|Click to embiggen...|
First, Neil claims that no-one saw the original emails as they had hit their spam folder, so why did I get an auto-reply telling me someone would be in touch within ten days? That either means that the IT team at RBWM are happy to have auto-responders sent to 'spam' emails, thereby exacerbating the problems of spam for everyone, or it means someone is fibbing, and hoped the problem would go away if it was ignored. Would it be wise to have emails hitting the spam folder at all, given it's the only contact point for the public when dealing with parking fines? Something smells of bullsh*t to me, but I could be wrong!
Secondly, Neil suggests it would have been far easier for me to put all the facts together and provide them directly to him. I could find no process on the RBWM website for reporting this type of incident, and so all I could do was send it in to the email address listed - firstname.lastname@example.org, in the format I thought would be most appropriate. And it would be far easier for who? Isn't he supposed to be working for us, and not the other way round? I've made it as simple as I can for him to view the information - if he's unable to open a website on his computer and read the words and look at the pictures then perhaps retraining is required?
Finally, he informs me that he will not be able to provide any of the details of the investigation. Hmmm - so how do we know he will investigate, and not just brush it under the carpet, in the hope his boss doesn't find out? How do we know any improvement in behaviour will come of this, if we have absolutely no idea if any action was taken? Could he not provide a simple overview of the actions taken, without any names etc, so we could be reassured? I wonder if that information falls under the FoI act? I'll give it a while, and set myself a reminder for a few months time, then put in a request to see if I can find out if anything at all happened as a result. Keep watching this space - and those pesky skiving traffic wardens!