Mental health – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Increased awareness of mental processes can influence emotional behavior and mental health. A 2011 study incorporating three types of meditative practice (concentration meditation, mindfulness meditation and compassion toward others) revealed that meditation provides an enhanced ability to recognize emotions in others and their own emotional patterns, so they could better resolve difficult problems in their relationships.

via Mental health – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Margaret E. Kemeny, Carol Foltz, James F. Cavanagh, Margaret Cullen, Janine Giese-Davis, Patricia Jennings, Erika L. Rosenberg, Omri Gillath, Phillip R. Shaver, B. Alan Wallace, Paul Ekman. Contemplative/emotion training reduces negative emotional behavior and promotes prosocial responses.. Emotion, 2011; DOI: 10.1037/a0026118

Reaction to Judgement by a leading IP barrister

This is a fantastic result for you – zero damages and zero contribution to their costs. They won on a very narrow point and lost on everything else. This is reflected by the damages and costs orders that the Judge made. You should be very pleased with this!

Such a shame the board remain in denial over their loss – not to mention having recklessly expended in excess of £35,000 of shareholders money in a spiteful and vexatious claim foolishly initiated by Dr Karin Stockerl and Bains Cohen/Pinder Reaux.

twelve long years

Exif_JPEG_PICTURE

Exif_JPEG_PICTUREDear Annie,

It is twelve years, yes twelve long years since we first contacted you about the nuisance of exhibition traffic and fun fairs in St. Margarets Place. We have had meetings and discussions galore with many promises of improvements. We have written noise diaries and yet the problems with the Metropole do not go away, they abate on occasions but flare up on others. Your last meeting with the hotel has not worked, I wish it were otherwise.

Over the last few weeks we have been troubled with indiscriminate loading and unloading of vehicles and the use of a noisy and polluting diesel generator outside the loading area of the exhibition halls. Making contact with the hotel in an effort to get something done, as it often is, is a stressful business. People are not available, you can’t get through, You are left talking with personnel unrelated with this aspect of work, and willing as they are they do not have the power to deal with the issues. As I have said on many occasions in the past the hotel are not focussed on finding a long term solution. They just don’t care enough.

I attach two lots of photos illustrating the recent problems. Those taken on the 8th March relate to (I think) a conference just before the Lib-Dem Spring conference. Vehicles movements appeared to be managed by a separate company whose sole purpose, I was told by their blue coated personnel, was to see vehicles into the loading bays but not to manage vehicles lining the street. In other words they were unconcerned about residents needs. I asked them if they knew of the code of conduct . They knew nothing and were completely disinterested in finding out. The only thing that aroused their interest was the arrival of a traffic enforcement officer (who I called) who proceeded to clear the street.

The second set of pictures were taken after the conference and relate to a funfair. Big, noisy and polluting. Parking their vehicles across the loading bays, at a stroke made the loading bays redundant forcing subsequent vehicles into parking on the road. (It looks as if the right hand shutters have been botch repaired and now do not even open) We found out later why at least one of the vehicles was parked so. It was the diesel generator placed directly opposite us supplying power to machinery inside the building. The fumes and noise in this narrow street surrounded by high buildings with nowhere for the pollution to escape affected us, most especially by aggravating my wife’s asthma. The “manager” clearly did not see it as a the problem but Damian Meadows, whom we spoke to the following day was more helpful and admitted that he would not like his wife and daughter to have to walk past it. The generator continued for 25 minutes after the time it was supposed to stop. It was parked roughly 12.5 meters from our door. The fourth picture shows scooters being loaded into a van. This vehicle arrived at 7:15 in the morning and started, with the help of hotel personnel, to unload the scooters into the building via the fire exit. We all know that unloading should not start until 8:00 am a clear breach of the planning regulations.

There are several points to be made, none of which are new, but do need repeating.

1. The code of conduct is unknown to people using the exhibition halls in spite of the hotel telling me it is written into all contracts with exhibition companies.
2. The right hand shutter was down resulting in the loading area being reduced by half.
3. Traffic management companies employed by exhibition organisers are generally ineffective. They are not instructed to consider the needs of residents or take the trouble to consider what their role might be given this is a residential area. There is no wider view.
4. Visits twice a day by traffic enforcement officers is not enough to deal with the problems. Vehicle movements during exhibitions are too fluid for twice daily visits to be effective.
5. I have called for it before and do so again. Vehicles in breach should be clamped. Penalty notices are ineffective. They remain on the vehicle for the rest of the day and allow drivers to continue their business and choose the time when they depart. It can be seen as an all day parking charge and one they are willing to pay. Clamping will change the dynamic giving the council the power to choose when the vehicle can leave.
6. There are a number of breaches here of the planning regulations concerning the use of the exhibition halls. The time has surely come for the hotel to be impelled to abide by the regulations, which should they fail to do so would attract a financial penalty.

Summary of case “won” by SHBL

Summary
59. I reject the claimant’s case that the use of Sussex Heights or Sussex Heights Residents Association or the blog page with the word “official” on it amounts to passing off. I find for the claimant that the manner in which the defendant’s website has presented the documents of or relating to the claimant, coupled with the site overall, creates a likelihood of confusion between the claimant and the defendant which is likely to damage the claimant’s goodwill as the manager of the property.
60. The claimant has no right to complain about the domain name used by the defendant nor about the majority of the content on the defendant’s site, and I should add that the defendant has no right to complain about the URL used by the claimant either.
61. I will dismiss this action in large part but allow it in part. That is my judgment and I will hear the parties in relation to consequential orders.

HMCS Judgement Tom Coady 17 Dec 2012.

Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation – a SLAPP around the ear of democracy.

SLAPPs are attempts to bully people into political submission through inordinate demands. Their purpose is to terrify and enmesh. Even if they stand no chance of success, they ensure that campaigners who might otherwise have been trying to protect the environment or to defend workers’ rights are instead snarled up in the courts. Often, whatever the merits of the case, people will agree to leave the company alone if it drops the suit.

Those who might have joined the campaign are frightened off. Those who might have become active in other campaigns avoid politics altogether for fear of the consequences. Their absence impoverishes democracy.

via Will EDF become the Barbra Streisand of climate protest? | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Ofcom testing DAB+ in the Brighton area : Radio Today with RCS

DAB+ test transmissions going under the name of “Brighton Experimental” along with seagull noises and chilled out music are now on-air.

The service, operated by the Office of Communications appears to be two DAB+ channels from Sussex Heights with a loop of announcements on each one titled BEX6 and BEX7.

The streams are at 88.0kBit/s and are thought to be operated by a local Ofcom engineer and are given a subtitle of DABv2 and DABv2KMx. It is thought they will be on-air till February 4th 2013.

The on-air announcement says: “This is Brighton Experimental; a transmission licensed by the Office of Communications for the testing of new developments in digital radio technology. For any enquiries about this transmission, please call 0207 783 4021″

Ofcom has not announced any plans for DAB+, which is an upgraded version of the currently supported DAB transmission platform.

via Ofcom testing DAB+ in the Brighton area : Radio Today with RCS.

Correction to misleading notice

On 20 December 2012 Sussex Heights (Brighton) Limited sought to mislead shareholders by writing

At the trial at the Patents Court in London, on Monday 17th December 2012, His Honour Judge Birss QC found in favour of Sussex Heights (Brighton) Limited and duly granted an injunction against Tom Coady to prevent him (his servants or agents) from passing off in the future.

This is a complete misrepresentation of the outcome of the Trial. In truth, neither side “won”, but SHBL failed to have granted all of their claimed reliefs outlined below, except refusal to grant leave to appeal which in the event they ended up demanding instead for themselves to no avail! In the words of HRH Birss “Which is the successful party in this case? Neither is successful. The defendant got an extemely narrow injunction.”

The only relief granted was changed beyond recognition to force acknowledgement of the provenance of any documents that originate from them to be marked as such.

In costs they only asked for £150 damages (having threatened “up to £50,000″), but this was refused by the Judge who added “I will not make a desemination order as it would cause more confusion.”

So the question remains, why did SHBL bring this case in the first place? Why did one director believe that hiring Bains Cohen, who renamed themselves during the course of the proceedings, somehow validated their claim? Most importantly, why did they refuse to settle as instructed by the Judge on three occasions? Some people might suggest the action was brought out of spite and because none of the individual Directors offered to underwrite the action or indeed persuade any other shareholders to contribute anything other than a Disney themed dollar bill? Even the Judge described their motive as malicious after the verdict.

In any case, just to set the record straight, the following reliefs requested by SHBL were all denied:

[DRAFT] ORDER

IT IS ADJUDGED THAT:

1. The Claimant succeeds in its claim for passing off against the Defendant.

AND IT IS ORDERED THAT:

2. The Defendant (whether by himself, his servants or agents or otherwise howsoever) be restrained from passing off any website as a website owned, operated and/or provided by the Claimant and/or associated with the Claimant. [by the provision on such website of any documents relating to the Claimant without a statement alongside those documents that makes clear that those documents are documents of the Claimant.]

(effectively narrowed to relate only to provenance of SHBL documents)

3. The Defendant shall on or before [date] deliver up to the Claimant’s solicitors, or at his option destroy or obliterate on oath, all articles or materials the use of which would contravene the foregoing injunction and that are within the Defenda,ssession, power, custody or control.
4. If destruction or obliteration is elected by the Defendant, then on or before [date] the Defendant must make and serve upon the Claimant’s solicitors an obliteration in respect of all such items longer any item in the possession power the Defendant whose use would contravene the foregoing injunction.
5. The Defendant shall on or before [date] take any and all steps as lie within its power to transfer the domain names sussexheights.org and sussexheightsresidentsassociation.org.uk into the possession and control of the Claimant with immediate effect.
6. Within [ ... ] days of the date of this Order the Defendant shall, at its own expense, provide on the homepage of its webs it Heights (Brighton) Limited Successful Passing Off Judgement indicating that the Defendant has been found to be passing himself off as the his website, together with hyperlinks to the said link, notice and hyperlinks are to remain until ave been transferred to the Claimant as per paragraph 5 above.
7. The Claimant is entitled at its option to either:
a. An inquiry as to the damages, if any, suffered by the Claimant y reason of the Defendant’s acts of passing off; or
b. An account of the profits, if any, made b his acts of passing off, any interest thereupon found due to the Claimant (including pur~to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984J
8. The Defendant must serve upon the Claimant’s solicitors a Schedule setting out any transactions (and profits thereupon) made by the Defendant facilitated by its acts of passing off, and the values and profit associated with t to make the election provided for in paragraph 7 above. The Claimants shall make such election by [date].
9. The Defendant shall pay all sums certified to be due to the Claimant as a result of such inquiry or account, toget with interest at a rate and for a period as shall be directed at the taki of said inquiry or account.
10. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant’s costs of the action.

PERMISSION TO APPEAL

11. Permission to appeal is refused.

 

 

Hosereels and Hosereel Supply Tanks

Quoted from

Fire Risk Assessment Report by Roger Kemp (16 November 2012).

Hosereels

These were originally provided at a time when hosereels were generally accepted for use by the occupants due to their delivering a practically limitless supply of water. Because they were never tested (annually) by the fire service crews, it was not permissible for them to be used in the course of firefighting. Over the last twenty years, it has become generally accepted that the disadvantages of hosereels outweigh their advantages (see Commentary to Checklist14 below), so fire authorities have recommended their removal in all workplaces. The difficulty of operating a hosereel by any residents is compounded by the fact that they also have no training, so, in the opinion of this assessor their removal is an all-round benefit.

Hosereel Supply Tanks

In the opinion of this assessor the tanks supplying the hosereels are no longer required and are therefore redundant. Unless their combined capacity is 45,000 litres and they can feasibly be utilised to supplement the pump to the rising main, it is recommended that they be emptied as soon as practicable and in the course of time be removed.

Quoted from SHBL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS for the AGM on 23rd November 2012

Early in the year the board had agreed that the fire hoses on the various floors should be removed. They were very old and perished. No resident was trained in their use nor were they usable. They contained long stagnant water with the risk of Legionnaires disease. It was, however, a surprise to the Board and the Managing Agents that, without prior arrangement and unannounced, the Company Initial appeared and proceeded to remove them. We have complained about the lack of liaison and notice in strong terms.

We have also commissioned, through the Managing Agents, a Fire Risk Assessment which, in respect to hose reels says ‘These were originally provided at a time when hose reels were generally accepted for use by the occupants…[but] fire authorities have recommended their removal in all workplaces. The difficulty in operating a hose reel by any resident is compounded by the fact that they also have no training, so, in the opinion of the assessor their removal is an all round benefit’ and ‘Fire safety apart, there is an ever present risk of Legionella due to standing water’

  • According to ucl.ac.uk, ‘the risk of catching legionella from fixed fire fighting equipment is negligible. The conditions normally found within fire fighting systems (sprinklers, drenchers and ring mains); are not thought able to support the growth of populations of legionella.’
  • Either the board carried out a full risk assesment and consulted its insurers, or the hose removal was a “surprise” to the Board and the Managing Agents, but they can’t have it both
  • The installation of hosereels in buildings over a certain cubic meterage where designed for the use of firefighters because a pumping appliance’s hosereels may not reach far enough into the building. They were never intended to be use by the occupants, therefore staff do not need to be trained.
  • even if it is accepted by all that they’re not needed, and no one objects, we’re entitled to see evidence of risk assessments, consultation and insurer approval as the removal may enhance or reduce the protection of the property which must have impacted our premium.

Fire Safety Regulatory Reform Order 2005 requires:

  • The adequacy of structural features (passive protection), for example, fire doors, fire partitions, fire screens and fire-stopping
  • The adequacy of active systems such as fire alarms, automatic fire detection, fire sprinklers and emergency lighting
  • Provision and maintenance of the means of fighting fire (hose reels, hand held extinguishers etc.)

The most effective way to tackle a fire is to kill the source during its initial stage, preferably a few seconds after it has started. During this kind of situation, presence of mind and reliable firefighting devices such as fire extinguishers and fire blankets can spell the difference between minimal and serious damage, and between life and death. However, there are some instances when fire is not controlled during its incipient stage. When this happens, frontline fire safety devices may not be sufficient in fighting off the fire. This is when the role of the ever-reliable fire hose comes in.

A fire hose is designed to deliver pressurised water at a rate of 0.33L per second. It comes with a control nozzle, attached to the end of the hose, which is used for controlling the flow and direction of the water. This firefighting device can be used even when the fire has gotten big and out of control. In fact, this is the main equipment used by professional firefighters for combating fires. It is a valuable tool in any workplace that can surely contribute to the degree of fire safety and protection. It is not enough to have extinguishers and smoke detectors. Every workplace should also have a high quality fire hose installed.

The fire hose serves as a backup system if fire becomes too big to handle. It is the device to use in cases where fire blankets, sprinklers, or extinguishers do not succeed in combating a fire and preventing it from growing big and beyond control.