Page 831 - 11. 2019 New 26-05-21 No Table

the intended recipient and receive it in error you must not copy, distribute, or use the
communication in any other way. All traffic handled by the Government Connect Secure
Extranet may be subject to recording/and or monitoring in accordance with relevant
legislation.
This email has been scanned for viruses, but we cannot guarantee that it will be free of
viruses or malware. The recipient should perform their own virus checks.
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is
intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in
relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically
archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business.
Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in;
Security, archiving and compliance.

84.
Additional Email Attachments & Emails / Issue:
84. 1. 1
lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk_
12.12.2019_RE RE Simon Cordell Claim Number FOOED222
12/12/2019
/ Page Numbers: 539,540,541,542,543
--
539,
From: Lorraine Cordell <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>
Sent: 12 December 2019 20:11
To: 'Jill.bayley@enfield.gov.uk'; 'Kulwinder Johal'; 'Ronak Ahmed'; 'Sean Shanmuganathan'
Subject: RE: RE: Simon Cordell
Claim Number: FOOED222
Dear Kulwinder Johal and Jill Bayley
I do not understand why I am being ignored well this is what it feels like and I can only ask
why.
When I spoke to Kulwinder Johal today on the phone, she told me that it was the court that
had made an error and it was not a consent order that was sent to the court, so the Judge that
made the order misread the letter Kulwinder Johal had sent the court and mistakenly
approved it as a consent order.
So can I ask if there is nothing being hidden in the letter that was sent to the court why is
Kulwinder Johal withholding it, if it was the court that made an error there is nothing to hide
and it should be able to be corrected via the court?
It would seem only Kulwinder Johal and the court has seen a letter that the Judge deemed as a
consent order,
Do you not feel we have the right to see the letter, if not can you please explain why? Also
why would it have not been sent to the solicitors that were acting for my son before Legal
Aid was withdrawn, why was it only to the court?
My son Mr Simon Cordell no longer has a solicitor acting for him as legal aid was withdraw,
which you will be aware of. I have also stated this in emails that have been sent today, but I
still feel I am being ignored, and the only reason I can think of why I am being ignored is