Appointments CHANGES

Basically on the first appointment I cancelled - it was a home visit - the new appointment was offered as 0810 hrs at CAPITA office Coventry - to cut a long story short I contested the time/location. Initially I asked for the appointment to me moved to 1000 am, the same as the home visit proposal. I wrote to Mr J Lewis CEO CAPITA Europe, my letter got forwarded to the correct department. The correct department sent me an "out of office" reply with the addition in capital letters " I WILL NOT CHANGE YOUR APPOINTMENT". I copied and sent a reply to the CEO office telling them that the correct department declined to handle the appointment. I also advised that the said appointment would adversely affect my personal well being. As such Capita were being vexatious and in conflict of British law vis Duty of Care. I also advised that what company refers a letter to a department that REFUSED to deal with it. First thing Monday morning got a call changing my appointment to 11 May 11.55am. The term vexatious is basically means intended to do harm/cause anxiety ----(often used by refusals in replies for "freedom of information" requests). If you are asked to attend an unreasonable appointment write to the office of CEO Mr J Lewis. Mr Lewis has been brought in to sort CAPITA huge drop in the share price which was £13 + and has sunk to £1.95. So please involve his office when you feel you are be treated as " vexatious". intention to cause you harm.

Of course the CAPITA assessment does only allow two strikes and you are out. The main weakness I opened up was "show me any document that allows you to terminate my application" My claim that 0810 appointment was "vexatious" as such it breached the present Duty of Care law. All organisations and certainly all government contractors are expected to comply with UK law. Whilst they allowed me a third appointment they clearly have no remit to p's people off by making any arrangement that "may cause harm". That said what you advise your clients like me needs to be based on fact. The fact is that while CAPITA do deliberately make appointments and arrangements that are very questionable "causing likely harm" to participants they have not been able to show me written proof that instructs Capita to do so. Morover I requested to have the details of the person responsible for "Duty of Care" provisions within CAPITA. By conceding to a new appointment they swiftly avoid likely risky punitive legal action. They knew that the appointment was vexatious and that they could not substantiate it in UK law. The point I am making is if the client (me) feels that CAPITA are deliberately be (Obnoxious) to make attending difficult they are not contracted to do so. My next request would be under Freedom of Information to have a copy of the CAPITA contract with any commercial risk detracted however all operational activiy characteristics intact.