[Town_Fan]

The foi request by Bean is amazing hypocrisy considering the way the club plasters privacy caveats on it's own email exchanges.

Its staggering incompetence for them not to realise how this will just alienate the fanbase more. It makes an utter mockery of the claims made by Bean when he started.

This has genuinely boiled my urine and I will do all I can to support op if he wants to highlight what the club have done here. I have a shed load of nhs IG experience if op wants any help.

Edit: IG information governance

This post has been edited by Town_Fan: 09 October 2019 - 09:44 PM

[calvin plummers socks]

Bean out asap of our once wonderful club

[Mr Mercury]

calvin plummers socks, on 09 October 2019 - 09:48 PM, said:

Bean out asap of our once wonderful club

Is it possible somebody else has been pursuing this in his absence?

[Westbars Spireite]

Bean will be gone as soon as any deal is done. I will happily pay a hundred pounds for my seat knowing that is true.

[meowdmucker]

Westbars Spireite, on 09 October 2019 - 10:14 PM, said:

Bean will be gone as soon as any deal is done. I will happily pay a hundred pounds for my seat knowing that is true.

'Here, Here to a 'has bean'!

[Westbars Spireite]

As long as that seat isn't covered in bird ****.

[Wooden Spoon]

Mr Mercury, on 09 October 2019 - 09:51 PM, said:

Is it possible somebody else has been pursuing this in his absence?

An IT expert trying to deflect criticism away from the company secretary?

[SpireiteFitzy]

oldgoat, on 09 October 2019 - 09:41 PM, said:

My quote box is missing today, but someone above said:-
"My interpretation is that there can have only been two purposes:

a) To deliberately cause the OP grief at work
b) To identify if the OP had been in communications with anyone regarding his thoughts on bean/cfc. Presumably with the purposes of identifying them, which appears to be his M.O.

Neither sit well with me as neither are necessary considering all the OP had done was to raise legitimate concerns in a reasonable manner.

Ask yourself this. Are these the actions of man trying to build bridges with disenfranchised supporters? Not for me...as another poster mentions roll on the AGM when it will be us making the enquiries! "

Seems to me that there is a third option. If we assume that the original e-mail contained something about Mr. Bean that was untrue:-
c)To identify whether the incorrect/untrue statement had been shared with another third person, as if that were the case there may be a case for libel to answer. Or worse, he could allege that the company for whom the opening poster had worked was liable for slander - although in my opinion that would be a bit of a stretch as the opening poster would inevitably have been deemed to have been acting "on a folic of his own" and without any intent to show that the view was shared by his employer.



Oops sorry about the messy reply - The third option c) is not the case so it must be a) or b) .

Mr Bean told me over the phone repeatedly that he had not seen any of my 3 e mails asking him to explain to me what he expected to achieve by his actions , as I assume the conversation was recorded I have no reason to believe he was being untruthful .

However as all three e mails were replies to communication from Mr Bean so were to the correct address and the when I sent first one , when he was away on holiday , I received an out of office response from Mr Beans e mail account - who did receive the e mails .

If I was CEO of a company and I was not in a position to receive e mails for whatever reason It would be assumed that I would delegate a responsible person to read and them and take the appropriate action , as my e mails went to his address and at least the first one got to his in box why were they ignored .

I would hope that the person delegated to deal with them would be aware of what to action and what to delete , also I would hope that e mails from someone who Mr Bean had made a complaint , or as he says a FOI request about would be acted on / referred to Mr Bean and not just deleted .

I just want the truth , is that to much to ask ?

Some people representing our club will have no memory of what truth is so yeah it is a lot to ask.

[Sammy Spireite]

DEATH, on 09 October 2019 - 10:44 PM, said:

An IT expert trying to deflect criticism away from the company secretary?

you lost me at 'IT Expert'

[Wooden Spoon]

Sammy Spireite, on 10 October 2019 - 11:43 AM, said:

you lost me at 'IT Expert'

Allow some poetic licence. Perhaps boot licking, bottom crawling office grass is more accurate

[Wooden Spoon]

SpireiteFitzy, on 10 October 2019 - 12:13 AM, said:

Some people representing our club will have no memory of what truth is so yeah it is a lot to ask.

Some people representing our club have interest in the truth

[Mr Mercury]

DEATH, on 10 October 2019 - 06:57 PM, said:

Allow some poetic licence. Perhaps boot licking, bottom crawling office grass is more accurate

"Grass" is more than sufficient, why use multiple words when one sums it up to perfection..GRASS..

[Sammy Spireite]

I’d definitely be releasing details of any conservation if had with Bean, now he’s gone.

[Town_Fan]

Sammy Spireite, on 14 October 2019 - 10:46 PM, said:

I’d definitely be releasing details of any conservation if had with Bean, now he’s gone.

I agree, now that he has gone I can tell you we planted 2 trees and tidied up a hedgerow.

[clarevoyant.]

Town_Fan, on 15 October 2019 - 05:20 PM, said:

I agree, now that he has gone I can tell you we planted 2 trees and tidied up a hedgerow.

Not bad for someone living in the smoke.