top of page
Search

Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution approached

Your complaint to the SRA

Inbox


from: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

to: complaintsreview@cedr.com

date: 9 Jun 2023, 18:50

subject: Re: Your complaint to the SRA

mailed-by: gmail.com


Dear Sir/Madam


I disagree with this report, you so need to start afresh and not so much concentrate on producing a report for my consumption or for the Court's consumption but for the Public Enquiry: PUBLIC ENQUIRY PROCESS COMMENCED: IOPC Reference - 2022/173746 (knowledgeassessmentanddissemination.com) https://www.knowledgeassessmentanddissemination.com/post/public-enquiry-process-commenced-iopc-reference-2022-173746 The entire report is a whitewash cover-up of State-engineered Hate crime against me, a law-abiding citizen for being a Republican of sorts in that I think the Monarch should be subjected to a referendum for continuing as Head of State once every 15 years. So the State has victimised, terrorised, persecuted, and obstructed justice with me a second class citizen. They tried everything, stuck me in a mental hospital twice, tried to make me stateless, and impoverished me with only pension to live on with no scope for employment and when I stayed put knowing that they could not take away my British passport according to international conventions so that I am free to go on holidays and return back to the United Kingdom with my occupational pension soon to be supplemented with State pension in August, they Cyber attacked me with 500 criminal anonymous emails to me and my family both here and in India to try and destroy our lives mentally and physically. So the cyber-attacks were not trolls, Victims of Panigrahi Association (VOPA) does not exist but was concocted by the Security Services secretly to send malicious emails from my email account as a pretext to getting Kent Police to arrest me on 4 occasions and a 5th one that was coerced invitation. to charge me with offences with the complicity of North Kent Magistrates Court especially. All my protestations in issuing litigation against the Prime Minister, the University of Greenwich, taking the matter to the International Criminal Court came to nothing, such is the power of the State. But I survived. There is no resolution: A Republican is an outcast of the society in the United Kingdom.


Please do not reply to this email. This statement is just for the record.


Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanui Panigrahi

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL

Tel: 07967789619


To request a review of your complaint, please contact the Independent Reviewer within 20 working days i.e., by 8 July 2023

How to contact the Independent Reviewer

By email: complaintsreview@cedr.com

By phone: 020 7536 6000

By post:

Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR)

100 St. Paul’s Churchyard,

London

EC4M 8BU

United Kingdom


On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 14:55, Sean Kent <Sean.Kent@sra.org.uk> wrote:

Sensitivity: General


Dear Dr Panigrahi


I have completed a review of your complaint about our service. Please find attached a letter explaining my findings. At the end of the letter are details of the next step available to you should you wish to seek an independent review of our conduct and dealings with you.


Yours sincerely


Sean Kent

Corporate Complaints Officer

Corporate Complaints Team

Solicitors Regulation Authority

sean.kent@sra.org.uk

www.sra.org.uk


For information on how we handle your personal data, see our privacy notice.

This email is intended for the addressee only. This includes any attachments. Its unauthorised use, further processing, storage or copying is not allowed. If you are not the intended recipient, please let the sender know and then destroy all copies.

Please note the sender is not authorised to conclude any contract on behalf of the Solicitors Regulation Authority by email.

We are the regulator of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales. The Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited is a company limited by guarantee. Our registered offices are: The Cube, 199 Wharfside Street, Birmingham, B1 1RN. Our company registration number is: 12608059.

One attachment

• Scanned by Gmail

Sensitivity: Confidential

Solicitors Regulation Authority

The Cube

199 Wharfside Street

Birmingham

B1 1RN

UK: 0370 606 2555

Int: + 44 (0)121 329 6800

DX: 720293 BIRMINGHAM 47

sra.org.uk


Our ref: RGC 000100925


Private & Confidential

FAO Dr Panigrahi


By Email only: shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com


9 June 2023


Dear Dr Panigrahi

Your complaint about the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)

I am an officer within the Corporate Complaints Team at the SRA. I consider your complaint about our actions and look again at how we have conducted our activity as the regulating authority. I do not reinvestigate to provide a new outcome but I check that we have followed our procedures and assessed your concerns appropriately.

I can recommend a further review where I can see that our enquiries have not been sufficient, or that we may not have acted correctly in the provision of our service to you.

I have read that you remain unhappy with the decisions we have made regarding the report you made to us about Olives Solicitors Ltd (the firm), and others unidentified involved with the duty solicitor scheme in Kent. You are concerned about the quality of the service you have received from them in countering a police investigation into you for malicious communications.

By its nature, my review is retrospective. I consider the decisions we have made based on the material that we have seen. I gauge whether or not those decisions have a foundation based on a reasonable assessment of the facts that we have obtained during our evaluation of your report. As well as reviewing our file, I have read the outcome letter from the Investigation Officer (IO) and the letter of Mr Smith, Complaints Officer.


I think it helpful to say at the outset that my review of our file has not identified any significant failings with our earlier assessment. I am not referring the matter back for further consideration. There is very little I can add to the explanations that you have already received, both of which fairly state our position.


We take all of the reports made to us seriously, but we do not act to provide a resolution to the satisfaction of individuals. We assess if there are concerns about a solicitor or firm’s ongoing fitness to practise and a wider risk to the public or the


Sensitivity: Confidential


integrity of the legal profession. We may not act where we believe that any breach of our regulations has been inadvertent or of very limited scope. We are concerned when solicitors appear not to have provided you with an appropriate service. However, problems with the quality of work produced may be more appropriately considered by the Legal Ombudsman (LeO), who lead on issues of service. LeO may be able to provide a resolution to you that is outside of our scope. There can be an overlap between service and conduct, and we do take care to ensure that we have assessed correctly who is the most appropriate authority for the reports we have received. The IO has noted that you have made a report to LeO, and that this is the appropriate agency to deal with your concerns. I do understand that it must be disappointing and frustrating to believe that the firm have not acted in your best interests. However, concerns about the advice provided by a solicitor is not a regulatory matter. We could not see that the firm has breached our Standards and Regulations.


On a review of our file, I have seen the content of the email from your address of 17 May 2023. I can see that the IO has already advised you of the unacceptable nature of its content. You have previously stated that your email account has been hacked, potentially by a government sponsored agency. I understand that this forms the basis of your defence to the various complaints made to the police about you. However, I do think it is important to emphasize that we do not tolerate comments of a sexual, abusive and misogynistic nature made toward our staff or others.

As part of my review of our service I have reconsidered the warning that was given to you by the IO. I am now going further, and will explain that as it is your assertion that your email account is subject of hacking, then it would be most appropriate if all of your future correspondence with us is by post only. Furthermore, whilst you retain the ability to seek an independent review of our actions, we will not be corresponding further with you regarding this case.


Overall, based on the evidence you have provided, we consider that there is insufficient evidence to suggest the firm or solicitors that you have identified to us have acted unethically.


In summary, I found that the IO’s assessment of your report had been proportionate to the concerns that you had raised, and the decision made reasonable based upon the material we have seen. I could not find any reason to recommend further activity, nor could I find that we had acted incorrectly.


This concludes my review of your concerns at stage two of our complaints process. You do have the opportunity for our handling of your complaint to be independently reviewed. I have included details of how to do this below.


Yours sincerely


Sensitivity: Confidential


Sean Kent

Corporate Complaints Officer

Corporate Affairs Directorate

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Email: sean.kent@sra.org.uk

If you remain dissatisfied

If you are unhappy with our handling of your complaint about us, you can seek a review of it from the Independent Reviewer. It is not able to consider concerns about our decision, in this case not to act against Olives Solicitors Ltd.

It can review our service to you, for example, whether we have answered your concerns, explained matters clearly and followed our procedures and timescales.

It will decide whether your case is suitable for a full review. You can find more information about its remit at www.sra.org.uk/sra/complaints/complaints-policy.page

(paragraph 67).

To request a review of your complaint, please contact the Independent Reviewer

within 20 working days i.e., by 8 July 2023


How to contact the Independent Reviewer

By email: complaintsreview@cedr.com

By phone: 020 7536 6000

By post:

Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR)

100 St. Paul’s Churchyard,

London

EC4M 8BU

United Kingdom

____________________________________________________________________

Automatic reply: Your complaint to the SRA

Inbox


from: complaintsreview <complaintsreview@cedr.com>

to: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

date: 9 Jun 2023, 18:51

subject: Automatic reply: Your complaint to the SRA

mailed-by: gbr01-lo2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com

Signed by: cedr.com

security: Standard encryption (TLS) Learn more


Thank you for your email.

We will endeavour to respond to your correspondence within the next 5 working days.

Kind regards

Complaints Team

20 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Membership of TCLS/TCLP-UK now legally validated

Membership from:    Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com> to:          harshita.01singh@yahoo.com date:     22 Jun 2024, 11:35 subject:               Membership mailed-by:         gmail.com

Intimidatory harassment on me: CO/999/23 Review

Intimidatory harassment on me: CO/999/23 Review Yahoo/Sent Shantanu Panigrahi From:shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com To:Enquiries Kent Police Cc:PCC Correspondence Kent Fri, 21 Jun at 16:37 To Kent Police E

Comments


bottom of page