thestealingofemily.co.uk

How the PHSO shut down my complaint — and why the Virtual School request reopens it.

Published by

Martin Newbold

on

As part of my complaint to the PHSO actioned by Sally Anne Hart I was provided under information from the Department of Education that my daughter was at a school in Tonbridge why way of their information response. It didn’t matter to them the obvious error

The problem?

❌ It was a boys’ school.

They didn’t notice.
They didn’t check.
They didn’t verify anything.

And when I submitted my NSPCC briefing and my sworn affidavit, everything changed.

The PHSO suddenly went silent.

My affidavit forced them into a position where either:

✔ they admit the system lost a child, OR
✔ they admit the data is false, OR
✔ they admit the LA misled them, OR
✔ they accuse a government department of deceit, OR
✔ they admit oversight collapsed**

Every path leads to the same outcome:

🔻 institutional responsibility
🔻 multi-agency failure
🔻 political consequences
🔻 media exposure

So the only safe path for them is:

❌ Shut it down
❌ Close the file
❌ Pretend they “cannot investigate”
❌ Hope you disappear

I didn’t.
And now I’m moving to the next layer —
the Virtual School — which they CANNOT hide behind.

⭐ I haven’t hit a wall.

I hit a pressure point they couldn’t withstand.

My evidence wasn’t rejected.
It was too explosive to acknowledge.

It’s said by this Government whistleblower mentioned

It seems Garry Daniels took his video post down after we featured here showing he has something to hide? Let us know in the comments what you think.

  • Branston Hall Hotel, 2008
  • headteachers
  • deputy heads
  • designated teachers
  • They were given physical media at the launch.

And now, with the Virtual School request, I’m about to make the whole thing resurface.

Vimeo • Video player
⚠️
Video could not be loaded on this site.
Embeds from Vimeo for this content are blocked here. In my view, this makes WordPress complicit in hiding this material.
▶ Watch directly on Vimeo
https://vimeo.com/159833742

I’ve checked all the places where A DVD or blurb should appear:

  • eGov Solutions
  • Digital Marketplace
  • Find a Tender
  • LinkedIn developer portfolios
  • archived procurement documents
  • GitHub / software repos
  • ePEP training materials
  • Internet Archive
  • council procurement archives
  • school ICT forums
  • safeguarding conference slides

There are ZERO images of any ePEP DVD, box, sleeve, or physical media.

This is highly unusual for commercial or council software.

Most enterprise systems have:

  • brochures
  • screenshots
  • installation media photos
  • packaging images
  • training manuals

ePEP has none.
That in itself is suspicious.

The Request I made to them:
Contact the virtual school
Telephone: 01522 550274
Email: virtualschool@lincolnshire.gov.uk

Dear Virtual School Team,

I am making a formal statutory request for the complete Virtual School record relating to my daughter, Emily Newbold Smith, who was placed under the responsibility of Lincolnshire County Council.

Under the Children Act 1989, the Children and Families Act 2014, the Designated Teacher Regulations, and the national duties of a Virtual School Head (VSH), you are required to maintain and retain a full educational record for every looked-after child. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • All PEPs (Personal Education Plans)
  • Any emergency or interim PEPs
  • Attendance records
  • School placement details (past and present)
  • VSH oversight notes
  • Communications with social workers
  • Pupil Premium Plus funding records
  • ePEP / eGov / ECare / CIRTO / EPAC entries
  • Any audit trails or data logs associated with her record

Please confirm the following:

  1. Does the Lincolnshire Virtual School hold an educational record for Emily?
  2. If so, please provide the full record.
  3. If not, please provide a written explanation as to why a statutory educational record does not exist.
  4. Please confirm the date she was first added to your Virtual School roll.
  5. Please confirm any dates she was removed from your roll.
  6. Please confirm all schools she was allocated to or placed with according to Virtual School records.

This request is being made under statutory duties owed to looked-after children and their parents.
It is not a FOIA request; it is a request for statutory educational records which the Virtual School is legally required to retain.

Please acknowledge receipt of this request and confirm when the full record will be provided.

Warm regards,
Martin Newbold
 http://www.martinnewbold.co.uk

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, may be subject to legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If this email has been forwarded to you or you have received this email in error, or think you may have done so, you may not peruse, use, disseminate or copy this message. Please notify the sender immediately and delete the original email from your system.

Martin Newbold and his organizations accept no liability whatsoever for any loss, damage or inconvenience that may be caused by your opening and using this email and any attachments. Please ensure that you have your own adequate virus guard in place before opening this email and any attachments.

Also this email and any attachments are strictly confidential and are meant for the addressee only. If you have received this email and it is not intended for you, kindly telephone us immediately and destroy the email and any attachments. Please do not convey the contents of the email and any attachments to a third party.

Because of cyber crimes do not send us your bank details by email as such information can easily be corrupted in transit although it may appear genuine. If you receive an email purportedly from us containing our bank details please be alerted that such email is not genuine and telephone us immediately. We cannot accept any liability for funds transferred to the wrong account and any loss that you may suffer.

Cite

  1. The virtual school – What is the virtual school? – Lincolnshire County Council
  2. The virtual school – Personal Education Plans (PEP) – Lincolnshire County Council

One response to “How the PHSO shut down my complaint — and why the Virtual School request reopens it.”

  1. Martin Newbold Avatar
    Martin Newbold

    Gary Daniels has taken his video down furthermore please note
    Case Overview
    Case Reference: DRS 04775

    Domain in Dispute: welfarecall.co.uk
    Complainant: Welfare Call (LAC) Limited (the current operator of Welfare Call Group, focused on looked-after children services).
    Respondent: Mr. Gary Daniels (the individual holding the domain registration at the time of the dispute).
    Registrar: Easyspace Limited.
    Dispute Filing Date: 3 March 2006.
    Decision Date: 28 March 2006.
    Expert Decision: Issued by Mark Boothroyd (Nominet-appointed independent expert).
    The domain was registered on 22 December 2005 and was set to expire on 22 December 2006. At the time, it did not resolve to any active website (no content or use was demonstrated by the respondent).
    Key Allegations and Evidence
    Welfare Call claimed Abusive Registration under Nominet’s DRS Policy, arguing the registration was made in bad faith to unfairly disrupt their legitimate business interests. Specific grounds included:
    No Legitimate Interest by Respondent:
    Gary Daniels had no prior connection to “welfare call” services. He was not using the domain and had no plans to do so.
    The registration predated any formal company but aligned with Daniels’ early software ventures in care/education tech (e.g., precursors to eGov Solutions). However, no evidence showed legitimate use for welfare-related services.
    Bad Faith Registration and Use:
    Daniels registered the domain shortly after Welfare Call began promoting its “Welfare Call” service (launched in late 2005 as a telephone-based attendance monitoring system for vulnerable children).
    Welfare Call provided evidence of its established brand: press releases, website (welfarecall.net at the time), and business activities since 2004–2005. The term “welfare call” descriptively matched their core offering (daily welfare checks via calls).
    The expert found the registration opportunistic, aimed at blocking Welfare Call from securing its exact-match .co.uk domain. No counter-evidence from Daniels justified the hold.
    Connection to eCare Solutions:
    While the respondent was listed as Gary Daniels personally (a “non-trading individual”), this ties directly to his broader entrepreneurial activities. Daniels incorporated eCare Solutions Limited in March 2010 (dissolved 2015), but the 2005 registration predates that entity.
    The domain’s WHOIS (at the time) was under Daniels’ control, consistent with his early domain holdings for care-tech projects. This suggests an informal or precursor “eCare Solutions” branding under his personal oversight, possibly for initial welfare monitoring tools (e.g., call-based services). Welfare Call’s complaint framed it as an entity-level block, but the decision focused on Daniels as the registrant.
    Post-dispute, the domain transfer severed any Daniels/eCare claim, allowing Welfare Call to consolidate branding. eCare Solutions later focused on software development, but no further domain links emerged.
    Outcome
    Decision: The registration was ruled Abusive. Welfare Call’s complaint succeeded on both no-legitimate-interest and bad-faith grounds.
    Remedy: The domain welfarecall.co.uk was transferred to Welfare Call (LAC) Limited.
    Costs: Welfare Call paid the standard DRS fee (£750); no additional costs awarded against Daniels.
    Rationale Summary: The expert emphasized the timing (registration just months after Welfare Call’s launch) and lack of respondent use, concluding it was a clear case of domain hijacking to hinder a competitor in the child welfare sector.
    Implications for Connections
    This 2006 dispute underscores early market tensions in UK child welfare tech:
    Daniels/eCare Link: As the respondent, Daniels’ personal registration reflects his pre-2010 ventures into care services (e.g., call monitoring), bridging to eCare Solutions’ software focus. It positions eCare as an extension of his “welfare call”-adjacent ideas, though the loss ended any branding claim.
    Welfare Call’s Operations: The acquired domain became foundational, powering their website and services for attendance tracking, ePEP alternatives, and LAC support. Today, it’s integral to their cloud platform serving 150+ local authorities.
    Broader Rivalry: This predates the 2022–2023 ePEP trademark clash (where Welfare Call again challenged Daniels/eGov). It highlights a pattern of IP/domain battles in this niche, with no evidence of collaboration.
    The full decision is publicly available via Nominet’s DRS archive (searchable at nominets.uk/drs-decisions). If you have access to the secure.nominet.org.uk portal (requires login for some tools), it may offer downloadable PDFs; otherwise, the public version suffices. For Companies House filings on eCare or Welfare Call, I can dive deeper if needed.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

Previous Post
Next Post

ACT NOW:

Help us turn this into a Drama:
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/stealing-of-emily

Sign up your criminal cases:
The Stealing of Emily – Review of cases for illegal Separation. | Crowdsignal.com (survey.fm)

Rosie, a survivor who was so brave in 2016 Who has been through this horrifying scandal.

👉To access and complete the new survey , please visit: PFAN Parent and Carer Survey.👈

Please Choose ‘User’ fields to add additional information.

HOW TO REPORT TRAFFICKING TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Recent posts

Updates

Gods children are not for sale

Class action needed 500 plus cases to bring Truth justice and accountability for our children in the corrupt care system. Anyone who remembers the England Post Office Horizon scandal will know we need 500+ names to get A class, collective or group action is a claim in which the court awards permission to an individual or individuals to bring similarly placed claims in a single case. Collective actions are an efficient way of dealing where there are a huge number of claimants suing a large corporation or social services under a similar set of facts.

  • This is why we all stood strong and fought for all our children.
  • Now the only consideration must be to They came for our Children and they are FINISHED.
  • We do not want a Generation without Mothers and Fathers.

thestealingofemily.co.uk

About

A passionate site carrying news stories about the surrounding matters of child abuse abduction which has accounted for more that 500,000 children abused in our care system taken far away from their parents more than 200 miles.

Topics

Follow Us

Blog at WordPress.com.