From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: postmottak@fad.dep.no
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:28:34 +0000
Subject: Klageorgan Norge.no

Hei,

jeg har lurt litt på hvordan man skulle gå frem for å klage på Norge.no.

Nå kom jeg på, at jeg kunne jo prøve å sende dere en e-post, angående hvem
det er,
som er klageorgan for de.

Håper dette er i orden!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: postmottak@jd.dep.no
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:22:55 +0000
Subject: Klageorgan Politidirektoratet.

Hei,

jeg har prøvd å finne ut hvordan man skulle gå frem for å klage på
Politdirektoratet.

Så kom jeg på nå, at jeg kunne jo prøve å sende dere en e-post, angående
hvem det er som
er klageorgan for de.

Håper dette er i orden!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: post@mfa.no
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:16:27 +0000
Subject: Klage på utenriksstasjon.

Hei,

jeg lurte på hvordan man skal gå frem, for å klage på en av
utenriksstasjonene.

På forhånd takk for svar!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: Simon.Williams@legalcomplaints.org.uk
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:26:57 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Your e-mail (complaint about a duty solicitor)

Hi,

I'm refering to your e-mail from 2/10, where you are writing:

' *Q2: If not, then who is it one are supposed to complain to, about poor
service/unprofessional* *conduct, by law-firms, in connection with the Dury
Solicitors scheme?*

I have looked into this matter and would suggest that you refer to this
website:

http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions/liverpool_information.asp

It contains information and contact details of the Merseyside Duty
Solicitors scheme and I hope that you will find it useful.

I should also note that the Legal Services Commission is an organisation
wholly separate from the Law Society and, if you have any specific questions
in relation to the procedures, you should direct them to the LSC, rather
than our Office.'.


I've now been in contact with The LSC, and as one can see in the e-mail from
them, which I am forwarding with this
e-mail, the LSC are writing:

'I am not able to help you on this any further. You say that you have
sent you resolution complaint forms to the firms in question. Either
they have replied and you remain unhappy with the response, or they have
not replied at all. You have raised this with the Law Society and they
say that they are unable to assist. They have referred your compliant to
the LSC, and we have said that we are unable to assist and are not going
to take matters further.

If you wish to examine the procedure for making complaints against
firms of solicitors in greater depth, I suggest you contact the Law
Society, as they are the body which is in charge of regulating the legal
profession. There is nothing more I can add to this, and I am afraid
that I shall not be answering any further email correspondence from you.'.

So it doesn't seem like the LSC are able to help me with this.

So I thought I should try to refrase my question a bit, and see if maybe
it's possible
for you to answer me on the question I was wondering about.

What I'm really wondering about, is how one should go forward, if one want's
to
complain formally about unproffessional conduct from a law-firm, in
connection
with the duty solicitor programme.

I hope that you have the chance to have a look at this!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog





---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael Rimer
Date: Nov 9, 2007 5:37 PM
Subject: Re: Your e-mail (complaint about a duty solicitor)
To: eribsskog@gmail.com

Mr Ribsskog

I am not able to help you on this any further. You say that you have
sent you resolution complaint forms to the firms in question. Either
they have replied and you remain unhappy with the response, or they have
not replied at all. You have raised this with the Law Society and they
say that they are unable to assist. They have referred your compliant to
the LSC, and we have said that we are unable to assist and are not going
to take matters further.

If you wish to examine the procedure for making complaints against
firms of solicitors in greater depth, I suggest you contact the Law
Society, as they are the body which is in charge of regulating the legal
profession. There is nothing more I can add to this, and I am afraid
that I shall not be answering any further email correspondence from you.


Yours sincerely

Michael Rimer

>>> "Erik Ribsskog" 09 November 2007 17:31 >>>
Hi,

well I've sent both of the resolution-form complaints to the
law-firms.

So I have certainly contacted both law-firms regarding the complaints.

Like I've also explaned in earlier e-mail to yourself.

I'm not sure if I think it's to much to ask, to get some more
information
about
the general complaint process surounding duty solicitor cases,
involving
unprofessional conduct from law-firms.

As I would suspect that information surrounding the complaint-process,
should
be puplicly known.

You told me to send you the e-mails if I had recieved legal aid
founding.

I told you that I hadn't received any legal aid founding as of yet, but
that
I
was still wondering how to forward with the complaints.

And this I haven't recieved any answer to.

I think members of the puclic should be allowed to get information
about the
duty
solicitor complaint process, so thats why I'm asking about this again.

About where I can find general information about the duty solicitors
complaint
process, in cases like the ones I've mentioned.

So I hope it's possible for you to tell me this.

Thank you very much in advance for your help!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribssskog



On 11/9/07, Michael Rimer wrote:
>
> Mr Ribsskog
>
> You have not raised any fresh issues in your email to me. I have
told
> you what you should do. In not one email have you said whether you
have
> raised your concerns with the firms in question. I am not able to
add
> anything further to what I have said already.
>
> Your sincerely
>
> Michael Rimer
>
> >>> "Erik Ribsskog" 09 November 2007 17:04 >>>
> Hi,
>
> the involvement of the Law Society regarding these complaints, is
also
> being
> dealt with
> by the Legal Services Ombudsman.
>
> The cases, that the complaints are surrounding, are cases that have
> received
> any
> legal aid founding to this date.
>
> What I'm simply saying, is that the Law Society, told me that I
should
> complain to you,
> some weeks ago.
>
> And even if the dates for the contact with the law-firms are some
> months
> back, I've dealing
> with each complaint regurarely.
>
> It's just that I'm being passed around from one organisation to the
> next,
> and between
> different people and levels in the different organisations.
>
> So I was just wondering how is it, that one are supposed to go
forward,
> in
> general, if
> one wants to complain about law-firms, regarding unproffesional
> conduct, in
> conection
> with the duty solicitors program, regardless if any legal aid
founding
> has
> been given
> by the LSC as of yet.
>
> If you think I can complain to you, regardless if there hasn't been
> any
> legal aid founding
> being given by the LSC, than I can send you all the e-mails, from
the
> correspondence
> with the Law Society, and the law-firms.
>
> Since there has been quite long-lasting processes surounding this,
> then
> there are quite
> a few e-mails.
>
> And these e-mails are also being looked at by the LSO, like I
> explained.
>
> So it would be very fine, if you could explain to me how complaints
> about
> unprofessonal
> conduct, from law-firms, in connection with the duty solicitor
> programme
> (regardless if
> any legal aid founding has been given as of yet), usually are being
> reported
> by the
> complainant.
>
> It's the general complaint-process that I was a bit curious about.
>
> Maybe there is an informaiton web-page on your website, explaining
> about
> this?
>
> I'm sure I'm not the first person complaining about unprofesional
> conduct
> like this,
> from law-firms in connection with the duty solicitors programme.
>
> So I'm sure that there has to be a generall complaint-process
rutine,
> regarding
> how complaint-cases like this, should be dealt with.
>
> It's this information that I'm looking for, and I would be very
> grateful if
> it would be
> possible for you to enlighten me regarding this.
>
> Thank you very much for your help in advance!
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Erik Ribsskog
>
>
>
>
> On 11/9/07, Michael Rimer
wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr Ribsskog
> >
> > You have complained to the LSC, and I have suggested that you
> redirect
> > your complaint to the firms in question. I am afraid to say that
> the
> > way that you have expressed your complaints in word docs you sent
me
> is
> > not very clear. I have read each a number of times and it is not
> > abundantly plain what it is you wish to achieve by making a
> complaint.
> > Furthermore, the matters you complain of date back to May this
year
> and
> > it is now November.
> >
> > Because it is not very clear what exactly happened or didn't
happen
> > when you saw or spoke to advisers from EAD and from Morcroft, I
> cannot
> > see clearly whether you received advice from them which was paid
for
> by
> > the LSC. Rather than reiterate your complaint, if you could scan
any
> > correspondence you have received from either or both solicitors,
> that
> > may assist.
> >
> > I am not proposing to investigate your complaint any further. If
> you
> > are able to send me correspondence received from the solicitors in
> > question, so as to satisfy me that they did work on your behalf
for
> > which they were paid from the legal aid fund, then again, I would
> > suggest that you raise your complaint again with the firm.
Depending
> on
> > what they said, I might think it appropriate to refer this the
> relevant
> > firm's account manager at the Liverpool LSC office.
> >
> > Yours sincerely
> >
> > Michael Rimer
> >
> > >>> "Erik Ribsskog" 09 November 2007 15:26
>>>
> > Hi,
> >
> > thank you very much for your e-mail!
> >
> > The Law Society, told me (in e-mails I've forwarded to the LSC
with
> my
> > previous e-mails), that
> > if one wanted to complain (formally), about law-firms in
connection
> > with the
> > duty solicitors
> > programme, then one should complain to the LSC.
> >
> > So I was wondering if what you are writing to me, is that this
isn't
> > right?
> >
> > Are you telling me, that there isn't any formal way of complaining
> > about
> > profesional misconduct,
> > against law-firms, in connection with the duty solicitors
programme,
> > (other
> > than to the companies
> > themselves).
> >
> > This because, I have sent Law Society resolution-form comlaints to
> > both
> > law-firms.
> >
> > But both law-firms, are saying, that I'm not a client with them,
> since
> > they
> > only helped me in connection
> > with the duty sollicitors programme, and then I have no right to
> > complain,
> > since I'm not a client of the law-firm.
> >
> > So that option is already tryed.
> >
> > I was wondering if there are any Governement organisations that
one
> > could
> > complain about this to.
> >
> > And also, who could give me advice about this?
> >
> > Thank you very much for your help in advance!
> >
> > Yours sincerely,
> >
> > Erik Ribsskog
> >
> >
> > On 11/9/07, Michael Rimer
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Mr Ribsskog
> > >
> > > If you are unhappy with the service you received with the firms
of
> > > solicitors you had dealings with, then I repeat, that you should
> > write a
> > > clear letter to the firms outlining briefly what you think they
> > didn't
> > > do properly.
> > >
> > > I am not in a postition to be able to advise you further on
this.
> > >
> > > Yours sincerely
> > >
> > > Michael Rimer
> > >
> > > >>> "Erik Ribsskog" 08 November 2007 18:15
> >>>
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if you have read the complaints thorowly enought
> then,
> > > because it has a been a problem with lying and breaching of
> > > agreements.
> > >
> > > And giving wrong advice over the phone.
> > >
> > > This is unprofessional conduct, and it has been examples of this
> in
> > > both
> > > complaints.
> > >
> > > So I was wondering if you please could tell me how I should go
> > > forward,
> > > if I wanted to complain about legal firm in regarding
> unprofessional
> > > conduct
> > > in conection with the duty solicitior programme.
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for your help in advance!
> > >
> > > Yours sincerely,
> > >
> > > Erik Ribsskog
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/8/07, Michael Rimer
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear Mr Ribsskog
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the further information. Your complaints are of
a
> > lack
> > > of
> > > > what you perceive as being acceptable customer service from
each
> > > (not
> > > > being told who was dealing with your case, having meetings
> > cancelled
> > > and
> > > > not rescheduled, being passed from one person to the next and
> > having
> > > to
> > > > explain your case to each one, all of which can be frustrating
> > when
> > > you
> > > > have your own legal issues as a primary concern).
> > > >
> > > > May I suggest that you raise your concerns with the firms
> > directly.
> > > It
> > > > may assist if you shorten your accounts by summarising the
main
> > > points
> > > > of complaint, in order to get the text onto a one page letter.
> > > >
> > > > It might be that the person who dealt with your complaint at
the
> > > Legal
> > > > Complaints Service thought, as I did at first, that you were
> > > concerned
> > > > by the behaviour of a criminal duty solicitor. However, it
seems
> > as
> > > > though it relates to an employment dispute. In any event, I
> think
> > > that
> > > > you ought to be referring your concerns to the firms, as it is
> > they
> > > who
> > > > ought to be listening to the points you make and considering
> > whether
> > > > they need to take a fresh look at their customer service.
> > > >
> > > > Your sincerely
> > > >
> > > > Michael
> > > >
> > > > >>> "Erik Ribsskog" 08 November 2007
11:20
> > >>>
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > thank you very much for your answer!
> > > >
> > > > Well, in April, I called the Law Society about the problems,
and
> > > they
> > > > adviced me
> > > > to bring the complaints through their complaint-procedure.
> > > >
> > > > Now, about six months later, the Law Society tells me that it
is
> > the
> > > > LSC,
> > > > who
> > > > should have dealt with these complaints.
> > > >
> > > > The complaints are regarding poor service and unprofessional
> > > conduct,
> > > > from
> > > > law-firms,
> > > > in conection with duty solicitor meetings, being set up by the
> > CAB.
> > > >
> > > > I'm going to enclose a copy of the two complaints that I sent
> the
> > > Law
> > > > Society.
> > > >
> > > > One complaint regarding the Morecrofts Solicitors firm, and
one
> > > > complaint
> > > > regarding
> > > > the EAD solicitors firm.
> > > >
> > > > So I'm looking forward to hearing more from you, regarding how
I
> > > should
> > > > go
> > > > forward
> > > > with these complaints.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance for the help!
> > > >
> > > > Yours sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > Erik Ribsskog
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 11/8/07, Michael Rimer
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Mr Ribsskog
> > > > >
> > > > > Your email has been referred to me as you appear to have had
> > some
> > > > > difficulties in finding out where to make a complaint about
a
> > duty
> > > > > solicitor who assisted you recently. I am a lawyer in the
> LSC's
> > > > head
> > > > > office legal department.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not clear from your email what it is exactly that you
> were
> > > > unhappy
> > > > > about the duty solicitor who assisted you. Did the duty
> > solicitor
> > > > see
> > > > > you at a police station? Or did the duty solicitor see you
at
> > the
> > > > > magistrates' court? If you outlined very briefly the nature
> of
> > > your
> > > > > complaint about the solicitor, i.e., what he did that you
> > thought
> > > > was
> > > > > wrong, or what he didn't do that you think he ought to have
> > done,
> > > > that
> > > > > would be helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am mindful to suggest that you make a complaint to the
firm
> > > > directly.
> > > > > Usually, a complaint against a solicitor is best made to the
> > > senior
> > > > or
> > > > > managing partner at the solicitor's firm. Otherwise, the
> > solicitor
> > > > whom
> > > > > you are unhappy about wont know what it is he has done
wrong,
> in
> > > > your
> > > > > view. Depending on the firm's response, the Customer
Service
> > > Team
> > > > > (whom you originally emailed about this) will be in a better
> > > position
> > > > to
> > > > > say whether your complaint should be referred to the firm's
> > > account
> > > > > manager at the Legal Services Commission, or whether it
should
> > be
> > > > dealt
> > > > > with by the Law Society's Legal Complaint Service.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael Rimer
> > > > > Legal Adviser
> > > > > Corporate Legal Team
> > > > > Legal Services Commission
> > > > > 85 Gray's Inn Road,
> > > > > London WC1X 8TX
> > > > >
> > > > > DX 328 Chancery Lane
> > > > >
> > > > > Note: The email may contain confidential legal advice which
is
> > > > likely
> > > > > to be subject to legal professional privilege and which may
be
> > > > exempt
> > > > > from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Please
> > > contact
> > > > the
> > > > > author or the Commission's Legal Director to seek
> authorisation
> > > > before
> > > > > disclosing this email outside the Commission."
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> "Erik Ribsskog" 06 November 2007
> 02:25
> > > >>>
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail
yet,
> > > thats
> > > > > why I'm
> > > > > trying to send it again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yours sincerely,
> > > > >
> > > > > Erik Ribsskog
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > > > From: Erik Ribsskog
> > > > > Date: Oct 19, 2007 4:36 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Your e-mail
> > > > > To: Legal LSC
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > thank you very much for your answer.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will now try to summarise the corespondce I've been having
> > with
> > > > you
> > > > > and
> > > > > Simon Williams from the Legal Complaints Service.
> > > > >
> > > > > Simon Williams (The Legal Complaints Service) says that I
> should
> > > > > contact the
> > > > > LSC to complain about
> > > > > a duty solicitor.
> > > > >
> > > > > And you (The LSC) are saying that I should contact The Legal
> > > > > Complaints
> > > > > Service to complain about
> > > > > a duty solicitor.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I'm not sure how to conclude this summary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you please confirm again who I should contact if I
want
> to
> > > > > formally
> > > > > complain about poor service
> > > > > and uprofessional conduct from a law-firm in connection with
> the
> > > > duty
> > > > > solicitors scheme.
> > > > >
> > > > > Because Simon Williams from The Legal Complaints Service is
> > > writing
> > > > > this in
> > > > > a letter from 26/9:
> > > > >
> > > > > 'Here, a meeting under the duty solicitors programme is
> unlikely
> > > to
> > > > be
> > > > > something done under a retainer
> > > > > (that is, a relationship between solicitor and client), as
> duty
> > > > > solicitors
> > > > > are those who provide assistance
> > > > > to those who are without representation
> > > > >
> > > > > [...]
> > > > >
> > > > > As you are not a client of EAD, this office is unable to
> > consider
> > > > your
> > > > > complaint. I will, therefore, take
> > > > > steps to close this file'.
> > > > >
> > > > > So it's obvious that the Legal Complaints Service aren't
> looking
> > > at
> > > > > complaints against law-firms in
> > > > > connection to the duty solicitors scheme.
> > > > >
> > > > > Williams, write in an e-mail from 2/10:
> > > > >
> > > > > ' *Q2: If not, then who is it one are supposed to complain
to,
> > > about
> > > > > poor
> > > > > service/unprofessional* *conduct, by law-firms, in
connection
> > with
> > > > the
> > > > > Dury
> > > > > Solicitors scheme?*
> > > > >
> > > > > I have looked into this matter and would suggest that you
> refer
> > to
> > > > > this
> > > > > website:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions/liverpool_information.asp

>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It contains information and contact details of the
Merseyside
> > Duty
> > > > > Solicitors scheme and I hope that you will find it useful.
> > > > >
> > > > > I should also note that the Legal Services Commission is an
> > > > > organisation
> > > > > wholly separate from the Law Society and, if you have any
> > specific
> > > > > questions
> > > > > in relation to the procedures, you should direct them to the
> > LSC,
> > > > > rather
> > > > > than our Office.'.
> > > > >
> > > > > So he's saying that the LCS should deal with the complaint.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this correct?
> > > > >
> > > > > Who could I ask for advice/help regarding this, since I'm
> being
> > in
> > > a
> > > > > way
> > > > > 'thrown around' here, from one organisation to the
> > > > > other.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, you are writing that:
> > > > >
> > > > > 'In regards to our customer-helpline, it is more than likely
> > that
> > > > > there
> > > > > was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between you and
my
> > > > > colleague
> > > > > as a list of law firms can be accessed easily through a
search
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > CLS Legal Adviser Directory.'.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So you are writing that since you have an online directory,
> then
> > > it
> > > > > can't be
> > > > > something wrong
> > > > > in regards to your customer-helpline's advice.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't see that it's an excuse for giving wrong advice
> (giving
> > me
> > > > the
> > > > > phone-numbers to law-firms
> > > > > in Wales), I can't see that this can be excused by you also
> > having
> > > > an
> > > > > online
> > > > > directory.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the point of having a customer-helpline, if one
can't
> > > trust
> > > > > the
> > > > > advice?
> > > > >
> > > > > Since like you are writing, you also have an online
directory,
> > so
> > > > this
> > > > > fact
> > > > > means that any mistakes
> > > > > the helpline makes, must be misunderstandings.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't see the logic in this.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you must be mistaking.
> > > > >
> > > > > Even if you have an online directory, I don't see how this
> > > explains
> > > > > mistakes
> > > > > from your helpline.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's not a valid excuse I mean.
> > > > >
> > > > > If I go to Tesco and say I got the wrong change back.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then Tesco can't say that, of it must be a misunderstanding
> > > because
> > > > you
> > > > > have
> > > > > paid by debit-card.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thats the same reasoning to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > So it would be very fine, if you could please confirm that
> I've
> > > > > understood
> > > > > your excuse right.
> > > > >
> > > > > Because in that case, I don't think it's a valid excuse, and
I
> > > would
> > > > > please
> > > > > like to complain about it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I hope that this is alright!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you very much for your answer again!
> > > > >
> > > > > Yours sincerely,
> > > > >
> > > > > Erik Ribsskog
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/19/07, Legal LSC
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Our ref: KPL/MISC/07/07/70 (5)
> > > > > > Date: 19 October 2007
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dear Mr Ribbskog,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for your e-mail on 16 October 2007.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are always welcome to put forward an informal
complaint
> > > > regarding
> > > > > a
> > > > > > duty solicitor's poor service and/or misconduct, in
> connection
> > > > with
> > > > > > the Local Duty Solicitors Scheme, to the Account Manager
of
> > our
> > > > > relevant
> > > > > > regional office. They will be happy to investigate your
> > > complaint
> > > > > and
> > > > > > will communicate with the duty solicitor involved to
clarify
> > the
> > > > > areas
> > > > > > of your complaint and endeavor to resolve the issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, it is not within our capacity or powers to
enforce
> > any
> > > > > actions
> > > > > > upon the relevant duty solicitor in regards to their poor
> > > service
> > > > > and/or
> > > > > > misconduct.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For complaints on the poor service and/or misconduct of
any
> > > > > solicitor
> > > > > > to be dealt with formally and with enforceable actions,
you
> > must
> > > > > direct
> > > > > > your complaints to the Law Society's Legal Complaints
> Service
> > > > (LCS),
> > > > > > who are an independent complaints handling body that deals
> > with
> > > > all
> > > > > > formal complaints against solicitors. Even though they are
> > part
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > Law Society, they operate independently.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Further details on the LCS are available at the following
> > > website:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.legalcomplaints.org.uk/home.page
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Both the above options are available to you and it is your
> > > > decision
> > > > > on
> > > > > > where you want to direct your complaint and how it is
> > resolved.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In regards to our customer-helpline, it is more than
likely
> > that
> > > > > there
> > > > > > was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between you and
> my
> > > > > colleague
> > > > > > as a list of law firms can be accessed easily through a
> search
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > CLS Legal Adviser Directory.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I hope the above is of assistance to you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yours sincerely
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ka Poh Ling
> > > > > > Central Customer Services Unit
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
***********************************************************************************
> > > > > > Disclaimer
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This email (and any attachment(s)) is private and intended
> > > solely
> > > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
> > Its
> > > > > > unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not
> > > permitted.
> > > > > If you
> > > > > > are not the intended recipient please destroy all copies
and
> > > > inform
> > > > > the
> > > > > > sender by return e-mail.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Internet e-mail is not a secure medium, as messages can be
> > > > > intercepted and
> > > > > > read by someone else. Please bear this in mind when
> deciding
> > > > whether
> > > > > to
> > > > > > send information by e-mail. Postal addresses for the
Legal
> > > > Services
> > > > > > Commission are available from
> > > > > > http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions/regions.asp

> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Legal Services Commission reserves the right to
monitor,
> > > > record
> > > > > and
> > > > > > retain any incoming and outgoing emails for security
reasons
> > and
> > > > for
> > > > > > monitoring internal compliance with the Legal Services
> > > Commission
> > > > > policy on
> > > > > > staff use. Email monitoring and/or blocking software may
be
> > > used
> > > > and
> > > > > email
> > > > > > content may be read. You have a responsibility to ensure
> laws
> > > are
> > > > > not
> > > > > > broken when writing or forwarding emails and their
contents.
> > No
> > > > > contracts
> > > > > > can be entered into on our behalf by email.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
> author
> > > and
> > > > do
> > > > > not
> > > > > > necessarily represent those of the Legal Services
> Commission.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Legal Services Commission checks all mails and
> attachments
> > > for
> > > > > known
> > > > > > viruses; however, you are advised that you open any
> > attachments
> > > at
> > > > > your own
> > > > > > risk.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
***********************************************************************************
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
************************************************************************************
> > > > > Disclaimer
> > > > >
> > > > > This e-mail (and any attachment(s)) is private and intended
> > solely
> > > > for the
> > > > > use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> Its
> > > > unauthorised
> > > > > use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you
> are
> > > not
> > > > the
> > > > > intended recipient please destroy all copies and inform the
> > sender
> > > by
> > > > return
> > > > > e-mail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Internet e-mail is not a secure medium, as messages can be
> > > > intercepted and
> > > > > read by someone else. Please bear this in mind when deciding
> > > whether
> > > > to send
> > > > > information by e-mail. Postal addresses for the Legal
Services
> > > > Commission
> > > > > are available from
> > > > http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions.asp
> > > > >
> > > > > The Legal Services Commission reserves the right to monitor,
> > > record
> > > > and
> > > > > retain any incoming and outgoing e-mails for security
reasons
> > and
> > > > for
> > > > > monitoring internal compliance with the Legal Services
> > Commission
> > > > policy on
> > > > > staff use. E-mail monitoring and/or blocking software may be
> > used
> > > and
> > > > e-mail
> > > > > content may be read. You have a responsibility to ensure
laws
> > are
> > > not
> > > > broken
> > > > > when writing or forwarding e-mails and their contents. No
> > > contracts
> > > > can be
> > > > > entered into on our behalf by e-mail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
author
> > and
> > > do
> > > > not
> > > > > necessarily represent those of the Legal Services
Commission.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Legal Services Commission checks all e-mails and
> attachments
> > > for
> > > > known
> > > > > viruses, however, you are advised that you open any
> attachments
> > at
> > > > your own
> > > > > risk.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
************************************************************************************
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: bureau@liverpoolcab.org
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:50:39 +0000
Subject: Fwd: The Chair, Liverpool Central CAB.

Hi,

I can't see that I've received a reply to this e-mail yet, that's why I'm
trying to send it again.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 27, 2007 5:08 AM
Subject: The Chair, Liverpool Central CAB.
To: bureau@liverpoolcab.org


Hi,

I've been adviced that I could contact The Chair, Liverpool Centrat CAB, on
this e-mail
address, if I wasn't satisfied with the response on the complaint, that I
sent Complaint &
Policy Officer Saffron Follows, on 23/5.

I'm sorry that it has taken some time for me to send this complaint, but
I've been some
problems with that the e-mail address, which is to be found on the Dale Str.
CAB's
webisite (http://www.liverpoolcab.org/), is wrong.

It says that the email-address to your office, is
bureau@liverpoolcab.f9.co.uk, but if one
tries to send an e-mail to that e-mail address, then one only gets an e-mail
in return,
telling that it is an invalid e-mail address, or something similar.

But when I contacted your representative, Mr. Khan again, I got to know,
that the right
e-mail address, is in fact bureau@liverpoolcab.org.

So this delayed this e-mail a bit, and also, the CAB's dealing with my
complaint, took
around two or three months longer than scheduled, so I hope it's alright, if
I've also
used some weeks on getting to find out how to do regarding this complaint.

I've been asking for advice, on how to deal with this, so that's why it has
taken a bit
longer than it would have done otherwise, but I appologise for this, and
hope that
this is alright.

The way I've written this complaint, is that I have written inbetween the
CAB-representative,
Mr. Khans answers to my original complaint.

It's a bit down in this e-mail, and I've marked the new complaints, like
this: '*New complaint:'*.

I hope that it's alright that I've written the complaint like this.

And I also think, like I've written a bit down in the document, that these
lies and suspected
'set ups', are very serious, so due to this, I expect that these things are
dealt with in a
professional matter, and I will, like I write in one of the new complaints,
bring these serious
issues up with the police, in an already scheduled meeting, at the beginning
of next month,
with The Merseyside Police.

So hope that this is investigated in a thorough and professional manner,
since I think these
are very serious issues, that I think should be dealt with responsible.

So I'm a bit expecting to receiving the results of your investigation,
explaining what you intend
to do regarding these issues.

I hope that this is alright!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog


On 10/22/07, Kristian Khan wrote:

> Mr Ribsskog
>
> Please acept my apologies for the dealy in replying to you - I have been
> out of the office for 2 weeks.
>
> Should you wish to contact the Chair then you would need to send you email
> to: bureau@liverpoolcab.org
>
> Regards
>
> KRISTIAN KHAN
> GENERAL UNIT COORDINATOR
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Erik Ribsskog [mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 08 October 2007 01:01
> *To:* Kristian Khan
> *Subject:* Re:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I tryed to send your organisation an e-mail, to the e-mail address, that
> is on your website (http://www.liverpoolcab.org/ ),
> but the e-mail wasn't working, that's why I'm sending e-mail.
>
> I was just wondering, to which e-mail address, I should send to, if I
> wanted to contact the Chair, Liverpool Central CAB.
>
> Thanks in advance for the reply!
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Erik Ribsskog
>
>
>
>
> On 9/6/07, Kristian Khan wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr Ribsskog.
> >
> > I am contacting you with regard to the complaint that you submitted to
> > Saffron Follows, Citizens Advice complaints and policy officer, on 23rd
> > May 2007. I have now been able to undertake an investigation into the
> > issues that you raised and my finding are detailed below.
> >
> >
> >
> > I understand that you attended the Bureau on 27th February 2007 and saw
> > our Duty Solicitor Eleanor Pool on a free first interview basis about a
> > harassment at work issue. Ms Pool completed a B ureau Legal Information
> > Service sheet in which she advised you that you possibly may have a
> > claim for harassment but there was insufficient time to obtain full details
> > and you would benefit from speaking to someone who could advise on
> > criminal aspect as well. Ms Pool took the case back to her firm,
> > Morecrofts. You state that on 28th February you received a letter from
> > Eleanor Pool informing you that they could take on the case at a cost
> > of £140 per hour. I take the the view that any action taken by a
> > solicitor after we have facilitated a free first 1/2 hour interview is
> > not our concern - these concerns would need to be addressed to the solicitor
> > directly and therefore I do not concede that the Bureau is responsible for
> > this
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5th April 2007 you had an appointment to see an Employment Duty
> > Solicitor from EAD at 1.30pm. EAD rang shortly before your appointment
> > to say that unfortunately no one from the firm was available to attend. As
> > this phonecall was received very close to 1.30pm you arrived minutes
> > later. (From my recollection the preceding client/s had failed to attend
> > anyway).
> >
> >
> >
> > As is common practice I apologized to you explaining that it was not our
> > fault and provided you with the phone number of EAD so that you could
> > contact them yourself to arrange an appointment with them to replace the
> > cancelled on of 5th April 2007.
> >
> >
> >
> > You state in your complaint that you rang EAD and spoke to Michael
> > Reiner who took details of the case and advised you that you wereoutside of
> > the 3-month time limit to commence employment tribunal proceedings and
> > that only in very limited circumstances could this time limit be extended.
> > You further state that you enquired about Legal Aid over the phone but
> > Mr Reiner advised that he could not provide advice on this over the phone.
> >
> >
> >
> > As far as I am concerned you did received a free initial interview from
> > EAD, ableit in telephone form, so as such I do not feel that the Bureau
> > was at fault.
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Below I have taken each of the individual points that you made *(in
> > bold)* and offered my response to each. I have copied and pasted the
> > complainant's points from the actual email complaint made by you.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *1. I think the CAB should have set up a new meeting between the duty*
> >
> > *solicitor and myself, when the duty solicitor canceled the scheduled*
> >
> > *meeting there on 05/04/07.*
> >
> > **
> >
> > I did not set up a new meeting because the next employment duty
> > solicitor slot was not until 24th April and that was fully booked.
> > Therefore the next appt. would have been at some point in May and I was
> > reluctant to leave things this long as I was aware (without knowing the
> > details of the case) that time limits may have been evident. Furthermore,
> > when Duty Sols. cancel they invariable see/speak to those clients at our
> > request who were booked either on the same day or shortly after.
> >
>

*New complaint*: I think that the CAB-representative, regardless of the when
the next employment duty solicitor slot was, should have offered to set up a
new meeting, when the dury solicitor canceled.



>
> >
> > *2. I think they should have informed me about the name of the duty *
> >
> > *solicitor that canceled the meeting. They didnt do this even if I asked
> > *
> >
> > *them about this twice.*
> >
> >
> >
> > We did not know the name; indeed we do not habitually know the names -
> > the firms send different people and it was the firm who rang to cancel
> > saying that no one from the firm was available to attend.
> >
> >
> >
> *New complaint:* If the CAB didn't know the name of the duty solicitor,
then I don't think the CAB should have adviced me to contact the EAD
law-firm.

I think they at least should have given me a contact-name or a
reference-number then, I don't think it was a professional way to sort this,
by just giving me the phonenumber (or rather fax-number first), and ask me
to call the company, without giving me any form of contact person name or
reference-number.





> *3. I dont think the CAB should have adivised me to contact the duty*
> >
> > *solicitors firm EAD on the phone on 5/4, since one needs to go through*
> >
> > *the documents of the case in detail, to see if one are eligable for
> > legal*
> >
> > *aid. Which was what the scheduled meeting was supposed to be about.*
> >
> >
> >
> > Please see response to Question 1 - furthermore we do not take
> > responsibility for advising clients on their legal aid entitlements at the
> > Reception desk at the time of booking a Duty Solicitor appt - this is why
> > people are referred to the solicitor if they require specialist advice .
> >
> > **
> >
>

*New complaint:*

Well, I think it should have been obvious that when one are unemployed (like
I was at the time), then one shouldn't be set up to meet with a duty
solicitor who don't accept founding from the 'legal aid programme', without
the issue of the costs of the advice should have been brought up.

I was sent to the CAB by the Police, and told to ask to see a solicitor
regarding an employement-case (like the Police were calling it).

And then I think that I shouldn't have been set up to meet with a solicitor
who didn't accept founding from the legal aid program, unless this had been
agreed on between me and the CAB, before the meeting.

I don't see any sense, in setting up a meeting (to discuss an empoyement
case, like the Police said it was), between a person who is unemployed and
out of founds, with a law-company who are only accepting founding from
private founds, and not from the legal aid programme.

I think that to set up a meeting like that, is a bit waste of time, and I
think it would have been much better to set up a meeting with a company who
was accepting founding from the legal aid programme.

I think this is really just common sense, and I can't see it differently,
than that I think that the CAB, if they wanted to to their work-tasks, in a
meaningful way, should brought up, and made clear, about the issues
surrounding the founding, and the legal aid programme, before the meeting
with the duty solicitor was set up.



> *4. I dont think the CAB, like they for the meeting on 5/4, should set
> > *
> >
> > *me up for a meeting with a Solicitors firms (EAD), that aren't based *
> >
> > *in Liverpool. The Solicitor-firms that they set up to do task of Duty
> > Solicitor *
> >
> > *representaton, should be based in Liverpool, for practical reasons, *
> >
> > *if someone wants to go to the Solicitors office to speak with *
> >
> > *someone there etc.*
> >
> > **
> >
> > EAD are based in Liverpool. Their address is: Prospect House, Columbus
> > Quay, Riverside Drive, Liverpool, L3 4DB.
> >
>
*New complaint: *(Even if I think this point, must mostly be said to be my
fault).

Yes, I saw that later when I sent the Law Society resolution form by e-mail
to the EAD law-firm.

It was my mistake, since they hadn't got any offices in the centre of
city, they only had offices in the outskirts, so to speak,
so I wasn't aware of that there was a place in Liverpool called Colombus
Quay, like the EAD answered, when I asked them
if they were situated in Liverpool, because their number wasn't to be found
in the 'Mersey 2005/06 Yellow Pages'.

So when I asked the EAD-company, on the phone, if they were situated in
Liverpool, they (the receptionist, Stephanie, it says
on my note).

They only answered that they were situated in the Colombus Quay area. But
they didn't answer directly, yes or no, to my
question, regarding if they were based in Liverpool.

So it was a misunderstanding between the EAD and me.

But maybe I should have been set up to meet a company from the centre of the
city then, but that's a bit to much to ask,
because I'm not really sure how many law-firms there are in the city centre
of Liverpool, who are dealing with cases like
this, and who are participating in the duty solicitor programme.

So if there arn't that easy to find centraly placed law-companies, then I
understand that I was set up to meet with a company
that are a bit outside of the L2 area of Liverpool, in which both the Dale
St. CAB's address, and my own address is situated in.

So I think, must be said to be my mistake, and not the CAB's, if the
situation is like it's described above, with the addresses for the
law-firms.



>
> >
> >
> >
> > *5. I dont think the CAB should have given me the wrong number*
> >
> > *to the EAD solicitiors firm. *
> >
> >
> >
> > Upheld - I accidentally gave you the fax number (708-0606) and for this I
> > apologize.
> >
>

*New Complaint:*


I understand that's things like this can happen, that one maybe give the
wrong phone-number sometimes.

But, together with the other points in the complaint, it contributed, to
giving an unprofessional
impression of the CAB.

So, if it had only been the problem with the phone-number, then I wouldn't
have been making any fuzz/
complaints, but like it was on the meeting this day, it was several things
that could seem to be
unprofessional/peculiar.

It was the issue with the lights being turned off, I had to press twice
before someone would let me in,
the duty solictor had canceled the meeting, I wasn't offered a new duty
solicitors meeting, I wasn't given
the name of the duty solicitor or a contact-person, by the CAB this day, but
was only told to call
the EAD company, without being given any contact-person name, or other
spesific reference to say to
the receptionist answering my phone-call.

So, all in all, I thought it was very unprofessional meeting.

With the lights off, and giving the wrong phone-number, and the other
things, I though the general impression
of the CAB from the meeting, was so poor, that I thought it was a below the
standard, I think one should
be able to expect from a respectable organisation like the CAB.

(I also remember that I thought the fax number for the company was a bit
strange, I work with company research
and I thought it was a bit strange, that the phone number to EAD was 0151
735 1000, (ending on 1000), while
the fax-number was 0151 708 0606, (ending on 0606). I didn't see any
logic/system in the numbering of the
phone/fax-numbers, but this might be that I'm a bit caught up in my work.

And of course I know that this has nothing to do with the CAB, I just
thought I'd write it down, while I was
writing, so to speak.

Because I think that the fax-number was maybe a bit odd.

And if the phone/fax-numbers are a bit odd, like it doesn't look like
a phone-number for a big law-company,
since companies phone-numbers, oftern end on like 1000, and other
even numbers, so to me it really
looks a bit strange, that the CAB-representative, didn't notive that it was
an uneven number he was
reading to me, because I would imagine that most law-firms phone numbers are
even, or at least not
as odd as I think the EAD fax-number, could be said to be.

So I think this makes it a bit more strange that the CAB representative gave
me wrong phone-number that day.

But this could also be me being a bit caught up in my work.

It isn't easy for me to know how often the CAB represenatives are
calling/reading the law-firm phone-numbers.

But the representative didn't seem stressed at all, so one
could maybe suspect that there was something wrong
at the CAB since there were so many errors and strange incidents, especially
with having the lights turned on,
I thing was really strange, for an organisation that are recieving members
of the public, like the CAB is.)




*6. I think the CAB should have the lights on in the parts of their
> > offices*
> >
> > *where members of the public are recieved, and in their other public*
> >
> > *areas, during their opening hours. This to insure that contacts
> > between representatives from the CAB and *
> >
> > *members of the public are kept in an atmosphare that one would expect *
> >
> > *from a public place. (And not in an atmosphare that one would think*
> >
> > *belonged more to a privat place/situation.) I think they should have
> > the lights on during the opening hours, and that*
> >
> > *they should not arrange meetings with members of the public to be held
> > *
> >
> > *with the lights off. (Like they did when I went there for the Duty
> > Solicitors meeting, and ended *
> >
> > *up first sitting waiting for several minutes in the dark, and then
> > speaking with *
> >
> > *the CAB representative for several minutes in the dark, on 5/4).*
> >
> >
> >
> > The lights were *partially* switched off as we were closed for lunch. I
> > switched them on again when I began speaking to you and I admit that
> > they perhaps should have been left on fully in order to create a
> > professional atmosphere.
> >
>

*New complaint:*


The representative says that the lights were partially switched off.

But when I was 'buzzed' inside, after ringing the button by the CAB
entrance-door twice, I grabbed a folder on the
reception-desk, which was unpopulated.

There also was a young girl, like eleven or twelve years old maybe, sitting
in the stair-case, alone, for no appearent
reason, right outside the the hall where the CAB enterance-door is.

So this also added to the surreal experience of the meeting at the CAB, that
day, since the State House, is an office-
building I thought.

And then the lights were off at the CAB.

And there were no people present there.

I buzzed in by a man, who I don't think presented himself, and it must have
been from an office at CAB then, I reackon.

Because there no people at all there, no members of the puplic, and no
representatives from the CAB.

And it was dark.

I grabbed a folder ('A Merseyside Empolyement Law'-folder), from a
folder-display on the reception-desk.

I sat down in the chairs around the TV-set. In the waiting area. (I don't
think the TV was on).

Then I tried to read the folder, but it was to dark, it was like twilight so
to speak, so it was to exhausting
for the eyes to focus enough to read the folder, so I just had to give it
up, and wait for someone to appear.

And then the CAB representative appeared, maybe after five minutes, or
something like that.

And then he started appologising, since he hadn't called me to inform about
the cancelation of the meeting.

And then we were discussing why the meeting was canceled, what he would
advice me to do, that was
to call the EAD company the same day.

And I think that this could have been why I was given the wrong
telephone-number perhaps, because I
don't think the representative turned on the lights before reading the
phone-number.

Because I remember, that it wasn't untill the meeting was almost finished,
that the representative,
went to get me another folder from the folder-display at the reception-desk.


But I declined, since I had already grabbed the folder on my way in.

And the representative turned on the lights, which were on the way to the
folder-display.

It seemed a bit sureal and peculiar, to have the meeting in the dark.

I think the representative should have turned the lights on before the
meeting.

In fact, I think the CAB, should have turned the lights on, before leting me
in to their reception
area.

I've been working myself, as a food store manager, and other positions, in
one of Norways
biggest food-store chain, and also a few years in other food stores before
that.

So I've been working for close to fifteen years as a the food-store
business, and it would never
had crossed my mind, to not turn on the lights in the shop, before leting
the customers in.

If I had let the customers walk aroung in the shop with the trolleys,
started to scan the goods
in the check out, and then, right before I was going to tell them how much
the customer had
to pay, then I would get up from the check-out, and to the entrance of the
shop, and then
turn on the light.

If I had done something like that as a food-shop manager, I don't think I
would kept my job
for a very long time, and it would have seemed totally out of line, and very
unprofessional,
or I think I would even have to say extremely unproffesional.

It's just one of those things one don't do.

So for a thing like this to happen, like it did that day at the CAB, I would
have to say, that
something must have been wrong.

And now, when I'm writing this, I'm beginning to think, that the reason,
that the representative,
read me the fax-number, and not the phone-number to the EAD-company, must
have been,
that the lights were still turned off, causing that it was to dark to be
possible to read clearly,
resulting in the representative reading me the wrong phone-number.

And also remeber it clearly, that the representative, didn't turn on the
lights at the beginning
of the meeting, like the representative claims in the e-mail I'm answering
to now, but the
representative turned the lights on, at the end of the meeting, as I remeber
it, and also like
I wrote in the explanation-file, that I sent with as an enclosure together
with the orginal
complaint to Complaint & Policy Officer Saffron Follows on 23/5.

So it's clear to me that the CAB representative, General Unit Coordinator
Kristian Khan, is
lying when he says that he 'switched them [the lights] on again when I began
speaking to you',
like he is claiming in the e-mail I'm answering to now.

This is clear to me from three reasons, I remember that he switched the
lights on at the end
of the meeting, I've also written this in the explanation I sent Saffron
Follows on 23/5, and
also it seems to me that the problem with the CAB-representative, reading me
the fax-number
to the EAD, instead of their phone-number, must be due to the problems with
the lights being
turned off, in a way that made it impossible to read clearly, in the
reception, waiting and
main public meeting (that is where the CAB-solicitor usually sits, to give
advice to the
members of the public, when their turn to get advice is due) area.

I'd like to clearify when the lights were switched on, they switched on in
the last half of the
meeting, like a bit after half of the meeting had passed.

So that one can say that it was about one third, left of the meeting, when
the representative
turned the lights on.

So he did it in while the meeting was being held, and at some time in the
last half of the meeting.

I hope it's possible to understand what I mean.

It was under no circomstance, at the beginning of the meeting, that the
representative turned on
the lights.

And I also think's unacceptable to let people in to the CAB, at all, without
turning no the lights first.

They shouldn't let people wait in the waiting area, while the lights are off
at the CAB. (So that it's not
possible to read).

(And from a customer-support perspective, I also think someone should
receive the people that
are being buzzed in, and not let them wait for five to ten minuttes first (I
think it must have been),
like they did on this day.)

And this, that the CAB-representative, is lying, I think is very serious,
and I think it should
be dealt with in a formal way.

I also think that this, not having turned on the lights, might have been
conected with the
litle girl, just sitting, for no reason, in the stair-case, outside of the
CAB, and then
with the lights off at the CAB, I think this could have been some kind of
set-up in
connection with mob/mafia, that I have been having some problems with in
Norway
and Britain, and which is connected with the work-case, that I was
contacting the
CAB and the EAD, to get advice on, regarding the founding of (if I was
eligable
for legal aid or not).

So I think that also the Police should be brought into this, and I will do
that myself, in
a meeting that is already scheduled, that I'm having regarding these cases,
with
the Merseyside Police, in the beginning of next month.

So, I must really say, that I think you should investigate the lying and
also the other
strange situations that occured, with the 'set-up', with the girl in the
stair-case, and
the lights being turned off.

And also with the canceled meeting, and the other points mentioned in this
e-mail.

Also the fact that the solcitior, I think she is, the woman with the dark
hair, in her
fourties I think, that is working at the Dale St., CAB.

I thought it was peculiar, that she would appear, right before I went out of
the offices,
to just stand in the reception-area, by the chair there (I guess it must
have been
a chair there). And then just look out in the air, and not doing any
work-tasks,
but just looking out in the air, in the hight of my face/eyes, as like to
monitor
the expression on my face or something like that.

It was very surreal and peculiar, it was like she 'scanned' almost, the
expression
on face, how I looked, when I went passed her, and out of the CAB-offices,
when
the meeting was finished.

I don't think she returned my salutaion, I seem to remember that I noded to
her
at least, but she just stood there like carved in stone, I think one could
say.

(This should be more thoroghly explained, in the explanation, that I sent
Saffron Follows on 23/5, regarding if I saluted or not, like I seem to
remember
that I did now.)


*7. I think that the CAB should have informed before the meeting with the
> > *
> >
> > *Duty Solicitor from Morecrofts on 27/2, that the Morecrofts Solicitors
> > firm*
> >
> > *only accepted payment from private founds. And that Morecrofts didn't
> > accept founding founded by the legal aid-*
> >
> > *programme, like the Duty Solicitor from Morecrofts, Eleanor Pool,
> > informed*
> >
> > *me of on 22/3.*
> >
> >
> >
> > Please see response to Question 3.
> >
> >
> >
> > *8. I think that the CAB should have informed me before the meeting with
> > *
> >
> > *Duty Solicitor Eleanor Pool from Morecrofts there on 27/2, that the *
> >
> > *meeting only was scheduled to last for thirty minutes. I wasnt made
> > aware of this, untill Eleanor Pool first informed me of this when *
> >
> > *the thirty minutes had passed.*
> >
> >
> >
> > As far as I am aware, clients are advised that the Duty Solicitor
> > service is a "free first 1/2. I can confirm that both Reception staff and
> > myself make clients aware of this at the time of booking the
> > appointment.
> >
>

*New complaint:*

I wasn't made aware of this, that the meeting was only sheduled to last for
30 minutes, at all, before the meeting.


> >
> > *9. I think the CAB should have explained to me about the legal aid
> > system, *
> >
> > *and how it works, before they set me up for the meeting with Duty
> > Solicitor*
> >
> > *Eleanor Pool from Morecrofts there on 27/2. Especially since this was
> > an employment-case (like I told them that the *
> >
> > *police had told me to tell them that it was). *
> >
> >
> >
> > Please see response to Question 3.
> >
> > **
> >
> > *10. I also think that the solicitor I got to speak with on the phone
> > (about when*
> >
> > *one would need a criminal solicitor), when I was at the CAB on 20/3,
> > should*
> >
> > *have explained to me what her name was, and which solicitors firm she
> > was *
> >
> > *calling from. I was put in a room at the CAB, and told to wait untill
> > the solicitor called me.*
> >
> > *But when I answered, I picked up the phone and said 'yes hello this is
> > Erik*
> >
> > *Ribsskog speaking', but the solicitor didnt say eighter what her name
> > was*
> >
> > *or the name of her company was, she just asked what my questions were.*
> >
> > * Also, when I had finished speaking with the solicitor on the phone,
> > then *
> >
> > *the CAB advisor had starting speaking with another member of the public
> > *
> >
> > *there, without informing me that our meeting was finished, and without*
> >
> > *me being alowed to finish explaining why I had gone there.*
> >
> > *I had gone there to ask about two things. *
> >
> > *1. About when one needs a criminal advisor, and 2. how the legal aid
> > system works. *
> >
> > **
> >
> > *But I only got to tell about the first point, before I was put in the
> > room to *
> >
> > *wait for the phone from the solicitor. Without me first being informed
> > that *
> >
> > *my meeting with the CAB advisor had finished.*
> >
> >
> >
> > If the solicitor failed to give her name then I am afraid that I do not
> > see how the Bureau was to blame for that. We cannot be held responsible
> > for what a solicitor does or does not do. You state that you attended
> > CAB on 20th March 2007 and spoke to a criminal solicitor by phone, and
> > then asked us about Legal Aid and was advised to check the CLS
> > Eligibility calculator. If the Bureau was fully booked on that day then
> > you may well have been advised to check this calculator as we like to offer
> > some "signposting" advice that will enable the client to undertake some
> > work/research on this case prior to their appointment at the Bureau. The
> > CLS calculator advised that it could not assist you as you wereself-employed and so
> > you returned to the CAB and was given the appt. 5th April 2007.
> >
>

*New complaint:*

I didn't ask to speak with a criminal solicitor, but I asked advice on when
one needed a criminal solicitor, since Moorecrofts had said
I'd might need one, in the letter, enclosure X, that I sent Follows.

My complaint was, that the solicitor, working with you, the woman with the
dark hair in her forties I think, didn't tell me
that our meeting was finished, before she left to start helping another
member of the public.

So, she didn't give me the oppertunity, to explain, that I had more
questions, which I would have made clear, if she had told
me, that the meeting was finished.

And I also think, that the solicitor, that the CAB got to call me, while I
was there, should have interduced herself, when she
called. (And also said which company she representated).

Because then I would know which person it was that gave me the advice, and
this could be useful to know, eg. if there were
some problems with someone being given wrong advice etc.

Thats why I think the solicitors calling to the CAB to give advice to a
member of the public, should interduce themselves, and
say which company they are working for.


> >
> > *11. So I think that the CAB advisor should have told me that the
> > meeting*
> >
> > *there on 20/3 was finished, before ending the meeting.*
> >
> > *Since this would have given me the chance to explain that there were
> > more *
> >
> > *things that I wanted to bring up in the meeting.*
> >
> >
> >
> > It would seem that there was no availabilty for you to see an adviser on
> > 20th March 2007 and this may explain why you were only given "signposting"
> > advice i.e. be allowed to talk to a solicitor on the phone and then be
> > given the CLS calculator website.
> >
>

*New complaint:*

Yes, I was let to speak with an advisor, but the advisor ended the meeting,
without informing me that the meeting had
finished, causing, that I didn't get to bring up both of the issues I had
intented to bring up in the meeting.


> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In conclusion I have investigated your concerns and I hope that you are
> > satisfied with this response, however you should remain dissatisfied then
> > you can contact the following:
> >
> >
> >
> > THE CHAIR
> >
> > LIVERPOOL CENTRAL CAB
> >
> > 1ST FLOOR
> >
> > STATE HOUSE
> >
> > 22 DALE STREET
> >
> > LIVERPOOL
> >
> > L2 4TR
> >
> >
> >
> > Yours Sincerley
> >
> >
> >
> > *KRISTIAN KHAN*
> >
> > *GENERAL UNIT COORDINATOR. *
> > **
> >
>
>
>

johncons

View Member Profile
Add as Friend
Send Message
Find Member's Topics
Find Member's Posts Today, 11:20 AM Post #566


Alf Milward


Group: Members
Posts: 39
Joined: 29-September 06
Member No.: 1,870



QUOTE(drEss @ Nov 25 2007, 12:30 AM)
Cheers mates. I get it. If its any consolation the media here in Norway is even worse. Today they only focus on United being beaten, Shite (as allways) winning and that overrated twat Carew scoring a goal. Most papers dont even mension our win at all. The only one who did, focused on Keanes team getting hammered, not us producing a fantastic perfomance.

The media is overrated!



I'm a Norwegian living on Merseyside, and I sometimes watch MOTD, when I have the time, and then it seems to me that, even
if Gary Lineker, who is presenting MOTD, used to play for Everton in the eighties. (At least for one season, the 85/86 season
I think it was).

Even if he did this, he doesn't seem to say that many positive things about Everton, and he sometimes forget to mention Everton
when he's reading the table etc.

At least it seems that way to me.

But I can only speculate about what the reason for this could be.

And Everton has usually been on at the end of the programme the times I've been watching it, so one could maybe start to wonder
what the reason behind this could be.

Could it have been a problem between Lineker and Everton in the eighties, that led to Lineker only playing one season for Everton?

Could it have been something that has happened later on?

It's not really that easy for me to say for certain, but I think it can sometimes seem like it could maybe be some reason behind this,
that hasn't got out.

Even if this would only be speculation.

I also remember that it seemed to me that Lineker didn't like Sven Göran Eriksson very much he was the England manager, and he
had often a remark of some kind about Sven, like he's usually calling him.

I just remembered this while I was writing now.

I could be wrong, but at least this is how it seems to me from watching the programme.

Angående det jeg har skrevet om tidligere om at Politidirektoratet ikke svarer på e-postene mine.

Jeg lurer på om det kan komme av at de er involvert fra før, og at de har drevet med ting som ikke tåler dagslys.

Jeg lurer på om det kan ha vært sånn at tidligere sjefer jeg hatt i Rimi, f.eks. Skodvin, kan ha vært i familie med
folk innen etterettning osv. (f.eks. han Skodvin som det er om i nyhetene innimellom).

Og så har de bestemt seg at de skal bruke meg som et slags levende mål, eller hva man skal kalle det, og
flyttet meg til en butikk (f.eks. Rimi Bjørndal), hvor de viste at det var folk som jobbet som var tilknyttet
kriminelle nettverk.

Også har de fått inn et vaskefirma der, f.eks. det som ligger på Grunerløkka der, hva heter den gata da, W. Thr. gt
krysser Uelands gate, og blir til Sanner gata er det kanskje.

I Sanner gata der, ikke langt fra Christies gate f.eks., og lyskrysset i starten av bakken opp til Sinsenkrysset, og
på andre siden av gata for Hawaii storkjosk og en MC-forretning.

Ca. der, ligger det et vaskefirma som heter Kvalitetsrengjøring eller noe sånt noe, vegg i vegg med en skiltforretning, så de har
rosa klistremerke-reklame på alle vinduene, som er laget i butikken ved siden av.

De for eksempel, kunne jo være tilknyttet til kriminelle mafia-nettverk, eller i allefall ha ansatte som er i denne
kategorien.

Så når de begynte å vaske på Rimi Bjørndal.

Det var forresten etter at en dame i slutten av 40 årene vel, blondt hår, virket velstelt og ordentlig og respektabel.

Hun kom å anbefalte det firmaet.

Jeg sa jeg skulle si fra videre til butikksjef eller distriktsjef, og det gjorde jeg, jeg sa fra til distriktsjefen Skodvin var det
vel.

Og da dukket det firmaet opp noen uker etter vel.

Og der var det de kurdiske søstrene Hava, Sema og Songul Ozgyr jobbet da.

I allefall de to første som er de eldste da.

Og foreldrene begynte å vaske butikken.

Og de har en bror som heter Muhammed, som likte mafiafilmer, eller han likte vel bare den som het mafiabrødre.

Men men.

Så de her har det virket for meg som senere at var i et mafia nettverk da.

Og den personen som var en av de første jeg overhørte at jeg var forfulgt av 'mafian' fra.

Det mener jeg var den samme blonde dama, som hadde sagt fra om vaskefirma i 1997 tror jeg det må ha vært, eller kanskje slutten av 96. Mest sannsynlig 97 vel.

Hun samme dama, stod i butikken i desember 2003, og prata med en nabo eller venninne, og sa det såpass høyt at jeg kunne
overhøre det, at hun hadde hørt at jeg var forfulgt av mafian _også_.

Og at det måtte ende tragisk, men at hun kjente litt til meg, så hun trodde kanskje at jeg kunne klare å ordne opp i det.

Noe sånt var det jeg overhørte at hun sa til venninna eller naboen hennes, eller hva hun var.

De stod å prata/sladra sammen midt inne i butikken, og virka som om de hadde slått litt rot der, og stått der en stund og
kjente seg litt varme i trøya.

At dem hadde stått der så lenge at dem følte seg hjemme der omtrent virka det litt som.


Og jeg mener dette var samme dama som tipset meg om et rengjøringsbyrå, som hun trodde at det var mulig at butikken kunne spare noen kostnader ved å hyre da.

Jeg jobbet jo som assisterende butikksjef på Rimi Bjørndal, fra like etter påske 96 til høsten 98 vel, så jeg hadde egentlig ikke så mye med hvilket vaskefirma butikken brukte.

Så når Skodvin kom innom noen dager etter, så ga jeg lappen til henne, og fortalte at en dame som virka ordentlig, hadde vært innom butikken og anbefalt disse da.

Jeg burde kanskje ha gitt lappen til butikksjefen, men han var litt morsk osv. synes jeg, og jeg gikk ikke så bra overens med assistent Irene heller, så vi løste det på den måten at Kristian og Irine jobbet alle tidlig vaktene, og jeg hadde ansvaret for senvaktene.

Det virka vel ganske greit, da slapp vi å se hverandre så mye, og jeg synes samarbeidet gikk minst like greit med de vanlige medarbeiderne som jobbet på kvelden.

Selv om dette mest var jenter, så gikk vel samarbeidet stort sett greit uansett, jeg fløy rundt og spredde varene, og de jentene satt i kassa og tok tippinga og ting som det.

Selv om det kanskje ble litt stressende for hun Hava, som var datteren til de som vaska i butikken.

Hun pleide å være tredjemann i kassa, og hadde samtidig ansvaret for å fylle opp frukta på nytt.

Og da måtte hu hele tida sitti i kassa innimellom frukt-påfyllinga, for det var ofte at det trengtes tre kasser.

Men fire kasser trengtes ikke så ofte, så fjerdemann som hadde jobben å fylle på varer, behøvde ikke å sitte så mye i kassa.

Og hun Hava var såpass pålitelig.

Altså hvis jobben hennes var å fylle opp frukta, så gjorde hu det da.

Og da hadde man på en måte måte kontroll på fjerdemann og, jeg pleide vel å ta kassanøkkelen til fjerdemann, og kunne man mer eller mindre beregne hvor mye arbeid personen gjorde på de to timene personen fylte opp varer, før vi bytta kl 18, og da ble fjerdemann førstemann i kassa, fram til butikken stengte kl 20.

Så det systemet funka vel egentlig ganske bra, og vi ganske bra kontroll på butikken.

For Rimi Bjørndal er en butikk med lav snitthandel og tipping og en god del støy og alltid noe som skjer, og nå de siste årene har det jo vært post der også så, så da har det jo vært enda mer.

Så jeg tror ikke det er mange Rimi-er i Norge, som det er veldig mye mer utfordrende å lede.

Det er mye tomflasker og, fordi folk kjøper jo brus osv. i sentrum etter jobb/skole, med de tar jo ikke med tomflaskene til sentrum igjen, så de blir vel panta på Bjørndal da.

Så den måten å jobbe på passa vel bra til den butikken da.

Selv om man lærer jo mer om ledelse osv. forhåpentlivis, ved å jobbe som butikksjef, og å være på kurs osv., så selv om det virka bra da, så er det sikkert at jeg ville gjort det på samme måten nå.

Men det er vel en annen sak.

Men jeg ville kanskje ha satt fjerdemann til å ta frukta da.

For det er jo ikke noe poeng i at folk skal stresse seg ihjel heller.

Altså det skal jo være en balanse sånn at folk trives litt på jobben og vel, og ikke bare jobber seg halvt ihjel.

Men man lærer vel så lenge man lever forhåpentligvis.

Selv om det kanskje ikke alltid er like lenge, men det er vel en annen sak.

Og det var ganske slitsomt i den jobben, etter at Irene slutta, og før Merethe begynte.

Disse to var assisterende butikksjef-kollegaer av meg da.

Irene begynte som assisten på Rimi Mortensrud vel, hvis det ikke var ambulerende butikksjef for Anne Kathrine (Skodvin), hun ble da.

Og Merethe hadde vel jobba ute i Siggerud eller noe, hvis jeg husker riktig.

Men etter at Irene slutta, da hadde jo jeg ansvaret for å spre alle varene, ta alle bestillingene, tørrvarer, kjølevarer, frysevarer, melk, brød, Stabburet (nå spis) til tider, ringnes i ferier da, salater, frukt hver dag.

Jeg hadde vel stort sett alle bestillingene i hele butikken, ansvar for å spre alle tørrvarene, ansvaret for å legge opp alle kjølevarene, var tippeansvarlig, og ansvarlig for å lede alle senvaktene.

Så jeg hadde vel nok å drive med, men jeg var veldig motivert for å gjøre en god jobb da.

Men jeg merket i 98, rundt tiden når jeg begynte som butikksjef på Rimi Nylænde, at jeg var rimlig utslitt ja.

At jeg nok egentlig hadde trengt et par måneder å slappe av, for jeg var helt utslitt, må man vel si.

Og da jeg hadde ferie sommeren 98, så var det VM finale mellom Frankrike og Brasil.

Og da var det ingen av de andre som svarte når Vaktservice ringte og sa alarmen hadde gått, så da måtte jeg ta taxi vel, opp til jobben, for å sjekke alarmen, midt i VM-finalen.

Og jeg tror ikke jeg fikk dekka taxi-regninga engang.

Jeg var ikke så glad i prate med hverken butikksjefen eller distriktsjefen.

Det er mulig at jeg hadde fått dekket regninga, hvis jeg hadde tatt det opp, men det er også mulig dem hadde sagt at det var en del av jobben min å dukke opp der, men mest sannsynlig hadde jeg vel fått dekket det.

Men da var faktisk de politifolka som var der rimelig greie.

Dem kjørte meg til og med hjem til St. Hanshaugen fra Bjørndal.

Så det var jo kult gjort da, dem kjørte noen sånne veier som ikke var lov å kjøre på egentlig osv. hvis jeg husker riktig, for vanlige biler da, fra Ryen og ned til byen, kanskje noen kollektivfelt eller noe, jeg husker ikke helt.

Men det var jo VM finale og de var jo politi, så dem hadde vel kanskje lov til det.

Men samme det.

Det jeg skulle skrive om var at det kan jo virke som om det er noe etteretning og/eller politi, som har brukt meg som sånn levende mål mot mafia kriminelle nettverk osv.

Det var jo når hun dama sa at jeg var fulgt etter av '¨mafian' _også_.

Og dette var jo noen få dager etter at tryne mitt hadde blitt ødelagt på en måte, sånn at det virka som om huden i trynet hadde blitt etsa bort på en måte.

Det var to pakistanske søstre, litt runde, som jobba på Rimi Bjørndal i tiden rundt desember 03.

Og hun eldste av de, hun skjønte jeg, på at jeg overhørte hva hun prata med kollegaene om, at hun skjønte hva som hadde skjedd med tryne, og at det ville bli bra etterhvert eller noe.

Jeg mener hun sa det til i hvertfall to andre, sånn at jeg hørte det.

Jeg mener hun sa det også til hun Candelia, eller hva kusina til hun, ja hva het hun igjen da.

Anica.

Jeg mener hun sa det til Candelia, som nettopp hadde begynt der, og var kusina til Anica.

Også den dagen jeg bare stakk hjem fra jobben.

Det var jo dagen etter at en sånn torpedo aktig jugo-aktig kar, som så ut som om han var topptrent, tøff som om han var
kriminell vel, kanskje 150 kg eller noe og 195 eller 2 meter høy eller noe.

Han spurte på dårlig norsk: hva koster appelsiner.

Mens han holdt opp en kasse klementiner.

Og kikka på navnet mitt på navnskiltet, og gliste.

Han kjøpte vel ikke noe, og bare forsvant ut av butikken.

Pluss at det var en gjeng på tre-fire albanere eller noe i tjueårene vel innom og klappa meg på skuldern og gjorde narr av meg vel, mens jeg og Toro og Frederick la opp frysevarer.

Pluss at jeg hørte ungdommer i butikken og på bussen, sa ting som at 'han er forfulgt av mafian, men han er ikke redd' osv.

Dem sa vel det fordi jeg dro på jobb da.

Pluss at folk jeg kjente som jobba i butikken, og ungdommer som jeg kjente fra jeg jobba der før, kom og hilste alvorlig på meg, som om dem tok farvel osv.

Og var veldig triste virka det som, på en måte som at her var nok alt håp ute.

At de var triste på mine vegne, men at det nok ikke var noe som det gikk ann å gjøre med dette.

Sånn virket det for meg.

Og da jeg hørte fra de jentene i posten, at Songyl ringte rundt, og prøvde å finne ut hvor jeg bodde osv.

Men at personalpermen var låst inn, så hun kunne ikke finne det der.

(Kontrakten min var vel uansett hos Anne Kathrine, så hun kunne vel ikke finne den i medarbeiderpermen).

Og jeg hørte hun eldste at de litt runde pakistanske søstrene, sa at hun hadde lovt å hjelpe Songyl osv.

Det må ha vært med å ta meg det da.

For jeg hørte hu eldste pakistanske søstra, sa til hun kollegaen, at Songul hadde ringt rundt til hele byen, eller alle hun kjente til, eller noe i den duren, hele dagen, uten å ha funnet ut noe som helst, om meg, uten å ha funnet ut hvor jeg bodde eller noe.

Så mente jeg hun sa at Songul var sammen med en mafiakar, og at hun var imponert over hvor rolig jeg tok det.

Jeg var jo litt stressa over at trynet var ødelagt, og hørte ungdommer sa på bussen ting som at, 'han kjemper tilbake han'.

Om meg.

Så det var tydelig for meg at det var noe som foregikk.

Så jeg holdt øyne og ører åpne, så det var vel derfor jeg klarte å høre hva hun pakistanske dama sa, og de andre da.

Candelia mener jeg spurte om hu pakistanske dama, om jeg kom til å bli bra igjen.

Og da sa hun pakistanske dama ja, men at det kom til å ta tid vel.

Men samme det.

Jeg skriver navna her, fordi jeg tror det er et eller annet, som ikke er helt som det burte være i Norge, så derfor synes jeg
vel kanskje at det er mest ansvarlig å skrive navna, så er det kanskje noen som klarer å finne ut av dette mafia-greiene, ettersom det er vel ikke så morsomt hvis hele byen og landet er kontrollert av noen sånne gangstere og kjeltringer.

Og jeg skjønte det på ungdommene på bussen, som sa ting som 'han kjemper tilbake han' osv., at dette var noe som hadde skjedd mange eller flere ganger tidliger, og at dette var ganske velkjent blant ungdommene.

Det virka i allefall sånn for meg.

Så det kan vel virke som om det er ganske vanlig at disse mafia-nettverkene, plukker ut en person, som de forfølger, sikkert helt til de får drept dem på mer eller mindre barbariske måter da.

Og at folk vet om dette, og antagelig politiet vet om dette, men at det ikke står noe om dette i avisene.

Og det virker som om politiet og/eller etterettning, har plassert meg i en butikk.

(Skodvin fikk meg jo til å begynne som assisterende butikksjef på Bjørndal i 96, etter at jeg hadde operert kneet, etter en korsbåndskade, på Aker i februar 96 var det vel).

At Skodvin plasserte meg der, og at etteretning da (representert ved hun blonde dama jeg nevnte), fikk inn et vaskefirma, hvor de viste det var mafiakriminelle involvert.

Samtidig som etteretning/politi da antagelig har spionert på/overvåket meg da.

Og brukt meg som en slags levende blink.

Også har de fått hun blonde dama til å si til meg at jeg er forfulgt av mafia, sånn at de kan jage meg vekk fra Oslo da antagelig.

Av en eller annen agenda.

Og brukt meg som en levende blink rundt omkring i Storbritannia og Europa.

De ville vel bli kvitt meg da kanskje, sånn at det ikke skulle komme ut hva de hadde gjort.

Noe sånt.

Og at det er på grunn av dette, at politidirektoratet ikke svarer på e-postene mine, siden de allerede er involvert fra tidligere.

Og, som det kan virke som, har gjort diverse brudd på menneskerettigheter osv., som vel ikke engang er lov å gjøre hvis det er krig.

Å bruke noen, mot sin vilje og viten, som levende blink, og spionere på, det er vel ikke lov noen steder.

Untatt kanskje i Stalins Sovjet, men jeg tror Stalin kanskje også ville synes at det var å gå litt langt.

Eller det er vel kanskje heller tvilsomt, dette ville vært helt i hans ånd, så han hadde vel antagelig støttet opp om en slik praksis, og vel heller kanskje blitt litt skuffet over at han ikke hadde kommet på denne gode ideen selv.

Men samme det.

Så hva agendaen bak dette har vært, det kan man jo lure på.

Om det var for å spionere på mafia-nettverkene.

Altså at de var på samme side som jeg, selv om dette ikke egentlig er min business, eller noe jeg har engasjert meg så mye i, jeg har vel mest engasjert meg i jobben osv.

Eller at etterettning og politi, er på samme side som 'mafian', som dem kaller den.

Og at de av en eller annen grunn, ville kvitte seg med meg, og få 'mafian' inn i omgangskretsen min, og på den måten bygge opp et slags nett rundt meg.

Ved at de gradvis får kontroll på hvem jeg omgås av venner og familie osv.

Får disse til å samarbeide på forskjellige måter.

Og når de har alle vennene og familien din under kontroll, så snører de nettet sammen, og prøver å drepe deg eller hva de gjør da.

Jeg mener også det var Skodvin som ville at vi skulle ansette David Hjort.

Han sendte jo en søknad, hvor det stod at han hadde hatt problemer med sjefen på en cafe/is-resturant eller noe, på Oslo City, hvor vel også dama hans da, Heidi, jobba.

Var det han sjefen som var jøde eller noe da.

Og jeg mente at det var ikke så smart å ansette en som hadde hatt mye problemer med sjefen i den forrige jobben.

Dette sa jeg når Skodvin spurte meg om min mening.

Men Skodvin fikk vel trumfa igjennom, i allefall over meg, i kraft av sin stilling som distriksjef, at vi skulle ansette han.

Jeg var jo bare assisterende butikksjef på Bjørndal, så jeg hadde ikke så mye jeg skulle ha sagt i den sammenhengen egentlig.

Dette var jo egentlig en butikksjef-avgjørelse, sånn som jeg ser det.

Så hvorfor distriktsjefen skulle blande seg selv om meg inn, det husker jeg at jeg synes var litt snodig/rart, og det synes jeg vel forsåvidt nå også.

Men det kan vel være at butikksjefen hadde spurt henne om råd da, og hun spurte meg om råd.

Men jeg synes det var rart at hun spurte meg om råd, hvis hun allerede hadde bestemt seg.

Jeg sa jo at jeg ikke synes det hørtes ut som noe god ide, men hun bestemte seg jo for at Krisitian skulle ansette han uansett.

Og den butikken, Rimi Bjørndal, er jo som nevnt, såpass kaostisk å lede/styre, så hvis det skjærer seg med noen av medarbeiderne, så blir det nesten for slitsomt å jobbe der, for da er det enkelt at de finner på unnskyldninger for at de ikke kunne gjøre den og den jobben.

Og jeg hadde jo nok ansvar og arbeidsoppgaver fra før.

Mer enn nok, vil jeg nok kanskje si.

Så man måtte jo prøve å opprettholde, å ha det sånn jeg synes vi hadde det på seinvaktene i hvertfall, at alle gjorde jobben sin stort sett, og at ting gikk mer eller mindre på skinner.

Det var vel nesten nødvendig å ha såpass kontroll, altså at man for det meste i allefall, hadde medarbeiderne med seg, for å få noe som kunne ligne på kontroll over butikken.

Nå var det vel egentlig ikke mitt ansvar at butikken gikk bra, det var vel egentlig butikksjefens ansvar.

Men jeg prøvde i allefall å ta mye ansvar, for at butikken skulle gå rundt, og at ting skulle fungere, på en måte sånn at kundene skulle bli fornøyde med butikken osv. da.

Dette fordi jeg likte å gjøre en god jobb, jeg er vel litt ærgjerrig og ambisiøs da.

Selv om jeg tilfeldigvis hadde havnet i Rimi, så synes jeg jo at det var ganske morsomt å jobbe med praktisk jobbing, etter at jeg hadde blitt vant med det mer eller mindre fra infanteriet, under førstegangstjenesten osv.

Og jeg hadde ikke lyst til å gi meg i Rimi før jeg ble butikksjef, og hadde det på papiret, sånn at det ga et godt inntrykk sånn sett, når man søkte på nye jobber osv.

Jeg hadde jo egentlig studert data, og drevet mye med programering osv, så det var vel ikke akkurat Rimi jeg hadde tenkt å jobbe i resten av livet.

Men etter militæret, så var jeg jo arbeidsledig, og hadde bare 'dimme'-pengene, og søkte en del kontorjobber.

Jeg hadde lyst til å ha en vanlig kontorjobb, sånn at jeg kunne drive med programering på fritiden, ved siden av en heltidsjobb da.

Jeg hadde ikke fått fullført utdannelsen, mye pga. av at jeg slet litt med at jeg var skikkelig deprimert husker jeg, vinteren 91/92 og jobbet mye på Obs Triaden, så det det gikk litt ut over studiene.

Jeg hadde ikke så mye venner og familie og kjente da, og jeg likte ikke helt å bo i Ungbo leiligheten på Ellingsrudåsen der, og likte vel ikke helt de andre folka som bodde der heller.

Selv om de vel ikke egentlig var så værst, men jeg hadde ikke så mye til felles med dem da.

Så jeg var vel mest for selv osv., og det var vel ganske kjedelig og tamt på både jobben på Obs og på studiene på NHI, så jeg trivdes ikke så bra, av en eller annen grunn.

Og det hadde jo nettopp vært nedgangstider på slutten av 80-tallet og begynnelsen av 90-tallet, så det var ikke så enkelt å få seg jobb i 92.

Og det husker jeg dem prata om når vi studerte på NHI i 89/90 også, at vi kunne ikke regne med å få jobb med bare to år fra Norges Høyskole for Informasjonsteknologi etter videregående, vi måtte ha verv i studentrådet eller noe ekstra for å få jobb virket det som.

Så det var litt deprimerende å høre, så det er nok morsommere å komme rett ut fra utdannelse sånn arbeidsmarkedet er nå, hvis det ikke har begynt å gå nedover igjen da, enn det var i perioden 89-92/93 osv.

Så jeg fikk ikke noe kontorjobb gitt.

Jeg søkte ikke så mye datajobber.

Han karen på arbeidsformidlinga på Stovner, satt meg opp som ADB-ekspert eller noe, som i Administrativ Data Behandling.

Og det var vel en foreldet betegnelse, så jeg fikk vel ikke så mange jobbtilbud gjennom dem heller.

Og det var vel kanskje ikke så mange ledige datajobber på den tiden, og jeg hadde bare 33 av 40 vekttall fra skolen, så jeg var litt flau over det, og søkte mest kontorjobber.

Også innen kommunen og det offentlige.

Men de jobbene var det stort sett bestemt på forhånd hvem som skulle ha virket det nesten som for meg.

For jeg ble ikke inkalt til et eneste jobbintervju på de jobbene jeg søkte på.

Så det er mulig at den typen jobber kun lyses ut, som en slags formalitet.

Jeg ville jo bare ha en vanlig jobb, sånn at jeg kunne programmere, og utvilke egne programmer på fritiden da, og kanskje selge de etterhvert da.

Det kan jo også ha vært at CC Storkjøp i Drammen, eller Obs Triaden på Skårer, ga meg dårlige tilbakemeldinger, hvis noen firma
ringte dem for å få høre deres mening om sin tidligere arbeidstager da.

Selv om jeg synes at jeg bra nok, og sleit må man vel nesten si at man gjør, når man sitter i kassa i butikker som CC Storkjøp, og vel særlig store supermarkeder som Obs Triaden da.

Men man, sånn er det, det er ikke så lett å gjøre folk fornøyde alltid, så det er vel vanskelig å si hva det kan komme av.

Selv om jeg prøvde å være pliktoppfyllende og ærlig og gjøre jobben på en best mulig måte, så er det ikke sikkert at andre
ser på det på samme måten, uvist for meg av hvilke eventuelle grunner.

Det var en episode da jeg jobbet på OBS Triaden.

Da kom det en kar med en avis, og lurte på hvor han skulle legge de seks kronene, som vel VG og Dagbladet kostet da.

Han ville vite hvilket spesielt sted kunder skulle legge pengene, når de gikk forbi en kunde som ble ekspedert.

Altså at jeg satt i kassa og slo inn varene til en kunde.

Så kom det en annen kunde, og ville gjerne vite hvilket spesielt sted, kunder som går forbi køen, skulle legge fra seg småpenger for aviser osv.

Jeg prøvde å tenke ut om vi hadde noe sånt sted.

Jeg var litt bekymret for at kunden ville bli misfornøyd hvis vi ikke hadde noen sånne steder å legge mynter.

Han virka som en kar som var ganske vant til å bra kundeservice osv.

Så jeg ble litt flau over, på vegne av butikken, å kanskje måtte bli svar skyldig da.

Så jeg så litt over kassa.

De fleste kundene la jo bare pengene på pleksi-glasset over kassabåndet der.

Men det var jo faktisk en sånn skål til å ha mynter i og.

Og da tenkte jeg, at da ble vel kunden fornøyd.

SIden vi faktisk hadde et sted beregnet for småpenger.

Jeg ville jo ikke at kunden skulle få et dårlig inntrykk av butikken, og evetuelt kanskje til og med klage.

Han virket litt som en type som kunne finne på å klage over en sånn ting.

I allefall for meg da.

Han var voksen og myndig.

Og jeg hadde jo bare jobbet i butikk et år eller halvannet da vel.

Så jeg var vel ikke så vant til å takle 'vanskelige' kunder da.

Så jeg bare sa at han skulle legge myntene i myntskåla, som var en jernskål, montert inn i pleksi-glasset da.

Og det gjorde kunden, og gikk vekk fra kassa.

Så betalte den første kunden, når jeg var ferdig å slå inn alle varene til den kunden.

Men det som var med den myntskålen, var at når de i den butikken hadde fått bank-terminaler.

Så hadde de montert bank-terminalene, sånn at de ble satt halvveis over, og dekket for sikten til, disse myntskålene i pleksiglasset.

Det var i hvertfall sånn i en god del av kassene, blant annet den jeg satt i da.

De hadde vel 15-20 kasser der på det meste, i hvertfall noe sånt som 14-15, kanskje fler.

Så de myntene, ble jo liggende sånn at jeg ikke hadde sikt til dem, på grunn av bankterminalen, som dekket over mye av myntskålen da.

Så jeg så jo ikke disse pengene i synsfeltet mitt.

Så da glemte jeg de bort, og begynte automatisk å slå inn neste kundes varer.

Istedet for å slå inn de seks kronene på kassa.

Jeg synes vel for å være ærlig, da, siden jeg var jo vant til å ha masse lommepenger fra jeg var 10 år eller noe, at seks kroner ikke var så mye penger for en stor butikk som OBS Triaden da.

Det betyr jo ikke at jeg ville stjålet pengene, fordi jeg ville ikke ha noen problemer med sånt, og ville heller være ærlig og tjene penger på en ordentlig måte.

Så jeg glemte rett og slett bort de seks kronene, siden de forsvant fra synsfeltet.

Jeg så jo at han mannen med avisa, stod i gangen utenfor butikken der, og vel observerte kassa da.

Men jeg skjønte ikke helt hvorfor han var så opptatt av meg osv. da.

Jeg var vel inne på tanken at det kunne være pga. de seks kronene, men jeg synes det var litt tåpelig, hvis en så stor butikk skulle gjøre et nummer ut av om seks kroner lå i en myntskål noen minutter.

Jeg var jo vant til å få flere hundre i uka av fattern til mat osv., fra jeg var sånn ti år vel, så jeg var vel ganske bortskjemt egentlig, og jeg så vel ikke på seks kroner som noen særlig formue akkurat.

Og synes vel heller at det ville være litt latterlig, hvis noen hadde gjort noe nummer ut av de myntene, og ble vel litt irritert, for jeg var vel inne på tanken på at han karen lurte på om jeg hadde tenkt å stjele de myntene.

Og da ble jeg litt irritert og fornærmet, hvis han karen trodde at jeg ville gjøre meg til kjeltring for seks kroner.

Og det var mye stress med masse kunder osv, så dette var bare sånn jeg tenkte på i glimt innimellom kundene da.

Og etter en times tid eller noe, så var den en kunde som ga en 50-øring eller noe, for en ekstra bærepose, og da kom jeg på det med de seks kronene igjen.

Og tok de også.

Samt noen tiøringer som lå løst i kassa, som ekspeditørene pleide å knipse opp i kassa, hvis en kunde manglet ti øre, for å slippe å få diff i kassa da.

Det ble noen mynter her og der kan man vel si da.

Så slo jeg inn disse myntene til sammen da.

Det ble vel en krone eller to, eller noe lignende, mer enn seks kroner da.

Jeg tok vel ikke det med de myntene så viktig.

Jeg synes ikke det var så mye penger, og så mye å ta høytidelig, jeg trodde ikke at den store butikken var så nøye på at noen mynter ble slått inn riktig.

Jeg husker for eksempel da jeg jobbet på Obs Triaden, og gikk på tredje klasse videregående på Gjerde VGS i Drammen i 88/89.

Da jobbet stesøstra mi, Christell, på en gave-butikk som het Casa, eller noe, på Gulskogen-senteret.

Og da var jeg der ved stengetid en gang.

Og da sa stesøstra mi, mens hu telte kassa, at myntene de blåste de i, de telte ikke myntene, de bare var en drøss med mynter liksom.

Så sa vel jeg at vi telte dem på CC Storkjøp, eller kanskje jeg ble litt flau over at vi tok 10-øringene så nøye på CC Storkjøp, det er mulig det og.

Men samme det.

Uansett da, så endte det med at jeg fikk klage da, og måtte snakke med kassaleder Helene da, og vel også Klara på kontoret om disse seks kronene da.

Jeg trodde ikke det var så viktig, fordi hun Helene bare sa det i vanlig stemme, uten at jeg helt skjønte at dem tok dette så alvorlig.

Så jeg var ikke så skjerpet da jeg pratet med Klara heller vel.

Så jeg prøvde ikke å forklare så mye, og husket vel heller ikke med en gang den episoden.

Men jeg mener Klara nevnte dette en gang senere og, og da begynte jeg å tenke litt på hva som kunne ha skjedd.

For jeg slo jo alltid inn pengene i kassa, og stjal aldri noe, selv om jeg har jobbet i butikk i 15 år eller noe.

Untatt en gang må jeg innrømme.

Det var når jeg jobbet på CC Storkjøp, og dem plasserte meg i hallen utenfor butikken der, for å selge freia sjokolade.

Det var i russetida vel, og jeg var 18 år vel.

Og jeg delte opp litt ekstra sjokolade til kundene jeg da, og spurte alle som skulle inn på senteret om dem skulle ha sjokolade da.

Jeg prøvde å gjøre en bra jobb da.

Jeg synes jo det var litt flaut å stå der, men jeg hadde jo gått på handel og kontor, og lært markedsføring og alt mulig, så jeg tenkte at jeg fikk jo prøve å tenke på jobben professjonelt osv. da.

Men da solgte jeg så mye sjokolade innimellom.

At tierne vel fløyt litt i hytt og pine.

Og jeg hadde vel brukt opp alle pengene mine på et russetreff eller noe da.

Det var vel om sommeren dette her, husker jeg nå.

I juni eller juli 89 kan det vel ha vært.

Jeg hadde ikke penger til bussen til Berger.

Og det var tre-fire mil.

Og jeg var lei av å haike og var litt misfornøyd for at jeg ble plassert i hallen der for å selge sjokolade.

Jeg likte ikke helt hu freia dama som stod der om dagen, og lot meg passe butikken om kvelden heller skal jeg være ærlig.

Og synes vel det kanskje var litt flaut osv. å stå der å selge sjokolade da.

Så jeg putta en tier i lomma da, mens dem fløyt rundt i kassaområdet der da.

Sånn at jeg skulle ha nok mynter til bussen hjem, og slippe å haike da.

Så jeg kan ikke si at jeg aldri har stjålet.

Men jeg kan ikke huske at jeg har stjålet noen andre ganger fra noen av stedene jeg har jobbet.

Untatt noe smågodt på OBS Triaden, men det var noe kassasjefene gjorde.

Så det hadde jeg inntrykk av var lov.

Men samme det.

Og Kristian på Rimi Bjørndal, sa at man hadde lov å ta en is og en brus, hvis man jobbe ekstra og passe på butikken
mens bonet husker jeg.

Det må vel ha vært Kvalitetsrengjøring det da.

Og det hendte vel at jeg rappa en smågodt eller to på Rimi Langhus og, husker jeg, så det var vel ikke så bra gjort,
men da var jeg veldig lei av Rimi osv. da.

Selv om det vel ikke er noen unnskyldning.

Men noen andre penger, enn den tiern på CC Storkjøp, det kan jeg ikke huske at jeg har stjålet i løpet av de 15 årene
jeg har jobbet i butikk.

Så de seks kronene for den avisen på OBS Triaden, de var jeg helt sikker på at jeg ikke hadde tatt.

Men jeg tror jeg fikk det på 'rullebladet' der, så og si.

Så det er mulig at de seks kronene, har fulgt etter meg, på den måten, at når fremtidige mulige arbeidsgivere har ring
OBS Triaden, så har de fått høre at jeg har rapporter om tyveri fra Securitas eller hvilket firma de brukte.

Og at dette kan ha vært en grunn til at jeg ikke ble innkalt til noen jobbintervju osv. da.

Så det er også en mulig grunn.

Uansett, så endte jeg opp i Rimi etterhvert da.

Og det var jo mye sånn jobb som tok ut mye av overskuddet man har osv.

Med mye stress med å fylle opp varer og rydde alle hyllene hver dag på Rimi Nylænde osv.

Og på fritiden så gikk det vel mye i å spille tennis, fotball og badmington osv. sammen med brutter, Glenn og Magne osv. da.

Så det ble ikke så mye fokus på programmering.

Jeg hadde vel ikke så bra PC osv. heller.

Men jeg begynte å ta kjøretimer etterhvert, og ble tilbudt den gamle Hi Ace-n til Glenn og Øystein da.

For 5000.

Jeg synes det vel hørtes smart ut å prøve å lære å kjøre bil ordentlig, når jeg først hadde tatt lappen, så
det slo jeg til på.

Og når jeg etterhvert fikk kjøpt meg pc, et års tid senere vel, så var jo internett nytt, så da ble det vel mest
til at man brukte tid på chatting, og lese nyheter og alt sånt da.

Og jeg fikk meg jo ekstrajobb som kinamat-sjafør, på Chinatown expressen Eiksmarka, ved siden av
å jobbe som assisterende butikksjef på Rimi Nylænde, som jeg ble etterhvert.

Men jeg sluttet i den jobben med å kjøre kinamat, i februar 96, når jeg ble lagt inn for å operere korsbåndet
i det venstre kneet, som jeg hadde fått avrevet, når jeg spilte fotball i Frognerparken sommeren 95, var vel
antagelig det.

Men uansett, så var det i allefall sånn at jeg tilfeldigvis begynte i Rimi.

SIden jeg jobbet der ved siden av militæret, og ikke fikk noen kontorjobber eller datajobber.

Og Magne sa at Kristian trengte folk på Rimi Nylænde, så da ble det til at jeg jobbet litt på Rimi Munkelig, og
litt på Rimi Nylænde, helt til jeg begynte som låseansvarlig på Rimi Nylænde da, da sluttet jeg på Rimi
Munkelia.

Men det var aldri sånn at jeg hadde planlagt å jobbe på Rimi resten av livet.

Jeg hadde vel mest lyst til å jobbe for meg selv med programering/systemutvikling osv.

Eller eventuelt i et firma, og jobbe med programering, systemutvikling, eller noe annen form for data, eventuelt i kombinasjon med annet arbeid, jeg hadde jo handel og kontor utdannelse med markedsføring osv, og hadde jobbet noen måneder med kontorarbeid på Norsk Hagetidend, høsten 90.

Men det var vel programmering jeg hadde mest lyst til å drive med.

Jeg pleide å lage spill osv i datatimene på videregående, og når jeg studerte på NHI, så lagde jeg et sånt kryssord-kompilator program osv.

Og når jeg bodde på Ellingsrudåsen, så lagde jeg faktisk et sånt prosent-tippe program, ved siden av rimi jobben.

Jeg hadde bare igjen å få programmet til å printe ut på sånne tippekuponger som var på printer-ark.

For det virka helt greit det programmet.

Men det er klart at hvis man skal selge sånne programmer osv., så var ikke det så lett for meg, da jeg bodde der, for jeg kjente ingen som jobbet med sånt, og dette var før internett osv., så det måtte ha blitt å annonsere i tippeblader osv. da.

Men jeg hadde egentlig ikke så mye penger i disse årene.

For jeg jobbet ikke heltid i starten, og jeg måtte jobbe ekstra på Norsk Idrettshjelp med telefonsalg for å få råd til lappen.

Jeg brukte nok for mye penger på mat, og røyk, før jeg slutta å røyke.

Så jeg var nok litt borskjemt fra da jeg bodde på Bergeråsen og fikk penger av fattern til mat og alt jeg ba om omtrent, hele tida.

Så jeg var nok vant til å spise mye ferdigmat og snacks og godteri osv.

Og røyk er jo dyrt ved siden av, så jeg var nok ikke så flink til å spare osv. nei.

Og når jeg fikk litt penger, så ble jeg jo tilbudt å kjøpe bil osv., så gikk jo pengene til dette.

Så jeg fikk vel adri spart opp noen penger, det var vel sånn at lønninga rakk akkurat fra måned til måned.

Så når jeg ser tilbake på det, så hadde det nok vært smart å spart opp noen penger, og prøvd å fått solgt f.eks.
kryssord-kompilator programmet og tippeprogrammet osv. da, etter å ha brukt litt mer tid på de.

Men sånn var det i hvertfall at jeg havnet på Rimi.

Og når jeg hadde havnet der, så synes jeg at jeg kunne jo sette som mål å bli butikksjef, før jeg ga meg, og
begynte innen data eller kontor da, eller ledelse, som etterhvert også ble en mulighet.

Men det var aldri planen min å jobbe på Rimi hele livet, i tilfelle de her i politi og etterettning trodde det, og at
siden jeg ville slutte på RImi, for å begynne å studere data igjen.

De siste par årene på Rimi var rimelig krevende, med mye konflikter osv. på Rimi Kalbakken, så jeg trengte
å roe det ned litt et par år, og få tilbake litt overskudd, så da tenkte jeg at studier ville vært en god ide, og
samtidig fått oppdatert datakunnskapene, og fått litt mer fritid, eller i allefall muligheten til å disponere tiden
mer selv, enn jeg hadde da jeg jobbet i Rimi.

I Rimi, ble det mye sånn at man måtte jo selvfølgelig jobbe vanlig arbeidstid.

Men man måtte også jobbe ekstra hvis det var varetelling, eller hvis noen var syke og hvis dem skulle bone gulvet,
eller hvis det var seminarer eller møter, osv.

Jeg har jo alltid likt å drive med data og andre ting ved siden av skole, jobb, studier, så jeg synes det blir litt mye
jobb, hvis det blir sånn at Rimi liksom blir hele livet ditt.

Så dette var også mye av grunnen til at jeg hadde mer eller mindre fått nok av Rimi.

Det var liksom som om jobbingen der tok alt fokuset og kreftene dine, eller at det iallefall lett kunne bli på den måten.

Og en slik jobb har jeg egentlig aldri hatt som mål å ha, jeg liker å drive med forskjellige ting, og ikke ha jobb som det
eneste som betyr noe, og at jobben er alt man har og hele livet sitt liksom.

Det blir litt for ensforming for meg, og jeg har ikke hatt som mål å ha en såpass slitsom og tidkrevende jobb resten av livet, i tilfelle noen innen politi eller etterettning trodde det, og at de kunne bruke meg som levende blink siden jeg hadde sluttet i Rimi, og ikke hadde noe liv lenger, hvis det er sånn de ser det.

Jeg så det vel heller på den måten at hvis jeg sluttet i Rimi, så fikk sjangsen til å få et mer normalt liv igjen, uten å ha det øket eller hva man skal kalle det, som en såpass tidkrevende og slitsom jobb vel kanskje kan sies å være.

Man har jo på en måte aldri fri, man må være tilgjengelig døgnet rundt, i tilfelle det er noen problemer på jobben, eller hvis det f.eks. er falsk alarm mitt på natten pga. et eller annet i butikken da.

Så jeg hadde egentlig ikke som noe mål å ha noen sånn jobb resten av livet.

Rimi jobbene er også veldig sånn at man kan risikere å bli veldig detaljstyrt, hvis man er uheldig med sjefene, og det er ikke alltid like morsomt å ha andre til å tenke for seg hele tiden.

Selv om jeg fokuserer mye på det negative nå.

Så prøver jeg bare å forklare at Rimi egentlig ikke var min type drømmejobb, og at jeg sluttet i Rimi, etter å ha oppnådd målet mitt der, som var å bli butikksjef.

At jeg sluttet i Rimi etter å ha blitt butikksjef, og ville heller ha en karriære innen data f.eks., og kanskje drive et eget firma og utvilke programer for firmaer osv. da.

Eller kanskje også jobbe innen ledelse f.eks. innen systemutviklings-prosjekter i et datafirma da.

At jeg hadde hellet lyst til å ha en sånn type jobb.

Istedet for å ha en jobb i Rimi, som man vel må kunne si ofte kan slite en ut før pensjonsalder, og vel kanskje ikke er noe særlig jobb å bli gammel i.

Og med det inntrykket jeg hadde av kollegaer, eller for å være ærlig, så var det som telte mest, det inntrykket jeg hadde av sjefene oppover i systemet, som jeg vel hadde et litt ambivalent inntrykk av for å si det sånn.

Så jeg så på det mer som en befrielse å slutte som butikksjef i Rimi.

Og tenkte at jeg skulle bruke et par år på å komme meg igjen etter de siste tre-fire årene i Rimi, hvor det skjedde veldig mye merkverdige episoder med ansatte og ran osv., når jeg jobbet som butikksjef.

For jeg var veldig overarbeidet på den tiden, og gikk videre mest på viljen vel.

Så var planen å starte en ny karriere, innenfor et av de nevnte feltene da.

Så at det at jeg ville begynne å studere igjen og så få en ny karriere, utenfor slitet eller hva man skal kalle det innen Rimi, og heller få en jobb hvor jeg synes få brukt eventuelle evner og hodet mer da, og slippe at folk skal tenke for en hele tiden.

At det skal være noen grunn til at politi og etterettning skal få lov å jage en jorden rundt, og bruke en som blink, uten å si fra eller noe sånt, for mafia, og spionere på en og jage en rundt.

Bare fordi de synes at de hadde rett til det, eller hvilken forskrudd grunn de har brukt.

Det mener jeg at er en fremgangsmåte som er helt uforenlig med et demokratisk samfunn, og folks sivile rettigheter.

Da blir det mer som at myndighetene tar seg til rette, og ser på vanlige folk som kveg.

Og det mener jeg er så borti natta galt, at jeg finner nesten ikke ord for å beskrive hvor uakseptabelt jeg synes en slik måte å leke med folks liv på er.

Så hvis myndighetene i Norge tror at en slik måte å behandle folk kan forsvares, så tror jeg de er litt på en annen planet.

Eller at i allefall fornuften deres har havnet på en annen planet.

For dette passer ikke sammen med menneskerettigheter eller folks sivile rettigheter på noen som helst måte.

Så det kan nesten virke som om myndighetene, som vel skal tjene medborgerne, som bor i landet.

At disse myndigheten, ikke er på lag med medborgerne.

Men at myndighetene, 'mafiaen' da, som de vel blir kalt, og vel da også eliten da, som vel innbefatter mange av politikerne og personer som har posisjoner i samfunnet med makt osv.

Sammen med politi og etteretning osv. da.

At disse er en gruppe.

Styrt av folk med penger da antagelig, uten at jeg skal si for sikkert at det kan være jøder eller noen andre, for man skal vel ikke
generalisere for mye.

Og at denne gruppen med myndigheter, mafia, politi, etterettning osv.

At de samarbeider på en måte da, uten at det blir kjent.

Men at de snører nettet rundt enkeltpersoner osv.

Får mafian til å betale vennene og familen deres, for å holde kjeft.

Og så bare bruker de vanlig folk som de vil.

Som om de var kveg.

På en så diskret og utspekulert, og så hensynsløst og barbarisk måte, at vel selv Stalin må snu seg i graven, i en blanding av nesegrus beunding og skam over at han ikke klarte å tenke ut noe like manipulerende selv.