Looking for thoughts on the following emails which is intended for Police also Bailiffs. Should I be adding what I believe should be in the recordings also, Police is a particular request from myself. The Bailiffs there are areas of my curtalige, outside buildings and barn areas of the property. Subject Access Request – Request for Verification of Completeness of Video Disclosure Dear Sir or Madam, I write further to the disclosure provided in response to my Subject Access Request. Having carefully reviewed the video recordings supplied, I have formed the view that they do not appear to comprise the entirety of the footage relating to my interaction with your officers and/or agents. Whilst I cannot reasonably identify the precise point at which any omission may have occurred within the recordings provided, I have a clear recollection of actions undertaken and words spoken during the incident which are not reflected within the disclosed footage. The absence of those events causes me to question whether the material disclosed represents the complete and unedited recordings held by your organisation. Accordingly, I respectfully request that the original recordings be reviewed against the material disclosed to me in order to verify that the response to my Subject Access Request is complete and that all personal data falling within the scope of my request has been provided. If additional recordings, earlier or later sequences, body-worn video, vehicle-mounted video, CCTV, audio recordings, or any other material containing my personal data exist, I request that such material be disclosed in full. In the interests of evidential integrity, I further request that all original recordings, together with their associated metadata, audit logs, disclosure records and any documentation recording the extraction, editing, redaction or copying of the footage, be preserved pending completion of this request. Preservation of such material will ensure that the provenance and continuity of the evidence can be independently verified should any question subsequently arise concerning the completeness of the disclosure.

I was interested in some Art gear and photography lights for our daughter.. What the heck just happened.. Two retired folk arrive to drop it off. Somewhat, eccentric to be polite. FRUITCAKES , as my mom may have confesd.. Fortunately, I was in conversation with the lady.. FIR HOURS ...lol 🤣 Well. When the did EVENTUALLY leave, my better half was taken back... He said WTF was that, he is a proper nutta. Intrigued why, as I was aware, he told me about their conversation.. The chap was in the special forces SECRET OPS. Working with BLACK OPs going round doing his duty. We all know the sort of things they do, however what was cheerily shared was beyond my ethical comprehension.. So.. Doing my FINDOUTOLOGY I found the bastard.. What a bewildering experience of spontaneity.. Guess what... He was Some EXECUTIVE MAJOR ( only 4 at the time of his service that official) in the SECRET SECRET SERVICE.. I'm feeling a bit paranoid lol 🤣 🤣 Obviously I removed his face and number , I hope I do not particularly want to research army badges today to find out. So again I have removed personal identification.. The picture is below 👇 My intent is I have removed all all ID I'm aware What the ooooooooo

https://youtu.be/IQbxXYW2gcw?is=0tvqMbHJe2pnfndw I'm doing this from the 1st of August.. Wish me luck...

After pcn placed on vehicle in Sainsbury’s Car Park run by a council. FORMAL REPRESENTATIONS Traffic Management Act 2004 Notice to Owner No.: GI££££££££ Vehicle Registration: C*** *** Dear Sir or Madam, I make these formal representations pursuant to the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (Wales) Regulations 2013. Whilst it is accepted that no pay and display ticket was purchased, that fact alone does not discharge the Enforcement Authority from its statutory duty to properly consider all of the circumstances before deciding whether enforcement should continue. I respectfully submit that the Authority has failed to demonstrate that such consideration has been given and should now exercise its statutory discretion to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice. Background On 2 June 2026 the vehicle was being driven by a lady who was in the advanced stages of pregnancy. This fact was disclosed during the initial challenge and has never been disputed. The driver entered Ma**** Stre** Car Park for the purpose of shopping at the adjoining Sainsbury’s store. She genuinely believed that customers of the supermarket were entitled to park upon production of a shopping receipt and that no separate pay and display ticket was therefore required. That belief was honestly and reasonably held. It was not an attempt to evade payment, nor was there any intention to obtain an advantage over other motorists. The circumstances arose from an honest misunderstanding concerning the operation of the car park and its apparent association with the adjoining retail premises. The driver’s advanced pregnancy is not advanced as a plea for sympathy but as a material circumstance affecting her observations, concentration upon the safe operation of the vehicle and appreciation of the parking arrangements. It was plainly capable of being relevant to the exercise of discretion and therefore required genuine consideration.

The FINDOUTOLOGY Tongue Twisters 1. The great green grape grower grows great green grapes. 2. Five frantic fact-finders found five faulty files. 3. Bold BoneZ built better bundles by breakfast. 4. Seven subtle source-seekers searched suspicious scrolls. 5. Curious clerks carefully catalogued crooked chronologies. 6. Rapid researchers raced round records reading rare reports. 7. Peter's paper pile perplexed proper public processors. 8. Tim's tiny timeline tangled thirty-three Thursday transactions. 9. Molly's missing memo mysteriously moved Monday morning. 10. Barry's battered binder buried broken bureaucratic breadcrumbs. 11. Sally substantiated seven statements, six survived scrutiny. 12. Derek's dusty documents disguised doubtful dates. 13. Forty-four fact-finders followed four false footnotes. 14. Greta gathered governance guides from grateful gatekeepers. 15. Rory reviewed redacted records regarding remote regulations. 16. Thirty thoughtful theorists thoroughly tested tricky theories. 17. Freddy found five forgotten files behind four filing cabinets. 18. The chronologist cheerfully chased chaotic chains of correspondence. 19. Billy's bundle-building business built brilliant bundles beautifully. 20. A diligent document detective detected duplicated data. 21. Three trail trackers tracked three twisted transaction trails. 22. Lord Denning's diligent dragon drafted detailed decisions daily. 23. Sir Edward Coke kept careful custody of curious constitutional curiosities. Bonus BoneZ Challenge Six substantiation specialists successfully substantiated sixty-six suspicious statements while sipping super-strength coffee beside the sacred jar of jam. And the impossible FINDOUTOLOGY Grandmaster version: Bone Archivist BoneZ boldly built better bundles by breakfast while Barry's battered binder buried broken bureaucratic breadcrumbs beneath Billy's brilliantly built bundle-building business. If a member can say that three times fast, they should probably be awarded honorary Archivist status. 😄📜☕🍯