24th June, 2022. ‘I am very conscious that accessing your records may lead you to want to add to your existing complaint and you have sent a few emails to me and Wanda with further new concerns. There is an option for us to pause and allow you to add any other issues to the complaint so it can be dealt with in one report. This will mean your concerns can then be addressed clearly rather than lots of different emails that can get lost and not responded to. Please let me know if you feel this would be helpful.’ - ‘From: Long, Vicky, Meadows CMHT Service Manager ******************************** Sent: 24 June 2022 14:36 To: Mark Stock Subject: Updates.’

Vicky Long and Wanda Reynolds continued to conspire with each other until the events of the 25th September, 2022 but it took me several long weeks to realise that I was still being covertly monitored and likely misrepresented by both of these managers.

Vicky Long was absolutely right about one thing though. The complaint document that I had submitted on the 20th May, 2022 was in need of radical revision. The partial disclosure of my medical records by Southern Health on the 15th June, 2022, later expanded upon through further partial disclosures by the Sussex Partnership, had broken the thin crust of a deep cesspit of lies, deception and misdirection. I was now privy to the very real covert plan organised to misrepresent me and safeguard clinicians who were likely guilty of clinical negligence. My grievances were multiplying like an infectious disease.

I returned to my original complaint document which had been compiled on the 11th May, 2022. The first paragraph of that document began, ‘I am writing to make a formal complaint against Cahms, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the Bridge Centre, Basingstoke.’ My complaint had been accepted as a ‘joint’ complaint against two mental healthcare providers, CAMHS, Bramblys Drive and CMHT, The Bridge Centre, both situated in Basingstoke. Wanda Reynolds was the self-designated lead investigator assigned to my complaint.

‘…Everyone who provides an NHS service in England must have their own complaints procedure… In the event of a complaint about more than one organisation – perhaps a complaint that includes issues about your GP, local hospital and ambulance service – the organisations must work together to make sure you get a co-ordinated response…’ - https://www.england.nhs.uk/contact-us/feedback-and-complaints/complaint/

I had a plethora of new questions.

The disclosures had implied evidence of multiple meetings held by clinicians and leadership behind closed doors. I wanted details. I needed to understand the rationale for the clinical decisions made against me. There had been suggestions of meetings involving Sally Mungall and her clinical cohorts at CAMHS Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke. Where were the minutes, the records of what had been discussed, the professional justification for the appalling way that I had been misrepresented. Who had said what? Who was accountable?

I repeatedly asked Wanda Reynolds for additional records to be disclosed to me. I was very specific about what I asked for.

From: Mark Stock ******************** Sent: 01 July 2022 15:09To: REYNOLDS, Wanda (SPFT) ************************** Subject: 'extensive meeting'

Hi Wanda,

I hope you are well.

Did you manage to locate the minutes, notes etc relating to the Camhs ‘extensive meeting’ with senior leadership that took place at sometime between 16th Dec 2021 and 30th Jan 2022 subject ref; my 12 page letter to Sally?

The sooner I can be allowed complete and unredacted access to ALL information relating to that meeting the better. I have been informed by Vicky Long that her contribution to the response to my recent complaint was sent to Stephanie Pearson yesterday. I will, without doubt, need to respond to the findings of the current investigation with a revised complaint reshaped by my reaction to my recent medical record disclosures. Much of my revised complaint is already drawn up in detail but there is a conspicuous void surrounding the Camhs ‘extensive meeting’. It would help in bringing my complaint to a timely and tidy resolution if those minutes, notes etc were made available to me now. Please accept this email as a further reminder that I am determined to uncover the truth and will exhaust all legal avenues to achieve this.

Thank you.

Kind regards

Mark’

Email received from Wanda Reynolds on the 1st July, 2022

‘Hi Mark,

I hope your session at Basingstoke Counselling Service went well this week.  I have now been sent the minutes of the the meeting the administrator who took the notes has sent them too me but I need to get Sally to verify them as accurate as they have not been uploaded to the system.  I have responded to your complaint, as has Vicky and our response has been sent back from our PALS team asking some questions where we have not been clear.  This should be resolved early next week and I will also get Sally to verify the minutes next week and then they can be sent to the IG team for whether there is anything that needs to be redacted.  Thi sis related to third party information and I don't have enough knowledge on this to comment.  I am sorry that I didn't have them with the original request.

I completely hear your desire to understand what has happened and I hope that we have answered this in our complaint response which you should receive next week.

Take Care and have a good weekend

Wanda

Wanda Reynolds

General Manager

Hampshire CAMHS’

The ‘complaint response’ alluded to by Wanda Reynolds was already redundant.

Evidence would suggest that Wanda Reynolds had already attempted to divert me away from the truth. She had handed over a partial collection of Sally Mungall’s ‘progress notes’ to me when I met her and Vicky Long on the 20th May, 2022. Wanda Reynolds had, falsely, informed Katie Rees, Head of Information Governance, FOI & Records Management at the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust that she had disclosed ‘everything’ to me.

Katie Rees would prove to be more honest than Wanda Reynolds.

I wrote the following email

From: Mark Stock ******************** Sent: 06 July 2022 14:59To: REES, Katie (SPFT) ********************** Subject: RE: MAY22-021-REP - Disclosure

Hi Kate,

I hope you are well.

I thought that all my records had been disclosed and hadn’t expected to be writing to you again but I’ve recently been informed by Wanda at Camhs that ‘extensive meeting’ minutes, notes etc are still outstanding. She has said that she needed to show the minutes, notes etc to an attendee to check for accuracy before passing to you. I’m aware that there are potential infringements of the Records Management Code of Practice 2021 and Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 ie these particular records were not entered into the system at the time they were created and that an attendee of that ‘extensive meeting’ is being asked to contribute to and influence the content of those records 7 months after the meeting had actually taken place.

I have written to Wanda asking specific questions regarding these records but she hasn’t replied yet. I have copied and pasted that written enquiry into the body of this email for your information. Perhaps you can comment to me with your reaction to my questions. Hopefully you will also be able to disclose these minutes to me sooner rather than later as they constitute evidence in my ongoing complaint against Camhs.

Copied and pasted portion of text sent initially sent 2nd July 2022 and resent on 6th July 2022 with slight revision to final line of text;

‘’ ‘WITH REFERENCE TO THE MINUTES TAKEN IN RELATION TO THE ‘EXTENSIVE MEETING’ OF LEADERSHIP STAFF TO DISCUSS MY 12 PAGE LETTER TO SALLY MUNGALL HELD AT SOME TIME BETWEEN 16TH Dec 2021 AND 30TH Jan 2022-07-02

1. Were actual notes, minutes or any other forms of official record-keeping taken at the actual time of the ‘extensive meeting’?

2. Why were said actual notes, minutes or any other forms of official record-keeping not entered into my medical records or ‘onto the system’ at the time and date of the meeting?

3. Would you be able to provide evidence, if asked, to demonstrate that Camhs Bramblys Drive Basingstoke have ‘operate(d) a satisfactory records management regime’ with specific reference to myself and my time as a patient there?

4. Are these actual minutes, currently with Sally for her to check for accuracy, a summary of the administrator’s recollection of the ‘extensive meeting’ ie is the administrator wholly or partially relying on memory or are the actual minutes the unaltered, unedited record taken at the actual time and date of the ‘extensive meeting’? ie is this record characterised as ‘authentic’ meaning that ‘It is what it purports ( claims ) to be. To have been created or sent by the person purported to have created or sent at the time purported.’ ( section 3.2 Designing a records keeping system of the Records Management Code of Practice 2021 ).

5. If the minutes have been recorded in compliance with the Records Management Code of Practice 2021 then what is the rationale for asking Sally to check for accuracy and why at this late stage? Surely the minutes would have been circulated at the time and not several months later when memory is subjectively impaired by time.

6. If Sally questions the veracity of the record will she then expect to arbitrarily alter the record? The Records Management Code of Practice 2021 clearly states that ‘original entry ( into the record ) should not be deleted.

What I’m driving at here Wanda is a need to clarify that the minutes to the ‘extensive meeting’ are an accurate record made at the time and date and are not being compiled ad hoc or fabricated on the fly. In accordance with the Records Management Code of Practice 2021, record characteristics of the ‘extensive meeting’ minutes should be ‘AUTHENTIC’ and  ‘RELIABLE’,  and the ‘INTEGRITY’ of those minutes should be evidenced as ‘Complete and unaltered, Protected against unauthorised alteration’ and ‘Alterations after creation can be identified as can the person making the changes’. The records should also be ‘USEABLE’ in compliance with the Records Management Code of Practice 2021.’’’

With kind regards,

Mark

Katie Rees replied

‘Hi Mark

Hope you are well.

Unfortunately I have no idea as I checked the disclosure with Wanda for accuracy and it was confirmed this was everthing. I have asked Wanda for a response but can see she is currently out of the office, Once she has responded I will be able to update you.

Many thanks for letting me know.

Katie Rees CISMP

Head of Information Governance, FOI & Records Management

Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust’.

Katie Rees would become my trusted confidante and would eventually go on to authorise disclosure of records that Wanda Reynolds would have preferred to have withheld.