I had sent in my complaint in letter format, dated and singed. However, when it came to smaller enquiries regarding the complaint afterwards I asked "I have sent a complaint against registrant H in the post yesterday and would appreciate if you could send any further communication regarding this matter via this email."
The Professional Conduct Case Manager's reply came 16 days later in which she stated:
"I hope you will have by now received my letter confirming receipt of your complaint. We do prefer to correspond by post in these matters, to protect confidentiality. I hope this is not a problem for you."I responded:
"I was not sure whether you had received my email of 12th August 2014 as you didn't acknowledge receipt of it until now - 16 days later' which, given the circumstances of the matter is quite negligent . I note that my request for correspondence via electronic mail regarding the complaint against H has been refused by the British Psychoanalytic Council (BPC) on grounds of protecting confidentiality. As there has been no further explanation I request clarification of whose confidentiality you are protecting with this procedure and how sending e-mail to the BPC is threatening my confidentiality. Once I have received your analysis of the said and find that my confidentiality is at risk by writing to your organisation via e-mail I will provide you with a PO BOX where all future correspondence can be send. Also, I was unable to locate in BPC's Code of Ethics and Complaint Procedure the paragraph that states that communications regarding a complaint need to proceed via letter format, please advice me where I can find this guideline so I can familiarise myself with what I have missed. "Her reply:
"I am sorry, my letter to you of 12 August, sent to the given address on the same day both your email and letter arrived, was intended to act as the receipt of your communications. Our hesitancy in using email is to protect the confidentiality of all parties, including and perhaps especially your own, as email is not a secure format. I understand you would rather letters be sent to a different address and we can certainly do so. The Complaints Procedure does not specify the format that communications should take after the initial complaint letter, which must be in writing (paragraph 2.1), and this will be clarified in the next revision. We are grateful that you have pointed that out."The letter was now sent to my old address (although I had requested they would send it to me via email - this is possible, even communications with my solicitor when selling/buying my house have been done via email in which he attached any letter to the email). Yet here they were stating concern about confidentiality. This is typical in narcissism, a message of care is conveyed to the other person although the core of the message is dismissive and not concerned with the person's situation and feelings at all.
I replied:
"I note that you would prefer to send me letters regarding the complaint and I am letting you know that I would prefer emails instead; as the Complaints Procedure does not specify the communication format I do hope the BPC will be accommodative and respect my need and personal boundary in this matter and refrain from sending any more letters to my previous address.
14 days later I receive a response:
"Thank you for advising that you would prefer not to receive letters on this matter at your personal address. I am now in receipt of the registrant’s response, which is quite long and will need to be posted to you. Can you please let me know an address where I may send it? To clarify, we interpret the Complaints Procedure, where it uses the phrase ‘the day after posting’ (e.g. paragraphs 2.11, 2.15, 4.6), to refer to physical mail arriving in the conventional way."
Keeping in mind that I was already "vulnerable" not just because of the diagnosis of DID (which they knew of) but also because of having experienced a breakdown of therapy and all which that entailed, I was also struggling immensely at the time (not knowing that I was at the beginning of a nervous breakdown) and receiving any communication of H triggered intolerable feelings and anxieties. So I replied:
"Thank you for your email. Unfortunately I will not be able to read H' reply as I am not strong enough. This is still deeply traumatic for me and I would therefore like to know if the process can still go ahead even if I chose not to read her reply. If at any later stage it would come to a complaint and I needed to defend myself (due to a possible character assassination by H) I would of course have to read it but for now, I would prefer not to. I really have to look after my self in all of this and reading H reply to my complaint, unless she has turned 180 Degrees and has suddenly become compassionate, humble and professional, will only further traumatise me. If I dont have to read her reply in the future, feel free to throw it away. I dont want to hear her lies and attacks any more."At this stage I was unable to contain my anxieties and was struggling tremendously yet I still tried to protect my self by stating my needs to BPC. BPC's reply was to threaten me, in a "caring" way of course, that if I did not provide an address they would send the reply (which entailed highly confidential and private information about me) anyway, to my old address.
"We do respect your wishes, and I am sorry if this is distressing. However, our Complaints Procedure does oblige me to send a copy of the response, even if you choose not to read it – that is entirely up to you. Please do let me know an alternate address to which I may send it, as otherwise I will have to use the address you supplied in your original letter of complaint. If you find that that you do wish to make comments on the response, the Screening Committee will be able to them into account at their October meeting."
I became very unwell. One and half month later I replied to BPC and wrote:
"I have since moved and have settled into my new home. I feel more grounded and strong enough to receive H reply. Could you please send it to my new address at"My reply was acknowledged and I was sent H's reply which I read. I wrote to BPC
"In the light of H' response and colleagues' statements (which are all based on what H has told them about me) I would like to provide digital recordings to the next Hearing Panel as evidence of H's unethical and abusive behaviour. Please let me know which email address I can send these recordings to. In a second email I wrote: I forgot to forward the blog address which H mentions in her reply in which I speak of my experience with her anonymously, this can be found here http://psychotherapy-abuse.blogspot.co.uk/p/a-mind-less-breakdown_9055.html . Also, H has made accusations in her reply that are untrue and I wonder if I will get a chance to reply to those?"Her reply
"You may respond to anything you disagree with in her letter, preferably if you send something to me in writing that the Panel can see. Anything you do send will have to copied to the Registrant, in accordance with the Complaints Procedure, and that would include any digital recordings you choose to send. The address for all correspondence remains myself, at the BPC office."
I was hesitant to send in the digital recordings of the sessions as I was also a counsellor and did not want the recordings get into the wrong hands.
I replied
"Is there a time frame in which I should hand in my reply? Also, I would rather wait and see if the panel need more evidence and I would then send the digital recording. Would that be possible?"The reply was 10.11.2014
"We have not yet appointed a Hearing Panel, so there is no timeframe yet. Normally you would be given 30 days from receipt. You can certainly wait to see if the Panel requests clarifications if you prefer."
I was confused about this comment as it told me that: a. there should be a hearing panel in place which means I would have b. a time frame of 30 days to respond Both were not in place, no hearing panel, no time frame. So I waited. 14.12. 2014 I still hadnt heard from them, so I wrote
"Just wondering if there has now been a Hearing Panel appointed."
I received on 16.12.2014
"We apologise for the delay. We have encountered a delay in appointing panels for all our cases, which we hope to rectify very soon. Once a panel has been appointed I will inform you of the names of the members."By the 9.1.2015 I still hadnt heard from them and decided to send in my reply to H's reply to my complaint.
"Please find attached my response to H's reply to my complaint which I will also send via letter format. Has there been any news regarding the panel?"On the 15.1.2015 I received
"I am sending you a letter today, enclosing a further response from the registrant, and which also confirms that a Hearing Panel has now been appointed. I will be in touch once they have let me know how they intend to proceed."I was now told that a hearing panel had been appointed, which means, going by their complaint procedure, that the panel would now set a date for the hearing. On the 5.3.2015 I asked again if there had been any news regarding the date of the hearing. Not having had a reply I wrote again on the 10.3. 2015 asking for confirmation of receipt of my email.
11.3.2015 I received
"Yes, I'm, sorry I didn't acknowledge it at the time. I am still waiting for news from the Panel and have asked for an update."
Three months later the BPC had still not set a date for my complaint to be heard. What was the hold up?
Then 24.3.2015 I received an email from BPC with an attached letter (ah suddenly it was possible to send letters attached to email!) Attached were
THE FINDINGS (click here):
After I read the "findings" 26.3.2015 I replied
"In the "Guidelines for Making a Complaint" document the BPC states that the "complaint will now be considered by the SC which decides if there appears to be a potential breach and whether the complaint should therefore be taken to the next stage of the Procedure. [...] This Committee will evaluate your complaint and assess whether it could be substantiated, and, if it were to be substantiated, whether this would indicate that there has been a breach of the Code. The Committee will decide whether or not your complaint should be pursued, and you will be informed of its decision. If the complaint goes ahead, the SC pass all relevant information onto another body called the Intake Committee (IC) which selects a Hearing Panel (HP) to process the complaint and which will set a date for a Hearing." As the SC has already considered my complaint to demonstrate grounds for potential breach of the Code by the registrant, it was moved onto the IC which selected a Hearing Panel. Since this has been confirmed to me I have been waiting for the Hearing Panel to set a date for the actual Hearing, as described in said document, instead I have received a letter announcing the Hearing Panel has recommended the complaint be dismissed.
Two questions follow from this statement which I would like the BPC to clarify:
- Why has the Hearing Panel not set a date for a Hearing but made a decision without a Hearing?
- To whom in the BPC does the Hearing Panel "recommend" the complaint be dismissed?
The "Guidelines for Making a Complaint" document goes on to explain that the appellant has an opportunity to appeal if: a) evidence that was reasonably available was not considered b) the CP had not been properly followed I believe both points above need to be considered in my case as: a) The digital recordings that I offered twice were not called upon as evidence, nor has the b) CP been followed properly as there was no Hearing. Please clarify."
On the 1 of April I was sent another letter attached to the email stating
"Thank you for your email of 26 March. In answer to your questions, the Hearing Panel may decide to reach its determination without proceeding to a hearing if it considers this is the best way forward. Under the provision of paragraph 4.34, the Panel may decide its own procedures if they adhere to the principles of general fairness. After careful study and consideration of the material, because the Panel did not find breaches of the Code of Ethics in the context of the complaint, they considered there was no case to answer and it would have not been in the interest of fairness to proceed to a hearing The recommendation was made to the Chair of Ethics of the BPC."On the 16.4.2015 I replied
"To inform you, I will be sending the appeal next week. Please confirm receipt of it via email as I am still travelling."
MY APPEAL HERE
By now I was struggling so much that I could not be alone and had to move back to my mother.
By the 9.5.2015 I still had not heard from BPC and wrote
"It is unclear to me what is happening next regarding the appeal. Could you please explain to me what the BPC are doing with the appeal and whether I will be send all communications by H regarding this matter."
11.5.2015 I received
"An Appeal Panel is being appointed, which will decide whether to allow your appeal. There is a short response from the registrant which I will post to the address below."
On the 8.6.2015 I asked if there had been any movement regarding the appeal I received a reply the same day
"The Appeal Panel have met to consider your appeal, and are still in discussion. I should be able to update you soon."
On the 22.6.2015 I still hadnt received the findings
"Has there been any decision regarding the appeal yet?"
I received a response at the same day
"I am still waiting to hear the decision of the Appeal Panel. It should come soon."
On the 9.7.2015 I still hadnt heard anything
"Has there been any decision regarding the appeal yet?"
On the 10.7.2015 I received
"I understand the Appeal Panel have reached a decision, but I am still waiting to receive the Notice of Determination. I hope to have it shortly."
On the 20.7.205 I still had not received the findings. I wrote
"10 days ago you have explained that the Appeal Panel have reached a decision yet I have still not received the findings. Either you are trying to stall this process (which has already been dragged on longer than it should have been) or the BPC procedure is plain inadequate. Either way, as a client who has potentially been harmed by one of your members I have received no support throughout this process. Perhaps it is important to note that you are in the business of the "helping" profession and are dealing with emotionally vulnerable people. The least the BPC can do is keep the complainant up to date with the complaint/appeal process. Perhaps something to keep in mind when devising the new complaint procedure."
On the same day I also wrote to Gary Fereday
"Dear Mr Fereday Last year August 2014 I put forward a complaint against one of your members. The complaint had been dealt with appallingly to the point where evidence which was readily available at the time was not considered and a hearing was held in secret therefore not following the complaint procedure (amongst other things which I wont get into at this point). I put forward an appeal April 2015 this year (that's how long it took the "Hearing Panel" to dismiss my complaint - in secret).
This appeal is still ongoing and I would like to give you some feedback for your new complaint procedure so hopefully there can come some learning from this for the BPC. As an organisation that works for the public, especially the vulnerable people of the public who have potentially been mentally or physically abused by one of your members, I would suggest that when someone makes a complaint, the BPC:
* employs someone as a FtP Officer who is trained in counselling/communication skills, not just admin skills. This is a very stressful time for complainants and adaptability to the complainant's needs whenever possible should be a top priority of the FtP Officer
* should keep the complainant up to date with the process and explain each step as it happens. After waiting almost a year and having dealt with a FtP officer who was/is unhelpful and at times oppressive I have been told 10 days ago (after having yet again asked the status of my appeal) that a decision has been made but the FtP officer was still waiting to receive the" Notice of Determination."
Not having received any more communication since I decided to yet again write another email enquiring about the status of my appeal only to receive an automated email saying "I am currently away from the office. I will be back on Monday 27 July and will respond when I return." Either the BPC is trying to stall this process or your complaint/appeal procedure is utterly inadequate. I now have to wait another 7 days for Ms C to return to her office when she knew I had been asking about my appeal before she left on several occasions. I will be taking my case to the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) after receiving the findings as this process has been incredibly unprofessional and oppressive and not at all transparent as suggested by PSA it should be."
On the 27.7.2015 I received from Ms C
"I apologise again for the ongoing delay in finalising the Notice of the Appeal Panel. I have requested an update again this morning and have been advised that it is nearly ready. Please be assured we have not been stalling the process – the Panel have been very careful in reaching their decision, and this can unfortunately take time. I do apologise that it has taken so long, and I am sorry I have not been able to give you any more information while I was waiting for the outcome. As soon as I have it I will forward it to you."
3.8. 2015 I replied
"I understand "the Panel have been very careful in reaching their decision, and this can unfortunately take time" but the panel has reached its decision 3 weeks ago. What is the hold up of informing me of the findings? Some real information on the process rather that regurgitating the same sentence " the Panel have been very careful in reaching their decision" would probably be more suitable in this situation."
On the same day I received
"I have today received the Notice of Determination from the Appeal Panel, attached. I apologise again that the finalising of the document has taken longer than expected. Although the Panel had advised me previously that they had reached a decision the Notice was still being written, so I was not in a position to provide any further information until now."
THE FINDINGS HERE
On the 5.8.2015 I replied to BPC
"Could you please advise me on the next steps/stage now that it has finally been established that my complaint was not treated fairly or is there someone else I must contact who will be able to talk me through this process?"
6.8.2015 I received
"We will be appointing a new Hearing Panel, who will treat your complaint again anew. I will send them all the original submissions, yours and the registrant’s, but you are also welcome to send any other material. As it is now the summer break and many potential panel members are away, it is unlikely we will have a Panel in place before September. I should let you know that the registrant has now appointed legal counsel. We sustained several legal challenges to our 2011 Complaints Procedure late last year, and we are required to work under legal guidance put in place by our insurer. The current position is that we are operating an Interim Complaints Procedure for complaints where the registrant exercises their right to legal representation. Although legal representation was not permitted in the 2011 Complaints Procedure, this exclusion is no longer legally acceptable and we are having to allow it in accordance with Human Rights legislation. Under this procedure, it is likely that the BPC will instruct legal representation to present the complaint – that is, the BPC takes over pursuing the complaint. You would be interviewed in advance of the Hearing by our lawyer so they can produce a witness statement, which together with some or all of your already-submitted evidence will be used at the Hearing. You would be present as a witness and not have to present the complaint yourself, as our lawyer will be presenting it. The Hearing Panel will also be assisted by an independent legal clerk to ensure that they manage the hearing fairly and correctly. I will write to you once I have confirmation that we will be following the Interim Procedure – as I say, it is likely, but it needs to be confirmed. If this happens I will put you in touch with our lawyer who will be able to explain the process better than I can, and what the next steps will be."
So, after dragging the complaint out long enough (probably so that H could get a solicitor/lawyer involved) I was now told that I was no longer allowed to represent my complaint, instead I became a mere witness in a procedure held by an organisation which had previously unfairly dismissed my complaint.
7.8.2015 I replied
"It seems that what really is an ethical issue concerned about a registrant's fittness to practice has now turned into a legal matter. The BPC is not a court of law, neither has it got power to rule in that way. You refer to the Human Rights Act as if the BPC hearing was a court of law with any lawful power. Your work is no longer about the protection and well being of the public but the protection of the registrant and that makes the BPC rather corrupt in my eyes hence I decline your offer for a lawyer. However, I might take my own lawyer which the BPC is welcome to pay for. Please let me know if that is possible. Also, please advice me on how to call witnesses for the coming hearing. I want to call Mr R as a witness, possibly also Mr W and G. (all three "supervisors of H)"
7.8.2015b I received:
"We do understand your concerns. The issues which brought about the adoption of the Interim Procedure arose towards the end of last year, when it was determined that the 2011 Complaints Procedure, which had functioned effectively in the past, is incompatible with several legal requirements, primarily Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to a fair trial). The BPC, even though it is not a statutory regulator with legal powers, nonetheless is obliged under common law and the ECHR to abide by procedures which it has been advised are fair and robust. In particular this means allowing legal representation for a registrant complained against when this is requested. We are having to follow this legal advice and allow legal representation in a number of complaints; it is not only applied to this case. There is nothing we can do to alter the Interim Procedure's provisions without raising the risk the decision the new Hearing Panel reaches about your complaint could be quashed on the grounds that the procedure followed was not legally sound. This includes keeping to the requirement that the BPC has to take over the complaint, and to use its own legal advisors. I’m afraid you would not be able to use your own. I am sorry that we are allowed no flexibility on this point."
10.8.2015 I replied
"To clarify, the BPC is demanding that I, the client who represents the public, who could have been potentially abused by one of YOUR members am not allowed to represent myself but have to give over my complaint to the very organisation that handled my complaint in an "unfair, unreasonable and defect" way? And should I not allow the BPC, who has treated me unfairly before, to take over my complaint the complaint will be dismissed all together? Please clarify if I understood this right. Also, you have not answered my precious question: How can I call the witnesses RC, GG and WC into the hearing?"
I also wrote, on the same day, to BPC
"As advised by the Professional Standards Authority I would like to review the transcript of the hearing which produced the findings that were sent to me."
I had been in contact with PSA and told them that the hearing panel had decided without me or the registrant two things:
1. to rule (without me or registrant) and produce and sent findings to me (findings follow a judgement in a hearing)
2. To dismiss my complaint
1 and 2 stand in contradiction with each other.
A hearing panel can not dismiss a compaint, a hearing panel can only uphold or not uphold a complaint (after having heard evidence and witnesses) As the hearing panel met in private to make their judgement PSA advised me to get the hearing transcript as the procedure states.
10.8.2015 I received
"As set out in out letter of 19 March, the Hearing Panel had concluded that there was no case to be answered in the context of the complaint, and recommended that the complaint be dismissed. They consequently did not proceed to a Hearing. The Panel is permitted to meet as part of its consideration of the material (Complaints Procedure paragraph 4.5), but this meeting not itself a Hearing, and is not recorded. BPC Hearings are only conducted with the attendance of the parties concerned."
Here she admits that the HEARING PANEL (set up for a hearing!) concluded (after having met together) recommended the complaint should be dismissed when it wasnt the hearing panel's right to do this, the screening panel decides whether a complaint should be heard or dismissed. Once the screening panel makes the decision to let the complaint be heard in a hearing, the hearing panel has to hear the complaint in a hearing.
I replied
"The Hearing Panel can only "conclude" after a hearing, which was held otherwise I would have not been send any "findings". Why was I sent findings if there was no hearing. I was sent findings and I want to see the transcript of the "meeting" in which these findings were produced.11.8.2015 I sent another email
"Could you also please send me the new interim complaints procedure so I can read up paragraph 4.5. I am unable to find it in the version I have. "
On 12.8.2015 I was sent:
"Sorry for the delay while I was out of the office. To answer your emails in order: I reconfirm there is no transcript or recording of the Hearing Panel's meeting alone, as none is required. As I understand it, the judgement of the Appeal Panel was not that your complaint was handled in an unfair or unreasonable way, but that the Hearing Panel, in omitting to notify either of the parties that they were not intending to proceed to a hearing, did not act in a fair or reasonable manner. Your complaint will not be dismissed by us if we do not follow the requirements of the Interim Procedure. What I have referred to is the real possibility that the decision could be judicially reviewed for that reason, and it would be the Administrative Court who would quash the decision, not the BPC. It is not something the BPC has power over. For this reason, we are obliged to follow legal directions in applying the Interim Procedure. You could suggest to the lawyer who would be taking your witness statement that you would like to call the three witnesses. However, I am not sure that you may call witnesses yourself under the Interim Procedure, as your own role would be that of a witness. If after interviewing you the lawyer agrees that calling them, or asking them to submit a written statement, would be helpful in prosecuting your complaint, then they would made that decision. The Interim Procedure is still being finalised on some last minor points (not affecting those we have discussed), and I can send it to you once it is confirmed that this is the procedure we will be following. The paragraph 4.5 of the Complaints Procedure that I referred to is in the 2011 version which you have. It should be on page 8, commencing 'Once appointed the Hearing Panel will endeavour to meet at the earliest date possible to consider how to proceed.'"
I replied on the 13.8.2015
"I think it would be a good idea to perhaps explain to me what exactly is happening at the moment. You mention Administritave court but don't explain why the court is now involved. Is it because H and her lawyer are claiming the BPC handled the complaint/appeal improperly? Is that the reason I am now a witness not a claimant? I do hope you will tell me what exactly is going on so I can protect myself, I think that is the least you can do to "protect the public"
I received a reply 13.8.2015
"I can assure you that no courts are involved at this point. There is the potential for the Administrative Court to become involved, if there should be a judicial review of any decision we might make following a process which did not allow the registrant to have legal representation. We have to follow the procedures set out by our legal advisers to avert this. Nearly all other regulators (UKCP, BACP, GMC and so on) allow legal representation to their registrants; it is a standard aspect of regulatory complaints procedures that the BPC is starting to implement.
The registrant has asked for legal representation simply to ensure that her ‘right to a fair trial’ is maintained. She and her lawyers have made no comment, positive or negative, on the BPC’s handling of the complaint.
It is also standard procedure among regulators that the regulator prosecutes the complaint and the person bringing the complaint becomes a witness. The principle is that the regulator, who has a responsibility for the conduct of their registrant, should be the entity who brings the complaint based on information brought to its attention by a member of the public (i.e. the original complainant). That member of the public then has the function of a witness in helping the regulator prosecute the complaint.
What will happen now is that a new Hearing Panel will be appointed, and the BPC will instruct a lawyer to take your witness statement and advise you about the process. That statement would be included in the evidence that will go to the Panel and to the registrant ahead of the hearing. On the day itself you would be called upon by the lawyer presenting your complaint to give your evidence. You would not need to be present throughout the whole hearing if you did not wish to, and you could still request separate hearing arrangements just as you can under the 2011 procedure. I gather that regulators have adopted this process over the years precisely because it does better support and aid the witness (member of the public), and giving the regulator the responsibility for prosecuting the complaint is seen as a more robust system for protecting the public.
We will not be able to convene the new Hearing Panel immediately because most of the potential members are on their summer break until the start of September. I hope to have an update for you then. In the meantime I am awaiting the finalising of the Interim Procedure and will confirm the next steps, such as a meeting with our lawyer, when this is in place.
13.8.2015 I replied
"Thank you for your explanation. I understand that H wants to have legal support and this is not my concern. My concern is that I too have a fair hearing and under the human rights act it is my right to defend myself in person or through legal assistance of my own choosing. Therefore the BPC has no right to tell me that I must also take a lawyer. At the moment there is no court involved in this matter so there is no need for me to talk to a lawyer, and even if the court was involved I would still not talk to a lawyer but represent myself as is my right. I think it starts to get confusing when you tell me that no administrative court has been involved yet BPC is still wanting to involve a lawyer to take my statement. And then I am being told that if I dont talk to the lawyer my complaint may be quashed by the court when no court is involved! Things dont add up and that is usually a sign that other things are going on that I am not being made aware of and with the added issue of not having any trust in BPC's decision making concerning my well being, protection and integrity I will not talk to any lawyer but represent myself. I will write a new complaint against H which will include the new allegations that I mentoined in my appeal and will put all evidence together including the ditial tape recordings. Where will I send these electronic recordings to? I will also add the witnesses that I would like to call. When is the deadline for this complaint to be handed in? This is outragous, it really is. I have no way to guide myself in this procedure. your old CP has suddenly stopped and the new interim one is still not out. I am hearing lawyer, court and legal matters when this is an ethical matter and does not conecrn any law involvement UNLESS H is not allowed to take a lawyer with her to the hearing and as she is allowed to do so I am really not sure why there is any talk about any further legal concerns FOR ME. The BPC might have to be careful how they now proceed but as far as Im concerned I am well within my right to continue this complaint along the ethical lines not legal ones. H has potentially abused her power towards me while working with me and it is THIS that the hearing will establish, whether she has a lawyer sitting next to her or not. If you could let me know when the deadline for handing in the new complaint is, please. I also need the new Interim CP as soon as possible. I also need to know who to send the electronic mail to with the digital recordings attached."
17.8.2015 I received
"Please be assured that you will have a fair hearing. You do not need to defend yourself, as it is the registrant who is the subject of the hearing. She has the right to legal representation because a possible outcome of a hearing is the loss of livelihood, which is not a risk that you will face. There is no legal danger to you in participating in our procedures. The only reason we are using a lawyer to take your statement and present the complaint is because they have the training and experience to do so, not because they themselves are invested with any legal power at the hearing. The issue remains that we are not able to conduct a hearing with legal representation on the registrant's side without following the rest of the procedure that we have been given in the way that I have described it. I have taken legal advice to check whether you could represent yourself and I have been advised it will not be possible. Your original complaint is the one that will be considered by the new Hearing Panel, following the upholding of the appeal. You may send me new evidence, including the transcripts, to add to the original complaint, and there is no need to send again anything you have already provided. There is no deadline as such, but it would be helpful if the new material could arrive by the end of next month as the new Hearing Panel will be appointed by then. Everything should still come to me, and you may continue to use this email address."What they do not tell you is that should the complaint not be upheld in the hearing, no lawyer will take on your case afterwards should the complainant decide to take the therapist to court of law. This is very important, and in their usual deceptive style BPC tries to reassure that these arrangements will not effect the complainant.
On the 20.8.2015 I replied
"Please advice me on who your superior is. Is it Helen Morgan? I am no longer willing to communicate with you as you obviously are not following any kind of complaint procedure instead I have to listen to you "getting legal advice" which I supposedly must follow, if not my complaint will be quashed. The procedure you mention, I would like to have it. "The issue remains that we are not able to conduct a hearing with legal representation on the registrant's side without following the rest of the procedure that we have been given in the way that I have described it." If you are following any procedure which your "advice" is based upon, I want a copy of that complaint procedure right away, so I can continue with my complaint in an ethical and fair way. When will I receive the Interim Complaints Procedure?"
On 24.8.2015 I received
"My overall manager is our CEO, Gary Fereday. Helen Morgan is the incoming chair (from September). As I have explained, we are in the process of redrafting the Complaints Procedure, and in this interval we are also following an Interim Procedure in cases where legal representation has been requested. The actual Interim Procedure document is still being finalised by the lawyers, and until they have agreed to it we are not permitted to circulate it. I am hoping they will reach this agreement soon and we will be able to circulate it then."
As I still hadnt received a reply from Gary Fereday I decided to write him another email and to put my case out into the public via Twitter.
"Dear Mr Gary Fereday
On the 20th of July I have already sent you an email but you have not replied. Perhaps it wasnt clear that I would like to tell you about what I witnessed when I dealt with the BPC. This is what has happened to me so far. 2012 my analysis broke down abruptly. 2014 I handed in a complaint against the analyst to the BPC My complaint was accepted as the Screening Committee believed there to be grounds for a complaint. My complaint was passed to the Intake Committee which appointed a hearing panel which was supposed to set a date for the hearing. I was given the names of the hearing panel and waited for the date of the hearing. Nothing came for months. Yet again I emailed to ask what was going on. I was told that the Hearing Panel had found there to be no grounds for a complaint and dismissed it. BUT: The hearing panel is not allowed to dismiss a complaint before a hearing is held. It can only do so AFTER a hearing. Plus I was sent findings of the hearing, which is also a sign that the hearing was indeed held BUT I was not invited. Neither was my evidence considered (digital recordings of the sessions in question - highly important and damaging evidence for the therapist and her "high status" supervisors). After having been adviced by PSA to ask for the transcript of the hearing that produced the findings I was told no transcripts were taken! I appealed. My appeal was accepted and its findings announced that I was treated "unfairly" and the complaint dismissed unreasonably. The process was called "defect", As a matter of fact the Appeal Panel announced they were not able to follow the appeal procedure as the complaint was handled in such a defect way. A few days ago I was asked to hand in a new complaint, with a new hearing panel. I was also told that the BPC had now put in an Interim Complaint Procedure which allowed the therapist to have a lawyer with her in the hearing (A hearing which was supposed to be about the ethical issues raised and to see if the therapist was fit to practice) The reason the BPC gave is to be in line with the Human Rights act, esp. Article 6. I was told that I was no longer allowed to represent my complaint and BPC demanded I give the complaint over to them and have THEIR lawyer represent me at the hearing. When I declined and said I would like to represent myself I was told I was no longer allowed to do this and should I continue with this wish my complaint would get dismissed. My questions are: Why has an ethcial issue suddenly turned into a legal matter? The core concern is getting lost in all this - and that is the client, me, the public and its protection! Why am I not allowed to take my own lawyer or why am I not allowed to represent myself as stated in aticle 6 of the human rights act? And why am I being threatened to have my complaint quashed should I not follow the demands of the BPC? Do you think this is fair treatment of the client/public?"
After enquiring about it on twitter, Gary Fereday suddenly replied to me on the 1.9.2015:
"It has been drawn to my attention that you are the holder of the Twitter account @sIuagh I now realise that we have corresponded by e-mail (below) and I was not aware if this when I responded to the @sluagh Twitter account earlier today. I cannot advise you via Twitter. I did resend you a link via Twitter to the BPC public consultation document but this is not the interim procedure which is still being finalised. I am afraid can only reiterate what my colleague, Janice Cormie, has previously outlined to you: · We currently have to apply an interim procedure in cases where the Registrant has asked for legal representation · We have explained what this involves to you · Our hands are tied by the legal context in which we operate As Chief Executive I do not get involved in individual complaints. To do so would not be appropriate, as the handling of complaints needs to remain confidential and seperate from the wider activity of the organisation. I can only reassure you that your complaint will be handled with upmost care and professionalism
Your sincerely Gary Fereday | Chief Executive | British Psychoanalytic Council Unit 7, 19-23 Wedmore Street, London, N19 4RU +44 (0)20 7561 9240 www.bpc.org.uk The BPC promotes excellence in psychoanalytic thinking and psychotherapy; safeguards the public; promotes the highest standards of training and research; and works to make psychotherapy accessible to all.
Attached to above email was this email apparently sent to me: 27 July 2015 which I never received until :
"I am sorry to hear of your frustration and concerns with our complaints procedure. Unfortunately some complaints take longer to reach a determination than one might hope. I have taken a look at your case and understand that a letter of determination will be with your very shortly. I am satisfied that there was no intention to stall the process. With regard to your experience of Janice Cormie. I will review what happened with Janice but understand that she updated you regularly via e-mail. Janice has been handling complaints for the organisation for many years and I would be surprised if she was unhelpful or oppressive. It is a difficult role to undertake, having to maintain strict impartiality and considerable confidences. This can occasionally appear as a perhaps a little indifferent although it is certainly not intended to be. I will ensure the points you raise are fed into our complaints procedure review and thank you for those. Yours sincerely Gary Fereday"
This was very strange as I had never received a responds from GF before and suddenly he wrote to me with two replies attached. One from the 27th of July (such an email had never reached my email inbox) And 1.9.2015
I replied
"I am not sure what the @sluagh twitter account and tweets have to do with ignored email enquiries about possible corruption within your organisation. Fact is I have emailed you twice and you have ignored both emails. Going by what you say now, it is only because "it has been drawn to your attention" that @sluagh and myself are connected that you responded to my emails. Does it not worry you how the public is allegedly being treated by your organisation? I thought you might want to get to the bottom of what has happened to me at the hands of your organisation NOT at the hands of the analyst who I am complaining about. I did not ask you to get involved into my complaint against the registrant, I do however need you to get very involved in the mistakes and corruption of your organisation. Is this no concern of yours? When I first emailed you on the 20th of July 2015 I received an automated message stating: From: Leanne Stelmaszczyk BPC (leanne@psychoanalytic-council.org) Sent: 20 July 2015 Many thanks for your email. I'm now on annual leave until 29 July and will respond to your email upon my return. If your message is urgent please contact one of my colleagues at the BPC office on 0207 561 9240. I then emailed you again on the 10th of August 2015 thinking you will be back from your annual leave and not receiving an automated message this time I believed you to be in office. However, I received no response until now; now that you have become aware that I am linked to the @sluagh account. I also note that you have replied to my concerns about Ms Cormie in your last email and this is the first time I see this reply (which states it was supposedly written to me on the 27 of July). This is not a therapy session in which Ms Cormie was perceived to be a "little indifferent" because of her neutral stance. These are not the words I used to describe Ms Cormie's attitude in dealing with me or my complaint and I would appreciate if you did not put words in my mouth stemming from what you assume to be my reasons for bringing Ms Cormie's behaviour to your attention. I called Ms Cormie's behaviour unhelpful and oppressive and for you to assume I am writing to you because I perceive Ms Cormie as "indifferent" does not only show me that you are actually not listening but that there appears to be a need for you to defend "Janice". Are you saying that "Janice" is incapable of being unhelpful and oppressive because she has been dealing with complaints for years? If this is what you are assuming then I am very concerned as this thought process may reflect the dynamics of the BPC when dealing with members complained against, especially those members who have a high status and are well known in the profession and have been seeing patients "for years". This is a serious matter and I have great concerns for the public in your care. My complaint was dismissed unfairly and unreasonably and I demand that someone from the BPC is held accountable for this action. This was not a silly mistake Mr Fereday, my complaint was purposefully dismissed. I would like to know what you/BPC will do to get to the bottom of this corrupt action and I would like to be kept updated of its process. Please confirm this is possible. Please also confirm whether I will be able to represent myself in the hearing. Ms Cormie informed me should I not take a lawyer appointed by the BPC and give my complaint over to the lawyer my complaint will be quashed, please guide me to the paragraph in law where it states this must be so? Just as the registrant is allowed to have legal support under the human rights act, I am allowed to represent myself or have my own legal support, no? Also, the link you have provided via twitter leads me to the website I already read months ago but it seems to have been edited and now contains a link to the interim? complaints procedure. I have read the CP which was amended 2014 and it still states the registrant is not allowed legal support. Is it not a bit useless to publicise this CP if it is not being used? Are you expecting me to hand in a complaint without there being a complaint procedure in place?"
2.9.2015 Gary Fereday replies:
"I am sorry that you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your complaint and note that you allege corruption within the BPC. I have looked over the administration of your complaint and remain of the opinion that is has been handled properly, in accordance with our procedures and legal advice. I am satisfied that Janice Cormie has responded appropriately and explained the process to you. I am also satisfied that I have responded to any e-mail I’m aware you sent me. The interim complaints procedure has not been finalised and so not yet available to be sent to you. The BPC is required to operate within the UK legal framework that has required us to review and make changes to our complaints procedure. This is being done with the advice of lawyers with considerable experience in the regulatory field. As you are aware, following the recent determination of the appeal panel, your complaint will proceed to a second hearing. A second hearing panel will be convened as soon as the interim procedure is finalised. Janice Cormie has explained what is happening and I am afraid I am unable to add anything more that might help you. I trust that this helps"
I replied 2.9.2015
"I allege corruption within the BPC and ask you to investigate this allegation. Please let me know if there will be an investigation into the unfair and unreasonable dismissal of my complaint which the appeal panel suggested to be defect: "The Appeal Panel is unable to assure itself that the Complaints Procedure was correctly followed with regard to its decision to dismiss the complaint without a formal hearing. An Appeal Panel should be able to follow through the Hearing Panel’s decision making process as outlined in its Notice of Determination. We are not able to do this on the basis of the letters to the Complainant and Registrant dated 19 March 2015, which constituted the Hearing Panel’s Notice of Determination. This invites the possibility that the Hearing Panel’s procedure may have been defective. The Complainant was not properly informed of the amendment to the Complaints Procedure, and this could be regarded as unfair. We consider this to be a defect in the exercise of the Procedure." Please also let me know if: I will be able to represent myself in the second hearing or will I have to take a lawyer appointed by the BPC? And will my complaint be quashed should I choose not to take BPC's lawyer?"
11.9.2015 I receive an email from Ms C
"I have now been sent the final approved version of the Interim Procedure, which I am attaching for you to see. Please let me know when you think you may feel ready to give your witness statement so we can start working towards the hearing."
6.10.2015 I received another email
"I would just like to check whether you received the copy of the Interim Procedure that I emailed you on 9 September. If you prefer I am happy to post a copy to your address in Ireland. In order to begin preparing for a hearing, we do need you to speak with our lawyer to give a witness statement. This can be done by telephone if you are not going to be in London. I do have to ask for you to confirm your willingness to do so, or otherwise, by the end of next week (16 October), as I have not heard from you since 20 August. I had advised in my email of 17 August that any new material should reach us by the end of September. The deadline for submitting material would actually be according to the timetable that would be set in process by the convening of a hearing date, but we cannot do that until you confirm that you are willing to give a witness statement in accordance with the Interim Procedure. We therefore need your confirmation before we can go ahead."
8.10.2015 I replied
"Yes, please send the Interim Complaints Procedure to my address in Ireland as 41 pages is quite a read. Regarding the complaint. Can you please inform me how to start an investigation of the unfair dismissal of my complaint. Like I mentioned to Gary Fereday, who I have copied in, I do allege corruption within the BPC Hearing Panel (and Chair who has allowed the dismissal!) that dealt with my complaint and would like this to be investigated. My complaint was dismissed unfairly and the CP was called "defect" what are you doing about this? Surely the BPC can only be for such an investigation so any future complainants (the public) can rest assured that their complaint will be in professional, safe and fair hands. Please let me know what your plans are regarding the investigation of the dismissal of my complaint. "
On the 21.10.2015 I received
"I hope that by now you have received the posted copy of the Interim Procedure. Please let me know whether you are willing to continue the process. The original Hearing Panel reached its determination in accordance with what they considered to be a reasonable interpretation of the Complaints Procedure. The Appeal Panel found that they should have advised the parties in advance that they intended to reach a determination on the written evidence alone, but not that the determination itself was at fault. That is, the Appeal Panel did not find that your complaint was dismissed unfairly, only that the Panel’s decision to dismiss it without a hearing without giving prior notice to you and the registrant was grounds for upholding your appeal."
3.11.2015 I receive:
Further to my email of 21 October (below), I am obliged to ask again whether you will agree to be interviewed by the BPC’s lawyers for a witness statement, so that we can proceed to a hearing. Can you please confirm this by Monday 9 November? If you do not wish to engage with the process as set out in the Interim Procedure then we will not be able to progress the complaint, and will have to consider the complaint closed."
I did not reply. Note that no one, not even Gary Fereday confirmed that legally I was not allowed to have my own legal support yet both the Ms C and Fereday demanded I take their lawyer and act as a witness. I was also asked to send in a new complaint (after I had appealed) without there being a complaint procedure in place. The whole process was inadequate and the only person benefiting from this was H who was not only protected by a lawyer (who had nothing to do with the ethical side of therapy) but also by the BPC who seemed to try everything in their power to deny my need for transparent and fair treatment.
PSA advised me to take the complaint to BACP. This complaint process can be followed HERE