Ryan v Cambridge Jobcentre Plus

I had made several complaints from Oct 2022 to Neath Port Talbort ("NPT"), wales social services. They misrepresented the whole process, to repeatedly, to hide that Joseph was in trouble in Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls' care.  My request for data was made Dec 2022. But NPT delayed telling me until March 2023 because they had been told that I had a restraining order against me by Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls. There was no restraining order.  Even though NPT were repeatedly telling me they had no concerns, behind the scenes they were investigating, Oct, Dec 2022.  There report clearly shows that Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls had given Joseph an asthma pump with him having asthma.  The report also shows that Joseph was suffering mentally: a. "Discussion with Nunclateral checks with school and health will be completed again"  b. "you ring school check they still do not have concerns in regard to Joseph[.] has mother said he has asthma or has she provide...

Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls was repeatedly inconstant with the truth. This is when she claimed that Joseph had Asthma so she could stop court contact. Much later Joseph's GP Dr Luntz very reluctantly,  confirms that Joseph in fact does not have Asthma. They still protected her. On 28 December 2020 Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls, CC'd Cafcass officer Alistair Kinnaird, and complained that I could not have contact with Joseph because he had asthma: “Despite trying to explain that Joseph also has asthma and due to rapidly changing conditions as a result of covid restrictions the only option for contact this week is to force Joseph to go to a cold damp park you think this would be the most appropriate despite offering it a week later when it can be in a safer and warmer environment where he is more likely to engage, a perfectly reasonable alternative that still promotes contact. "(Elizabeth - 28 December 2020 at 15:10)”   On 6 August 2021 Dr Luntz, after I started legal pr...

Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls was repeatedly inconstant with the truth. On 12 March 2019, she claimed that Joseph had been attacked. Kicked in that head, once or twice, and his head slammed in a door, and that he had been thrown across the room. After a 3rd examinations at 2051 Addenbrokes reported that they could find nothing to support this.  Without support from the hospital records she looked to our neighbours. She then told that that Joseph had been injured. She said that "he might get away with this and hurt Joseph further" to encourage support from other priests and neighbours. This is not a difference of opinion. A doctor could only find dry skin wrong with Joseph. There was nothing to support being kicked, thrown, a door slammed on his head. However, social services still report that I injured Joseph. At Addenbrokes hospital Joseph was examined and found to be well. Joseph's report said at 12 March 2019 20:51: "ED Notes by Hena SALAM, Consultant at 12/3/201...

 Dear Daniel Zeichner, I did not want to publish what has happened to me by me current wife Rev Elizabeth Tremble-Niccolls because although I miss my children I hoped to reconnect with them and of course tell them. It is hard to tell if you are motivated by truth or faith. So I will try my best to publish as much today that is legal. So nothing from the court, and nothing of a lewd nature. Nothing is gained by that. I do not want to go to prison for contempt or harassment. But I do know that you detest domestic abusers. And I know and can prove you are behind almost 7 years of abuse. You have been more careless in these last months, and my clarity has improved. In your emails you were more than obvious that you were controlling the PHSO and DWP. So I can see you are also controlling or permitting the council to evict me, and the UC staff to delay access to benefits. I understand completely why you are doing this. You hate domestic abusers, so you hate me.  So today I will be p...

 Daniel Zeichner appears to have control over every aspect of my - now whether i am evicted or not.  I first started in 2019 when the pip assessment at atos lost my paperwork and i turned to Daniel Zeichner for help. This help lasted 6 months and was ended when I threatened to take the DWP to court on 20 June 2020.  I know now what I did not know then. A sign that Daniel Ziechner was messing with me. Both then and now. He set a complaint style that does not exist in law or in policy  and if it did it would be unlawful. In 2020 Daniel Zeichner set up a special one to one complaint with the DWP. And he did it again in  2026 with me and my partner. I only recognised its unlawfulness after 6 years of legal research, as a breach of natural justice or Art 6.   This complaint style is unlawful because it excludes the complainant from the complaint. It rephrases the complaint without confirming it with the complainer. And it extends the complaint beyond the usual....

 I made two major complaints and sent a letter before action.  One issues is Cambridgshire police failing to investigate crimes, silently closing them, and then hiding the reasons with redactions. They close these crime reports in way so I cannot use the victims right to review. Below is the visit I received after asking for my data about criminal complaints about Daniel Reynard. The police closed criminal reports for the 31 Oct 2025. The one where Daniel Reynard lied about me having no health or universal credit problems on 11 Sept 2026 . In response to my asking about what happened I get a lot of  visits from the police. 0400, 0500, 1000. These visits started 5 May until Sept 2026. The do not say why they are there. In between this I get a visit from Daniel Reynard  8 July 2026 delivering a letter before action.  This clip is of two policeman on 24 August 2026. I believe Cambridgeshire police. You will notice there is no mention or a warrant for arrest, warran...

This is the conduct complaint I made about Daniel Zeichner’s alleged corruption of a Parliamentary Health and Services officer .  Daniel Zeichner tells her that a final letter is needed. And then she confirms this. The problem is that a final letter is not always needed, says the PSHO guidance and the complaint I made.  And yet the PHSO officer never mentions this exception and claimed to have processed the form and rejected it. She has not obviously.  The way Daniel Zeichner I allege frustrated the complaint to the PHSO by refusing to sign the form. He said he refereed it. The problem with this is that PHSO will refuse any complaint that is not signed. This complaint was refused by the house or commons complaints team. View my conduct complaint here  https://ryanvcambridgejobcentreplus.blogspot.com/p/conduct-complaint-to-house-of-commons.html?m=

These are a few of the tricks that Police say to stop answering a serious complaints,  logging it or referring it back to the IOPC. The last point is what to do in reply to a refusal to do this. The first is the misstake. First the context. I made a police corruption complaint in July 2026 to the IOPC. Although police corruption complaints are handled by the IOPC not the local police, it was sent to Bedfordshire police. Context over. To stop logging the compliant the officer asked me to reformat the complaint. She refused to log the complaint and refer it back to the IOPC, I then waited as she did not answer. What I should have done was turn written the complain ready to be turned into a letter before action. As I had not and did not know the exact policy I just delayed. When I next encountered a similar refusal from Cambridgeshire this i did this to ask for the complaint to be processed.  https://ryanvcambridgejobcentreplus.blogspot.com/p/cambridgshire-police-timeline.html Th...

It is hard to sound normal when talking about things that do not make sense. Here, as part of a new series towards my application the ECHR, I will be publishing strange emails from UK government organisations. They say anything not to process a complaint. This one is from Parliament who the court has no jurisdiction over. In short they get wrong: - Not able to process a conduct complaint because it is case work - and ignoring this is overridden by my allegation of paragraph 11 house into disrepute. - Not able to take an allegation that Daniel Zeichner has brought the house into disrepute because that allegation is a “High bar” - when only an allegation is needed with evidence - Not able to make a complain about failing to progress a conduct complaint because the complaint process is not for that - without highlighting the review process instead The email chain from house of commons commissioner is on this page. It is a complaint about Daniel Zeichner, not providing help in a humiliatin...

Cambridge Jobcentre Uses Wrong "Medical Evidence Criteria" for LCWRA Instead of Correct DWP "Medical Evidence Including Fit Notes" and "Closing the Health Journey When a Fit Note Has Expired" Please sign my petition to make the DWP stop deleting complaints without your knowledge: Sign the Petition on 38 Degrees Introduction: Cambridge Jobcentre's Fictitious Guidance In another instance of Cambridge Jobcentre's dishonesty, they have once again referenced guidance that does not exist. The correct guidance documents are "Medical evidence including fit notes" and "Closing the health journey when a fit note has expired." Previously, they applied fictitious criteria to terminate a Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity (LCWRA) claim for my partner—a matter that remains before the Upper Tribunal. This arose because the Cambridge office failed to initiate her health journey during the COVID-19 pandemic, a mistake ...

 # Letter may be edited. Last edit To:   - Councillor Jenny Gawthrope Wood (Kings Hedges Ward)   - Councillor Delowar Hossain (Kings Hedges Ward)   - Councillor Martin Smart (Kings Hedges Ward)   CC:   - The Monitoring Officer, Cambridge City Council   - Robert Pollock, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Cambridge City Council   - The Head of Housing Services, Cambridge City Council   --- Dear Councillors, I am writing to complain about Daniel Reynard, Anna Hill, and Sarah Cafferkey before I apply for an injunction. The injunction will include Carla Buey. I am now publicly asking the councillors to help me with this, so I do not have to apply for an injunction. This is because it is your duty to put forward complaints and grievances to the council and advocate on my behalf.  But last time I asked, councillors were told by Anna Hill not to help. The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) states there was a du...