Customer Services and Information Governance Team
Communities, Economy and Transport Department

01273 335864

eastsussex.gov.uk 

25th November 2024

Subject: Response to Correspondence Regarding Injunction Application

Dear Customer Services and Information Governance Team,

Thank you for your response dated 20th December 2024 acknowledging my correspondence.

I must highlight that East Sussex County Council has failed to adhere to its obligations under current legislation, particularly concerning the handling of my children’s case and the associated genetic and genealogical report. These failures include placing siblings with the wrong families 14 years ago—neither of which is from Northern Ireland. This serious error raises questions about the accuracy, integrity, and accountability of the processes involved. Even when this entered the press.

When Anita Cundall was tasked with investigating these matters, she chose instead to defame me by perpetuating unsubstantiated claims made by social services. Despite being presented with evidence to the contrary, she refused to rescind these falsehoods, further compounding the damage and undermining trust in the Council’s actions, indicating criminality. I repeat, social services have never provided a report on me, which is required under the Care Act. Our family’s children were relocated approximately 500 miles from there home. This blatant breach constitutes serious negligence and a violation of her rights (Children Act 1989, Section 22C(9)(b); Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995, Article 27). You have never answered or provided repairation; instead, this raises serious concerns under the Fraud Act 2006, Section 2, which addresses false representation.

• Article 6: The right to a fair trial.
• Article 8: The right to respect for private and family life.
• Article 14: The prohibition of discrimination.

I have already pointed out timelines, which have all been ignored

Timeline of Events

2010–2014: Preceding Issues

• Matthew Dunkley’s Tenure in Australia
  • Dunkley was the Regional Director for Ultranet in Victoria, Australia.
  • Implicated in a corruption scandal involving the destruction of documents, investigated under Operation Dunham by the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC).
  • Evidence included a taped phone call where Dunkley advocated for destroying financial documents submitted to IBAC. CASE-20246844

2016: Key Incident

• Disappearance of My Daughter
  • My daughter went missing from her known residence and social media accounts.
  • Suspected illegal abduction orchestrated by Matthew Dunkley (Director of ESCC Children’s Services) and Christine Elizabeth Stirling (former social worker).
  • No adoption protocols were followed; my daughter was allegedly placed with unrelated families.

Post-2016: Efforts to Address Issues

• Raising Concerns and Submitting Evidence
  • I informed legal teams about my daughter’s disappearance and the ongoing illegal actions involving Dunkley and Stirling.
  • Highlighted alleged fabricated documents and destruction of records by Dunkley and Stirling.

2021: Financial Concerns

• Removal of Trust Funds
  • On November 12, 2021, I filed complaint CRW3CFFQN regarding the removal of my daughter’s trust fund and lack of transparency about the transfer of substantial funds.
• DNA Evidence Submitted to Southern Health and Social Care Trust
  • SAO10831060GB: DNA evidence was submitted to the Trust, but they failed to respond to my data protection request, potentially violating Section 10 of the Data Protection Act.

2024: Recent Escalations

• October 11, 2024
  • Provided 15 letters to NICCY in Northern Ireland, asking the Children’s Commissioner to investigate and meet with my daughter. No investigation was initiated.
• November 30, 2024
  • Keith Glazier referred to a report (RPPR Update Report) concerning East Sussex County Council’s financial situation.
  • Acknowledged a projected budget deficit of £55.3m in 2025/26, rising to £83.6m by 2027/28.
  • The report mentioned growing pressures on children’s and adult social care services, which might impact sustainability and service delivery.
  • Public consultations were planned to address proposed savings within Adult Social Care (ASC) and Community, Economy, and Transport (CET).
  • The Irish Times publishes Article Care being provided in Northern Ireland is not fit for service. Therefore, public money is being spent on goods that are not fit for use, adding to alleged criminality.
• December 20, 2024
  • An application for an interim injunction was served on Robert Clubb, requesting a legally certified order.

Systemic Failures and Council’s Response

• Handling of My Children’s Case
  • East Sussex County Council failed to place siblings with the correct families 14 years ago, despite clear legal obligations.
  • Neither child was from Northern Ireland, highlighting serious procedural errors.
• Investigation by Anita Cundall
  • Cundall perpetuated unsubstantiated claims made by social services instead of investigating systemic failures.
  • Social services failed to provide a report on me, as required under the Care Act.

Legal Breaches Identified

1. Children Act 1989, Section 22C(9)(b)
   • Breach of duty regarding proper placement of children.
2. Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995, Article 27
   • Failure to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
3. Fraud Act 2006, Section 2
   • False representation by officials.
4. Human Rights Violations
   • Article 6: Right to a fair trial.
   • Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life.
   • Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination.

Additionally, the Council’s published complaints process, as outlined at https://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/contactus/complaints/complaints-process-policy, has not been adhered to in this instance. Ms. Cundall did not activate a formal complaint as required, choosing instead to act outside the bounds of the established process.

As previously mentioned, IBAC has acknowledged my serious complaint regarding systemic issues within East Sussex County Council, including allegations of misconduct by former and current officers. These include the mishandling of complaints and investigations, as well as actions that appear to be aimed at obscuring wrongdoing rather than addressing it transparently.

The Council must take immediate action to rectify these issues, ensure compliance with legal obligations, and respond substantively to my concerns. Failure to do so will only further demonstrate an unwillingness to uphold the principles of accountability, integrity, and justice.

Given the gravity of these issues, I expect the following actions:

1. An immediate written retraction of your defamatory and inaccurate comments. Or place the injuction into court signed.
2. A formal acknowledgment of the factual corrections outlined above.
3. A detailed response addressing the systemic failures and breaches of law identified.
4. Please provide your full name in response.

I await your prompt response and a commitment to addressing these matters appropriately.

Kind Regards
Mr. Martin Newbold