Dr Ranson vs. Isle of Man government

[Bonefishblues]

If you'd been following the case as I have you'd know she had big financial costs to cover and if she'd lost or just got exhausted she would've lost everything.

The summary of the judgment on the first page reads as follows: “The unanimous Decision of the Tribunal is that Dr Ranson is entitled to be compensated for being unfairly dismissed due to her protected disclosures and is awarded compensation (gross) in the total sum of £3,198,754.00. Additionally, the DHSC must pay 70% of Dr Ranson’s costs”

The case was in her name. That's why costs were awarded to her. She was funded by the BMA

She was personally out a load of court costs -- the BMA only supported her but only after she had got the evidence and faced tribunals to prove her innocence. This cost a fortune of money. The BMA only support you if you can prove you have more than a 50% chance of winning so this had to be done first.

The 50% threshold is a standard insurance term. I've fallen foul of it myself (incidentally, it's not just in terms of winning, but also recovering, which is where I was unable to satisfy that criterion, even though my case was cast-iron)
Just in terms of her being personally out of pocket, I think that's not quite correct. Her lawyer husband initially began the case(s) she lodged. When costs were discussed his time was not allowed as costs - BUT, you will be aware that additional damages were awarded in her case (exemplary damages, which are very unusual, to the tune of £1M+), which conveniently filled the gap, whilst accepting the IoM's point that her husband should not be remunerated.


They did get involved at the end. In the IOM they'd only have limited power and access to information cos it's a different country -- not uk not eu it has it's own Parliament -- oldest in the world so you are at their mercy when stuff like this goes down.

This is highly misleading. You are 'not on your own'. Their employment law & procedure is based very closely on the UK's statute, most of which is adopted. In the case of legal precedent, unless there is a specific IoM case, then UK precedent is followed. The IoM's Employment & Equality Tribunal is materially identical to the UK ETs
https://www.hr-inform.co.uk/employment_ ... sle-of-man
https://www.gov.im/categories/working-i ... ary%202019.

The IOM government are used to winning by draining it's opponents via the justice system just like the PO.

You haven't evidenced this assertion

The BMA are now chasing Kathryn Magson the woman who was involved in misleading health ministers and closing ranks with the IOM government.

Not sure what this means 'chasing' her? She was last seen operating as a consultant to a S London Health Trust - her whereabouts are well known. She continues to refute all the points accepted as fact by the Tribunal, not unsurprisingly.

There are other people linked to this scandal who the BMA are chasing down it's gone uk wide now. Magson, the woman who Ranson reported to, was stopping information getting through to ministers but then when they figured they'd got it wrong they tried to cover it up. Extremely like what was happening at the PO.

It could have been so simple to sort out and cost much less if politicians and DHSC had been honest.

The key actor was the Interim CEO of the DHSC, Ms Magson, you're right. She seemed to have the ear of everyone, ran DHSC as a personal fiefdom, and her word against Mrs Ranson was simply accepted. There was, at the very least, a remarkable lack of curiosity exhibited by senior leaders on the Isle, but I'm not sure I've seen evidence of dishonesty on the part of politicians in any of the reports I've seen.

It's clear that Ronson was subjected to the most awful abuse and victimisation, hence her award. She has received a full apology from the Chief Minister in The House of Keys, and a payment has also been made in respect of her second ET action in favour of an IoM hospice IIRC.
https://www.gov.im/news/2023/may/09/chi ... s%20people.

Useful to close this off, just in case anyone is interested.

Embedded comments for convenience - mine in bold.

[Cowsham]

Bonefish -- you are starting to get the gist of the matter. It's a very interesting case.

As for the evidence of " The IOM government are used to winning by draining it's opponents via the justice system just like the PO."

You only have to look up how many times they appealed this judgement ( which is where you've got down to now but it's not even over yet )

In one of the appeals -- They hired a company ( Expol ) to ‘ascertain the causes of apparently inaccurate documents being created and held’ by Manx Care and the DHSC.

The company had been given ' terms of reference ' by Tynwald IOM but these were cleverly crafted to not implicate themselves but in the end actually did point to Meta data being tampered with and so shooting themselves in the foot.

The lengths this *government went to to delay, appeal even after the damning judgement you've quoted above should serve as plenty of evidence but there's plenty of other cases I've since found

*( new government since the trial conclusion you've quoted above -- there were many resignations in the old one and some in the new one over this whole affair.)

Like the PO scandal the whole thing beggars belief.

The Dr Rachel Glover thing was quite similar. She too got done over but only in as far as some fraudulent contracts, medical equipment and copyright stuff -- she had to fight her case too but I think that's still ongoing.

I was always quite sympathetic towards the old Tynwald government -- there were some good people in it. They were mislead but then it all went wrong. I had a lot of respect for Howard Quayle the chief minister at the time this started.

I don't have much time for Laurie Hooper the current Minister for Health and Social Care.

[Bonefishblues]

Bonefish -- you are starting to get the gist of the matter. It's a very interesting case.

As for the evidence of " The IOM government are used to winning by draining it's opponents via the justice system just like the PO."

You only have to look up how many times they appealed this judgement ( which is where you've got down to now but it's not even over yet )

In one of the appeals -- They hired a company ( Expol ) to ‘ascertain the causes of apparently inaccurate documents being created and held’ by Manx Care and the DHSC.

The company had been given ' terms of reference ' by Tynwald IOM but these were cleverly crafted to not implicate themselves but in the end actually did point to Meta data being tampered with and so shooting themselves in the foot.

The lengths this *government went to to delay, appeal even after the damning judgement you've quoted above should serve as plenty of evidence but there's plenty of other cases I've since found

*( new government since the trial conclusion you've quoted above -- there were many resignations in the old one and some in the new one over this whole affair.)

Like the PO scandal the whole thing beggars belief.

The Dr Rachel Glover thing was quite similar. She too got done over but only in as far as some fraudulent contracts, medical equipment and copyright stuff -- she had to fight her case too but I think that's still ongoing.

I was always quite sympathetic towards the old Tynwald government -- there were some good people in it. They were mislead but then it all went wrong. I had a lot of respect for Howard Quayle the chief minister at the time this started.

I don't have much time for Laurie Hooper the current Minister for Health and Social Care.

BBC report of the KC Review of the case. Cockup, not conspiracy, in short.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... 171369.amp

...and back to the PO!

[Cowsham]

Bonefish -- you are starting to get the gist of the matter. It's a very interesting case.

As for the evidence of " The IOM government are used to winning by draining it's opponents via the justice system just like the PO."

You only have to look up how many times they appealed this judgement ( which is where you've got down to now but it's not even over yet )

In one of the appeals -- They hired a company ( Expol ) to ‘ascertain the causes of apparently inaccurate documents being created and held’ by Manx Care and the DHSC.

The company had been given ' terms of reference ' by Tynwald IOM but these were cleverly crafted to not implicate themselves but in the end actually did point to Meta data being tampered with and so shooting themselves in the foot.

The lengths this *government went to to delay, appeal even after the damning judgement you've quoted above should serve as plenty of evidence but there's plenty of other cases I've since found

*( new government since the trial conclusion you've quoted above -- there were many resignations in the old one and some in the new one over this whole affair.)

Like the PO scandal the whole thing beggars belief.

The Dr Rachel Glover thing was quite similar. She too got done over but only in as far as some fraudulent contracts, medical equipment and copyright stuff -- she had to fight her case too but I think that's still ongoing.

I was always quite sympathetic towards the old Tynwald government -- there were some good people in it. They were mislead but then it all went wrong. I had a lot of respect for Howard Quayle the chief minister at the time this started.

I don't have much time for Laurie Hooper the current Minister for Health and Social Care.

BBC report of the KC Review of the case. Cockup, not conspiracy, in short.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... 171369.amp

...and back to the PO!

I've followed the case from the start and absolutely disagree with your assessment of the case.

Some of the documents were made just before the governments appeal and passed off as genuine from two years previous. This was very obvious and still ongoing investigation. Even Expol had to avoid investigating these documents because they had been employed by the government to " investigate " the concocted documents. That rejected concocted documents claim was a year ago things have moved on since then.

The one who made the cockup was Magson deciding not to give the information presented by Ranson to the people she was supposed to give it to. Instead she closed ranks with some dubious people in government. Then tried to discredit Ranson when Ranson went over her head to get the crucial information to the right people.

There's a lot more to it than one BBC news item could reveal.

Look where that news item came from
By Ashlea Tracey
BBC News, Isle of Man

[Bonefishblues]

Bonefish -- you are starting to get the gist of the matter. It's a very interesting case.

As for the evidence of " The IOM government are used to winning by draining it's opponents via the justice system just like the PO."

You only have to look up how many times they appealed this judgement ( which is where you've got down to now but it's not even over yet )

In one of the appeals -- They hired a company ( Expol ) to ‘ascertain the causes of apparently inaccurate documents being created and held’ by Manx Care and the DHSC.

The company had been given ' terms of reference ' by Tynwald IOM but these were cleverly crafted to not implicate themselves but in the end actually did point to Meta data being tampered with and so shooting themselves in the foot.

The lengths this *government went to to delay, appeal even after the damning judgement you've quoted above should serve as plenty of evidence but there's plenty of other cases I've since found

*( new government since the trial conclusion you've quoted above -- there were many resignations in the old one and some in the new one over this whole affair.)

Like the PO scandal the whole thing beggars belief.

The Dr Rachel Glover thing was quite similar. She too got done over but only in as far as some fraudulent contracts, medical equipment and copyright stuff -- she had to fight her case too but I think that's still ongoing.

I was always quite sympathetic towards the old Tynwald government -- there were some good people in it. They were mislead but then it all went wrong. I had a lot of respect for Howard Quayle the chief minister at the time this started.

I don't have much time for Laurie Hooper the current Minister for Health and Social Care.

BBC report of the KC Review of the case. Cockup, not conspiracy, in short.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... 171369.amp

...and back to the PO!

I've followed the case from the start and absolutely disagree with your assessment of the case.

Some of the documents were made just before the governments appeal and passed off as genuine from two years previous. This was very obvious and still ongoing investigation. Even Expol had to avoid investigating these documents because they had been employed by the government to " investigate " the concocted documents. That rejected concocted documents claim was a year ago things have moved on since then.

The one who made the cockup was Magson deciding not to give the information presented by Ranson to the people she was supposed to give it to. Instead she closed ranks with some dubious people in government. Then tried to discredit Ranson when Ranson went over her head to get the crucial information to the right people.

There's a lot more to it than one BBC news item could reveal.

Look where that news item came from
By Ashlea Tracey
BBC News, Isle of Man

Not mine, my paraphrasing the report of a KC into the conduct of the case by the IoM government.
Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

[Jdsk]

BBC report of the KC Review of the case. Cockup, not conspiracy, in short.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... 171369.amp

...and back to the PO!

I've followed the case from the start and absolutely disagree with your assessment of the case.

Some of the documents were made just before the governments appeal and passed off as genuine from two years previous. This was very obvious and still ongoing investigation. Even Expol had to avoid investigating these documents because they had been employed by the government to " investigate " the concocted documents. That rejected concocted documents claim was a year ago things have moved on since then.

The one who made the cockup was Magson deciding not to give the information presented by Ranson to the people she was supposed to give it to. Instead she closed ranks with some dubious people in government. Then tried to discredit Ranson when Ranson went over her head to get the crucial information to the right people.

There's a lot more to it than one BBC news item could reveal.

Look where that news item came from
By Ashlea Tracey
BBC News, Isle of Man

Not mine, my paraphrasing the report of a KC into the conduct of the case by the IoM government.
Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

The report from the Independent Review, unfiltered by any journalism:
https://tynwald.im/spfile?file=/busines ... P-0017.pdf

Jonathan

[Cowsham]

BBC report of the KC Review of the case. Cockup, not conspiracy, in short.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... 171369.amp

...and back to the PO!

I've followed the case from the start and absolutely disagree with your assessment of the case.

Some of the documents were made just before the governments appeal and passed off as genuine from two years previous. This was very obvious and still ongoing investigation. Even Expol had to avoid investigating these documents because they had been employed by the government to " investigate " the concocted documents. That rejected concocted documents claim was a year ago things have moved on since then.

The one who made the cockup was Magson deciding not to give the information presented by Ranson to the people she was supposed to give it to. Instead she closed ranks with some dubious people in government. Then tried to discredit Ranson when Ranson went over her head to get the crucial information to the right people.

There's a lot more to it than one BBC news item could reveal.

Look where that news item came from
By Ashlea Tracey
BBC News, Isle of Man

Not mine, my paraphrasing the report of a KC into the conduct of the case by the IoM government.
Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I think you're the only one interested and it would take a movie or drama like the PO drama to get anywhere near the reaction the PO scandal got. There's a good tv in there for sure.

The only way you could bring yourself up to date with what actually happened would be to look up and listen to all the IOM covid briefings from the ones where two of the journalists from different news groups started asking questions about Ranson and Glover sackings live on air. I wondered what was going on but at the time was much more interested in the information about the virus being uncovered week by week ( got much more from that than what was coming from our own broadcasts )

Then you'd need to read through the transcripts of the Tynwald sessions to do with Ranson. There's also audio recordings and transcripts of her employment tribunal which was brutal.

The new government have went a long way to try and cover up what happened in the previous administration. -- it's not like uk where an opposing government, like say if labour got in, could blame everything on the previous Tory government administration like what always happens. It doesn't work like that. They're all one body just circulating the people. The previous government had a good man at the top but this current one is more right wing and devious in my opinion.

A good place to start would be Chris Robertshaws interviews with Paul Moulton, one of the journalists who started asking questions at the weekly covid briefings. Chris was an MHK till August 2021 who took the side of Ranson during his questioning of her at the tribunals because he could see she was right and something sinister was going on.

The PO scandal was very similar but on a much larger scale. Each SPM got told was that they were the only one but in reality there were hundreds if not thousands more. The difference is Ranson was the only one against a very powerful manipulative body in government departments. The incredulous bit is that they're still trying to discredit her when it's obvious now they were and still are in the wrong. It would be like if our new government was still trying to cover up the PO scandal but only one person is left to fight them alone.

They will spend whatever it takes to defend themselves.

I think the stress of it all was a contributory factor in Howard Quayles stroke near the end of his administration.

[Bonefishblues]

Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I thought this was useful advice. You are the one who brought it to this PO thread.

If you have evidence and insight to bring, then put it up for us to see, since you seem to be intimating that there is, variously, BBC reporting distortion, a KC failing to get to the truth, and a Government conspiracy. I think those are matters of public and Forum interest.

Without being hyperbolic, why don't you assume the role of Mr Bates, since you are so vehement in your assertion of the above?

[Carlton green]

Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I thought this was useful advice. You are the one who brought it to this PO thread.

If you have evidence and insight to bring, then put it up for us to see, since you seem to be intimating that there is, variously, BBC reporting distortion, a KC failing to get to the truth, and a Government conspiracy. I think those are matters of public and Forum interest.

Without being hyperbolic, why don't you assume the role of Mr Bates, since you are so vehement in your assertion of the above?

I haven’t followed the exchange in detail but thought Cowsham’s use of the IOM case an interesting example of the legal process being misused. To my mind the PO scandal shows that some lawyers and some KC’s have too little regard for justice and instead focus on winning cases by any means and regardless of what they know - or should know - to be the truth of the matter. The courts are there to provide justice and such legal professionals subvert the course of justice; that’s a very serious matter.

[Bonefishblues]

Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I thought this was useful advice. You are the one who brought it to this PO thread.

If you have evidence and insight to bring, then put it up for us to see, since you seem to be intimating that there is, variously, BBC reporting distortion, a KC failing to get to the truth, and a Government conspiracy. I think those are matters of public and Forum interest.

Without being hyperbolic, why don't you assume the role of Mr Bates, since you are so vehement in your assertion of the above?

I haven’t followed the exchange in detail but thought Cowsham’s use of the IOM case an interesting example of the legal process being misused. To my mind the PO scandal shows that some lawyers and some KC’s have too little regard for justice and instead focus on winning cases by any means and regardless of what they know - or should know - to be the truth of the matter. The courts are there to provide justice and such legal professionals subvert the course of justice; that’s a very serious matter.

Can you detail the misuse of legal process here please - I note that the KC concludes that was not the case here, save the duality of roles fulfilled by the key protagonist, who has been shown to be a liar and a bully and rightly exposed and vilified?

Lawyers are there to represent their clients within the established rules which a Judge enforces. That is their duty as a lawyer and that is the way our system works. If they are found to be guilty of wrongdoing then they will face legal sanction and/or the loss of the right to practice.

[Cowsham]

Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I thought this was useful advice. You are the one who brought it to this PO thread.

You're the one who's doing the questioning.

If you have evidence and insight to bring, then put it up for us to see, since you seem to be intimating that there is, variously, BBC reporting distortion, a KC failing to get to the truth, and a Government conspiracy. I think those are matters of public and Forum interest.

The evidence is complex and long winded. I've pointed you the in the right direction if you care to look.

Without being hyperbolic, why don't you assume the role of Mr Bates, since you are so vehement in your assertion of the above?

There is already a Mr Bates on the island in the form of Paul Moulton who has had a SLAP order ( I think that's what it's called ) against him.

[Bonefishblues]

Perhaps you should open a separate thread to lay out your pov more fully.

I thought this was useful advice. You are the one who brought it to this PO thread.

You're the one who's doing the questioning.

If you have evidence and insight to bring, then put it up for us to see, since you seem to be intimating that there is, variously, BBC reporting distortion, a KC failing to get to the truth, and a Government conspiracy. I think those are matters of public and Forum interest.

The evidence is complex and long winded. I've pointed you the in the right direction if you care to look.

Without being hyperbolic, why don't you assume the role of Mr Bates, since you are so vehement in your assertion of the above?

There is already a Mr Bates on the island in the form of Paul Moulton who has had a SLAP order ( I think that's what it's called ) against him.

You make assertions for which you provide scant, or no evidence. I'm suggesting you open something up on what you say is a very serious situation and give us the benefit of your insight. If not, then they are simply assertions - ones which appear to be directly contradicted by a KC's Report. If someone else has a SLAPP order, take the opportunity, I suggest.
Simply saying go and find out for yourself isn't good enough, I'm afraid.

[Psamathe]

I'm lost. Is the IOM Post Office having a seperate inquiry, has it committed the same prosecutions, etc. All the press about the PO has been on UK, not seen anything about IOM yet it seems important enough for pages of this thread to be discussing.

Any links to the failures on the IOM Post Office please.

Ian

[Cowsham]

I'm lost. Is the IOM Post Office having a seperate inquiry, has it committed the same prosecutions, etc. All the press about the PO has been on UK, not seen anything about IOM yet it seems important enough for pages of this thread to be discussing.

Any links to the failures on the IOM Post Office please.

Ian

[Psamathe]

I'm lost. Is the IOM Post Office having a seperate inquiry, has it committed the same prosecutions, etc. All the press about the PO has been on UK, not seen anything about IOM yet it seems important enough for pages of this thread to be discussing.

Any links to the failures on the IOM Post Office please.

Ian

:lol:

But no links to explain about this aspect I've not seen reported in the press?

Ian