Page 2 of 2

Re: "Private and confidential..."

PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:39 pm
by Hairyloon
atticus wrote:Was the constituent's letter his own work, or was he cutting and pasting something produced by a campaign group or party?

I do not know. The lady seemed upset enough that I don't want to press the question. I got the impression it was her own work, but even so there are only so many different ways to make the same points.

I ask, as if the MP received a number of identical letters like this I could understand him being pissed off.

Does that really justify the tone? Identical letters can be given identical answers.
Perhaps he is pissed off because he knows she is right?

Correspondence with Representatives.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:35 am
by Hairyloon
Apparently he has been back in touch, calling her a liar and a hypocrite and kicking off because she has shared his email without permission...
{Hmm, perhaps I should've started a new thread. :oops: Changing the title should cover it well enough.}

Re: Correspondence with Representatives.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 7:28 am
by dls
Both letters should be chicked in the bin and forgotten about. neither does their author any credit.
Back to teh question posed.

Confidence applies to the knowledge contained within a disclosure, The content here is a mere rehashing of pretty standard complaints. It cannot attract protection under the law of confidence in the standard legal sense.

It should noted however that MPs have particular standards to meet, which may differ.