Conspiracy and communications to destroy families .
Dear Sirs,
- On 13 May 2014, Children Services sent me an email confirming that I will be contacted within 7 days with regards to a Child In Need Assessment.
- On 23 May 2014, I emailed to Mr Peter James as I was not contacted by Children Services.
- On the same day at 11am, Mr James advised that he has emailed to Social Services to find out what was happening. At 12.14pm, Mr Marc Davis called me on my mobile number and the conversation lasted for 7 minutes. He tried to convince me that they do not have a duty to support and he knew the law. In that instance, he advised that he will attend our premises on 27 May 2014 at 5.30pm with another female social worker to discuss about the law. He confirmed the social worker’s availability at the same time.
- On 27 May 2014 at about 5.45pm, Mr Davis phoned me to tell that he will not be able to attend the appointment as he was busy. He advised that he can attend at 6.30pm. I disagreed because of my children’s day to day activities. The call duration was 2 minutes. We then agreed for a visit on 28 May 2014 at 5.30pm assisted by the same female social worker.
- On 28 May 2014, Mr Davis did not appear until 6pm when we were in the bath. However, I went down with my bath robe on while he was calling my phone. He verbally said his name but failed to show me his ID card. I enquired about the other female social worker who did not accompany him. We had a long discussion about various issues from Section 17 Children Act 1989 support to my forthcoming plans. He was very inquisitive about my future steps and my asylum support appeal and immigration status.
Marc Davis and Home Office
- On 28 May 2014, the Home Office sent us some documents with regards to the asylum support appeal hearing dated 4th June 2014. Those documents contained over 140 pages and at page 136, Mr Marc Davis’s name appears at several places. It indicated in the minutes written by Mr Clifford Kirsch:
“Marc Davis at Newham Social Services is like minded on the case and content to inform Ismail that they are putting the children at risk themselves due to support and accommodation being available in Birmingham and that the court has stated there is no reason for them not to be dispersed there…”
The minutes continued: “The possibility of removal of the children into care is being raised by Mark with the family and details of this will follow in due course 11:00hrs…”
- On 14 May 2014, Newham Social Services Marc Davis informed fully of the situation with the children. Mark.davis@newham.gov.uk 02033732529 – Cliff Kirsch.
It is confirmed that you had prior communication with the Home Office (some we may not be aware of) and you did not inform me about this at all. Nevertheless after discussing this with my community/friends and family and my children’s legal guardians (as my life is under threats) after my Friday Prayers, they were concerned and shaken up with the document/evidence. They said that this is not a correct procedure. They were concerned about the fact that you spoke about ‘custody’ and ‘care’. This is very disappointing to note that you have attended the home without telling me that you previously communicated with Mr Kirsch and you acted as if you did not know anything and you were independent.
You did not say to me that the Home Office spoke to you regarding children safety and claimed that we are putting the children at risks. You merely kept quiet and collected all my information. Now I am concerned that you will disclose my future steps and my confidential information including the safety measures to the Home Office or to other agents.
You have acted dishonestly, unless you clarify your position. If you have communicated and those comments above are true, a complaint will follow accordingly. But if you have not commented as above, it is in your best interests to clarify your position in writing and give us a letter (addressing to the Asylum Support Tribunal) indicating that these above paragraphs / comments are untrue or inaccurate.
My evidence shows that this is a serious conspiracy against the children and it can amount to child abuse. You are well aware as a social worker that abusing children’s interests and conspiring against them and their families are against the law. My community will be ready to assist me in this instance.
Please note that my premises is under surveillance monitoring equipment as you correctly identify that there is a threat to me and my family from certain individuals of the State.
I am very saddened and shocked when I saw the document received from the Home Office when you left the home on 28th May. I trusted you so much that I spoke to you openly and told you everything about myself and my family in confidence. Now, I am in limbo thinking that you may have been untruthful and may have conspired with the Home Office prior to your visit to my family home on 28 May 2014. I understand that as you are familiar with the law, you may be aware that acting in this way is illegal and is not expected from a social worker from Children Services registered with HPC.
Please note that there is no room to even mention about child safety or custody or care as we are ourselves professional teachers and child safety officers. We indeed have threats from individuals from the State, but that does not give rise to mention about custody. You should have taken legal steps to protect us and the children and allow us to perform our parental duties. We recalled the occasion when Newham children services made a false witness statement under oath in 2012 which amounted to criminal conspiracy against the children. The letters from the schools were shown to Mr Davis.
I rely upon your cooperation. We await your response before 5 pm on Monday 2nd June 2014. I am henceforth attaching Pages 136 and 137 for your consideration and it will be appreciated if you could clarify your position and address the letter to First-Tier Tribunal Asylum Support.
I request you refrain from communicating with any organisation without our consent or consent from the children’s legal guardian (in our absence). If further communications occur, it may be against Data Protection Act 1998 and other statutes.
Yours faithfully,
Mr and Mrs Ismail
Parents Against Injustice UK 