important to you, as you started with this point, that opinions must not be voiced, yet you allowed Stan Laurel to use his opinion in his grievance outcome letter. As I said to you in relation to Buster Keaton my opinions were based on facts, Buster Keaton’s and now Stan Laurel’s opinions were not. Wasn’t integrity supposed to be a core value of XYZ? These opinions are lies because they are wrong.
- You have not acted professionally or treated me with respect.
- The grievance meeting, the outcome and the appeal were not dealt with in a timely fashion.
- The audio may have been transcribed but neither the audio or transcription have been shared.
- Your responses have not shown any support.
- Threatened - definition - state one's intention to take hostile action against (someone) in retribution for something done or not done. Intention? Hostile action? Retribution? Everything that I said I would do, I have done, except divulge any information, but that would weaken my bargaining position. Details will be released after the tribunal. I believe that fraud, for example, is in the public interest.
I can change the names in this letter and post it on my blog when I’ve finished.
- Minutes have not followed.
· At the 4th August the point for early
conciliation with ACAS had passed. No submission from XYZ had been made to me
via ACAS. The cut-off date set by ACAS was 30th July and you didn’t send the
outcome email until 29th July. Given that I got my certification just after one
o’clock in the morning, how was there time for any negotiation between XYZ,
ACAS & me?
· Oliver Hardy has made no contact with me.
· As at 28th September there has been
no review and/or resolution as you stated.
· As at 28th September there has been
no response to follow up your email dated 18th September. Which is
good as I owe you money. Although there is no actual proof that the letter with
the demand was delivered. Just in case you’ve forgotten, there a fraudulent
signature was involved.
· As at 28th September there has been
no answer to Stan Laurel’s statement that I declined an appropriate transfer on
your terms.
Additionally, you have also accepted contradictions made by Stan
Laurel in the grievance outcome letter. You already have these details, maybe
that’s why the appeal wasn’t investigated. On that point if you are not
investigating the appeal, why did you bother with the outcome letter? I had
already resigned, which was your reasoning for not following up on my appeal.
That is another contradiction.
As at 28th September you have failed to answer my
email dated 15th September 2025. This included confirmation of where
I declined any offers and where you needed clarification.
My original
question to Buster Keaton on 9th June
2025 was; “Are there any of the following statements that you
disagree with, or any of the statements that are factually inaccurate?” This
still remains unanswered.
The combined effect of your
actions is that you win.
There has been no proof offered that my emails and documents were bogus yet you
continue to insist that my grievance has no grounds.
To quote Stan Laurel, “I do not believe
that your grievance is upheld or that you have any evidence to support the
various allegations that you have had against XYZ” and “You have mentioned that
you believe XYZ has not complied with TUPE legislation, however I see no
evidence to suggest that TUPE was ignored or breached” and “XYZ is fully
compliant with TUPE legislation”
Therefore, if there are no grounds for my grievance then I must have created all those emails and documents myself. You have bullied and intimidated me into coming clean.
Gaslighting, definition - the practice of psychologically manipulating someone
into questioning their own sanity, memory, or powers
of reasoning. I think that covers the above.
Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation and
emotional abuse where a person, the "gaslighter," systematically
feeds false information to a victim, causing them to doubt their own reality,
memory, and sanity. The goal is to gain control and power by eroding the
victim's self-confidence and self-trust, making them more dependent on the
abuser. This often involves tactics like denying events, misrepresenting
facts, or dismissing the victim's feelings to create confusion and a distorted
sense of what is true.
You are still denying events and mis-representing facts,
even with factual documents and genuine emails to prove my grievance. You have
control and power, this is why I still question the process in my head at night
causing insomnia. Can XYZ really be so dis-honest?
I’ve been gaslighted, gaslit? As the youth of today would
say.... whatever.
You are indeed completely correct, I am confused and now
have a distorted sense of what is true, it is has all been a fraud and a sham.
I made it all up. Forgive me.
I feel so guilty for deceiving you that I will now tell you
how I did it.
You may or not be aware of Penn & Teller. They are American
magicians who perform their magic tricks and then explain how they are done,
usually with a twist to the trick, at the end. i.e. the trick isn’t what it
actually appears to be originally.
Firstly I need you to think of a card.
As you can’t, I’ve used a random card generator which has
thrown up the Jack of Diamonds. I’m going to write on the
card so that I can’t be accused of using a different card to get the result
that I want. I also have a real pack of cards here, just in case you are
wondering how I can write on a card that has been randomly generated on a
computer.
Now keep your eye on this card. It’s crucial to the trick.
Don’t worry, if you think that you’ve been forced to use this card, you can
change it later. That’s also known as an Equivoque – (a method of forcing
a specific object on a spectator through a seemingly randomized selection
process) makes it sound a lot more mysterious doesn’t it. The card doesn’t, in
this trick, actually make any difference. I’ll explain later.
I’m going to shuffle the card back into the pack. I’m not
going to use an ambitious card routine – (A common trick where a card seemingly
rises to the top of the deck)
Watch closely, the card doesn’t go back in to the pack, with
sleight of hand I fold it with my right thumb and then fold it again. (A mercury
fold) Having finished shuffling the pack I will then palm the folded card into
my pocket, to ditch the card. I would have added a Blind Shuffle (A cut or apparent shuffle in which the cards appear mixed
but all of the cards are left completely undisturbed after the shuffle or cut.)
but that isn’t possible with a random card generator.
I’ll give you a
little pointer, try for a Burn – (a subject staring at the magician's
hands without averting the gaze, no matter what misdirection is
thrown at a subject.) It will make the trick more effective. To make it
easy, now that I’ve told you, I won’t be going to my pocket for some fairy dust
or woofle dust to sprinkle over the cards, that would be far too easy and
obvious, and in any case, I haven’t got any to hand.
Note to self – Order some Woofle Dust.
Ready?
Although members of the Magic Circle shouldn’t reveal their
secrets, Penn & Teller have shown this on one of their TV programmes, so I
should be OK with the reveal.
I’m going to go for a little bit of Prestidigitation, a bit tricky now
there’s restricted movement in my hand, thanks to XYZ. – I do like that word,
it’s from French, Latin and
Italian meaning fast fingers.(Presto and digitus) better than legerdemain,
which is light of hand, which became sleight of hand.
Additionally I will cheat by using
Psychokinesis, moving things using my supernatural powers. It’s a bit unfair using my
supernatural powers to deceive you, but at least it’s not an out and out lie,
as I believe there might be some discrepancies between what you're saying
and the facts, or alternatively it seems that the information that you have provided
may not fully align with the actual circumstances.
Good, you probably didn’t
you spot that?
The card is now in my pocket.
The trick now is to take that card from my pocket at a later
point in the trick when I think you are not watching and then make it appear
somewhere strange and unexpected later.
You won’t actually see it happen because
of my Psychokinesis.
I assume that you have seen Star
Trek and teleportation, or heard of it, it’s the same thing.
Now to distract you from my pocket, I need some really good misdirection here. If I haven’t distracted you enough already.
I created a vast amount of bogus documentation, it’s amazing
what you can find on the internet and obtain from contacts at other depots, TUPE
forms, sick notes, the list is almost endless. Still watching my pocket? It’s
still in there. You didn’t miss it. Not yet......... because you will.
I also created some bogus email accounts, you might get an
email which has someone’s name on it, for example Buster Keaton, but do you look at the actual email
address? It’s how the spammers get to you. Still watching? It’s still in there............or
is it?
As it happens, it is.
Next up I got some burner phones and set up some fake
accounts so that it appeared that I had calls and texts from my surgery and the
NHS, amongst others.
Did you see the card go? No, I didn’t think you did.
I did tell you that you can’t see Psychokinesis. Unless you
are very good and spot the slight shimmering in the air.
I’m guessing that you rumbled me because of all the mistakes
that I made with the TUPE documentation. I was a bit rushed when I did that bit
and didn’t double check all the dates and details because the original
documents weren’t mine. Schoolboy error. I tried to double bluff you in my
grievance by highlighting all the errors that I had made.
So I put all that together and produced the grievance. I’m
guessing that the time that you spent “investigating” was in working out how I
produced all the evidence. All you had to do then was just deny everything, as
you have done and continue to do, as going to a tribunal with a hoax claim would
be a complete waste of time for me, so well played,
you win.
Oh, yes the card.
Jack of Diamonds
wasn’t it.
Did you see where it went?
No?
What I wrote on the Jack of Diamonds was CRM Document. Now where is it going to appear?
I should be using the woofle dust here, but I told you I
wouldn’t.
Where have I teleported the card?
Mr. Sulu, where did you send the card?
Sulu: If you ask Buster
Keaton to look in her email folder, that’s where I sent it.
That thwarts a XYZ magic trick. You
made the document disappear, but I actually saw where it went. You need to work
on your sleight of hand. I don’t think you
have even mentioned the document at all throughout the whole grievance process,
even when Stan Laurel was giving his opinion about my priorities. (Which were
completely wrong by the way “Perhaps the biggest area of concern relating to
your TUPE transfer” again, it seems that the
information that you have provided may not fully align with the actual
circumstances.)
The CRM document is the XYZ Local
document showing my position as Shift Manager. Twice.
Just to remind you, this document has
never been questioned throughout your process.
Did you speak to Franchisee 1or Franchisee
2 about its authenticity?
No, you can’t have.
So that is a double magic trick, I found where you had
hidden the document and then put it back where it came from.
Teleportation makes it so easy. Thank you Mr Sulu.
Come on Cardiff, at least a little ripple of apathy, I
thought that was a pretty decent trick.
What, you’re not happy with the Jack of Diamonds?
I forced you into choosing a card
that you didn’t want and obviously I also had a Peek (A secret glance by the
magician at a chosen card to know its identity) at the card.
No problem. I’ll generate another
card.
You can’t say that I’m not fair.
I mean, we have been playing by
your rules however bent they are.
Five of Diamonds.
Right, written on the back of the
five of Diamonds was TUPE Start date. That relates to the TUPE document which refers
to 1st January. That is the 1st of January which precedes the start of the TUPE
process. According to the document sent by Buster
Keaton the process started with it being presented to the XYZ Local
staff on the 23rd January 2025. Oops, that’s three weeks later. I told you that
I had made some mistakes with the dates on some of the documents that I had
used.
You were a bit unlucky there,
however.
All the Diamonds, and some others
(including all the Hearts), relate to the same master document, (response to
points, made by Buster Keaton,
could there really have been so much documentation that you ignored?)
In fact there’s over half a pack
of cards that I have used up there just from that one document that Buster Keaton sent to me. So
that document is also there in Buster
Keaton’s emails.
You can claim that the Random Card generator is a Confederate – (an “audience member” planted
to act in a cooperative manner), but try the Random Card Generator, see
how long it takes to get that sequence of cards. It would be a 1 in 52 chance
of drawing the same first card. It would be a 1 in 51 chance of drawing the
second card, as we already have the Jack of Diamonds on the table, which is a 1
in 2652 chance.
Another card?
Amazing, Ace of Diamonds.
Seriously, you’re so unlucky, 3
diamonds in a row. It doesn’t actually help the trick getting three Diamonds in
a row. Well, obviously, that’s the same result, the document is in Buster
Keaton’s emails. I am genuinely using a random card generator.
It is not a Gimmick, (A hidden prop or special piece of equipment
that helps the magician achieve a magical effect – (Random.org/playing-cards)
And predicting three cards would be 1 in 132,600.
Ah! That’s better.
Eight of clubs.
Written on the back of the Eight
of clubs was Paddock. This relates to the Paddock Surgery. I had phone calls
and texts that appeared to come from the Paddock Surgery on my burner phone.
But............ (pause for dramatic effect)
How did I use the real phone number on my burner phone?
That was a very clever piece of
hacking. I needed help with that.
A Computer science degree comes in
useful at sometimes, though I’m not sure that’s what they teach.
On a roll now, different suits.
Two of Hearts
Collective consultation – Leeds
Local. Similar set up. Create a dodgy document, submit it in my grievance and
hope it fools you. I used a fake email account on this one as well too, so that
it looked like Charlie Chaplin had sent it.
Well here’s the magic, how did I
get the email into Charlie Chaplin’s sent items?
Thank you again Mr Sulu.
In for a penny, In for a pound?
Another card?
Ace of Spades.
Written on the back of the Ace of Spades was NHS. The screenshot Stan Laurel referenced in the grievance meeting. It showed an NHS page with details of my last test results. You may remember that it related to a Bowel Cancer test. I had been trying to show Ryan Thorpe that I hadn’t received the recent scan results from The Sidings at Dewsbury, I had the impression that Ryan didn’t believe me. Stan Laurel seemed concerned about the image. Probably not because it was bogus but because of the mention of cancer. It was easy to create the document on PowerPoint, but...........(drum roll)
How did I use the correct web address? Ta-dahhhhhh!
Speaking of test results, what
happened to the referral you were going to arrange when I hadn’t got the
results of my ultrasound scan?
Was that your magic trick, making that
disappear?
I followed up on the missing test results by calling at the
surgery on my way home from the grievance meeting, as I said I would. You
failed to complete your task.
Seriously? You want another card?
King of Clubs.
Written on the King of Clubs is Dogsbody.
Note that I used Stan Laurel’s word,
not my word of “Donkey”. Stan Laurel states that this use of me as a dogsbody “was not acceptable” yet still failed to
uphold my grievance. How did I get him to do this?
This wasn’t magic, as such. I
hypnotised Stan Laurel during the grievance meeting. The process took so long
that I didn’t think that my hypnosis had worked.
There will of course be CCTV
footage of me working alone in the warehouse as the aforementioned dogsbody,
unless you’ve made that disappear as well.
It doesn’t actually matter which card you had selected, it was a rigged pack. Well it wasn’t rigged as such, it was a genuine pack as much as anything on the internet is genuine. I have a list with every card on it and something that you claimed to be bogus/false/ fictitious/forged/spurious/sham or fake assigned to every card.
Do you want to go on, as I said, we can use the whole pack.
It won’t make any difference.
And that is how I made up my bogus grievance.
and that’s why
they call me magic Mike.
I know that it will be a pointless exercise, but how do I
make an official complaint about your process? I know that you’ll be backed to
the hilt by any of your senior managers, but I’ve currently got plenty of time
on my hands.
o “Ofcom rules mean that parcel delivery
companies like Amazon Logistics, DPD,
DHL, Evri, Parcelforce, Royal Mail and Yodel, must have a complaints procedure
you can follow. If you have a complaint about one of these companies, please
contact their customer services team.
(I’ll remind you of your email from 4th August “I am
happy to aid you”) (Though it probably merits the same status as your grievance
procedure)
From 1 April 2023, Ofcom's complaints guidance comes into effect. This
means that, if you complain to a parcel company, you should be told:
- who to contact;
- which channels you can use to make a complaint;
- what the complaint process will be, and how long it should take to resolve; and
- that the complaint should be dealt with by staff who have received appropriate training.”
As the complaint
includes Oliver Hardy, I expect it to be someone with a higher status than him.
Can you also
confirm whether XYZ classes the grievance policy as a contract. I would suggest
that it is, as it is clearly intended to be binding. In which case you would
have breached that contract.
If you have any problems with the accuracy and content of
this letter, let me know and I’ll refer you to my legal team.
I would say I’ll be looking forwards to seeing you on 13th January, but I doubt that you’ll be there.
