University of Wales Lampeter Newsletter

Student Rights & Whistleblowers UK

Bringing Light to Injustice and Maladministration

Student Support Site

Threat of Legal Action

May 25th, 2008 · No Comments

Threat of Legal Action
Dear Sir,

We act for the University of Wales, Lampeter.

We attach an e-mail enclosing a letter which has been sent to Mr Trevor Mayes concerning material which has been posted on your website. We assume that the website is controlled by Mr Mayes, but in the event that it is not, please take this e-mail as notice of our client’s concerns regarding the published material. In the event that you do not remove this material immediately, we reserve our client’s right to pursue a claim against you.

Yours faithfully

Mark Rhys-Jones

Partner Cardiff The Reply

Go ahead the website stays, I also reserve my right to take action against your client.


Under Article 10 of theHuman Rights Act 1998 I can say what I like about any public spending bodyincluding a University provided I believe it to be true.

The facts are these and no threat can add or subtract from what is the truth.

With regard the the Vice Chancellor RobertPeace I repeat that his letter dated the 2nd of December 2003 he lied when hesaid that the complaints procedures had been fully complied with and i was senta report; that makes him a liar.

With Regard the the Secretary and RegistrarThomas Roderick I repeat that his so called letter of completion dated the 25thof August 2005 was a pack of lies and that also makes him a liar.

With regard the the Head of School DavidAustin his claim to Kathryn Worsey of the Ed Dept and the Welsh Assembly that hehad complied with procedures and his accusation of malicious harassment to theVice Chancellor was also lies that also makes him a liar.

That is the truth and I stand by thatirrespective of any threat, and I shall again write to the Bishop on theseissues and keep him posted.

Meanwhile David Austin has under threat ofcourt action for libel admitted that the false allegation of maliciousharassment against me that could have led to my arrest, detention and criminalcharges was ‘damaging’ . Destroying a students life prospects is in my opinion abit more than just ‘damaging’.

You must ask yourself why and how can heremain at work? why has he not been suspended? Does this University think solittle of its students that they think that sort of behaviour is perfectlyacceptable because I don’t.

What adds insult to injury is that the billfor what is a personal liability to make the above threat is being paid for out ofstudent tuition fees.

All papers submitted to this site and claimsof misconduct have also been presented to court and are therefore in the publicdomain. All other papers refer to what is already public knowledge.

The only concession I will make is when aninquiry has been started whereby this site will be suspended and thenrepublished on completion.

However, its the old game of cat and mousethey throw every obstacle in the way of any complaint, you then force them toplay be the rules they then use that as an excuse to obstruct you further. Whatare they afraid of? The truth.

Trevor Mayes

The answer to why David Austin has not been suspended is because he knows toomuch would take the others with him.

It only proves the point set out below this is what happens to you when you make a complaint.

Tags: Article 10 HRA