Are you allowed to suggest a conspiracyvto distort the truth

[ethan]

...amongst two parties for mutual gain, when the evidence points towards it when dealing with a complaint. Thee parties involved could be fined and struck off by a regulatory body?

I'm unsure as to how to handle the matter as I've discovered what amounts to be a conspiracy between one agency and another to backtrack and change the narrative of a dispute between a complainant and the organisations the complaint is being made against.
To cover themselve's the organisation keeps referring to the original complaint as a further concern when it wasn't. It was an original concern in which they failed to act. Realising this they went back to it to cover their mishandling of it by changing the narrative in which it was handled. There are a number of other falsehoods in their argument to confirm this. (Sorry I'm unable to go into specifics.

 

[dlockers]

Yes

Edit: no

 

[tom_e]

You seem to ask a lot of questions like this, have you considered finding a pet lawyer?

 

[Haggisman]

That would be an ecumenical matter...

 

[Chris Wilson]

...amongst two parties for mutual gain, when the evidence points towards it when dealing with a complaint. Thee parties involved could be fined and struck off by a regulatory body?

I'm unsure as to how to handle the matter as I've discovered what amounts to be a conspiracy between one agency and another to backtrack and change the narrative of a dispute between a complainant and the organisations the complaint is being made against.
To cover themselve's the organisation keeps referring to the original complaint as a further concern when it wasn't. It was an original concern in which they failed to act. Realising this they went back to it to cover their mishandling of it by changing the narrative in which it was handled. There are a number of other falsehoods in their argument to confirm this. (Sorry I'm unable to go into specifics.

You are not a member of the Campaign for Plain English, are you?

 

[jsmoke]

What hard evidence do you have?

 

[Stu999]

Sounds like a non-issue unless you can give some actual detail.

 

[fez]

You seem to ask a lot of questions like this, have you considered finding a pet lawyer?

Perhaps a man well versed in bird law?

 

[Mrwong]

...amongst two parties for mutual gain, when the evidence points towards it when dealing with a complaint. Thee parties involved could be fined and struck off by a regulatory body?

I'm unsure as to how to handle the matter as I've discovered what amounts to be a conspiracy between one agency and another to backtrack and change the narrative of a dispute between a complainant and the organisations the complaint is being made against.
To cover themselve's the organisation keeps referring to the original complaint as a further concern when it wasn't. It was an original concern in which they failed to act. Realising this they went back to it to cover their mishandling of it by changing the narrative in which it was handled. There are a number of other falsehoods in their argument to confirm this. (Sorry I'm unable to go into specifics.

Everyone is doing it these days, evidence is key, this is why I record all my conversations.

 

[Goodie]

I'm not completely sure what point you're getting at, but are you inferring that the moon landings were faked?

 

[Chris Wilson]

Everyone is doing it these days, evidence is key, this is why I record all my conversations.

Good God.... I have images of your wife saying in bed."Are you getting in the mood" and you replying, "No, go back to sleep and put my microphone down".

 

[arknor]

There's no single truth.