PGS ASA / PGSUK provided responses with several knowing misrepresentations to the data subject from October 2014 – December 2014 regarding the integrity of the data which they sent to SDK by post mail [DHL] and e-mail. The PGS ASA / PGSUK SDK personnel file data containing unsigned and unverified documents that was delivered to the data subject, SDK, by PGS ASA / PGSUK contradicts e-mail records that were provided by PGS ASA / PGSUK with the SAR, as well as e-mail records that are processed personally by the data subject, SDK. SDK has concluded that PGS ASA / PGSUK knowingly provided misrepresentations of material facts when queried about the integrity of SDKs personal data. SDK has since deduced that he was the target of a confidence fraud involving his hired solicitor firm, Landau, Zeffertt and Weir Solicitors (Philip Landau / Holly Rushton).
The unverified and inaccurate SDK personal data being processed by PGS ASA / PGSUK does not correspond to data provided to Philip Landau / Holly Rushton through verifiable e-mail communications. PGS ASA / PGSUK contracted the UK affiliate of global law firm, Watson Farley and Williams (WFW) to form the final terms and conditions of the termination settlement contract. E-mail communications from WFW solicitor, Rhodri Thomas, to Philip Landau that were shared with SDK seem to correspond with the false narrative contained within the forged documents delivered to SDK in response to his SAR as SDK personal data. SDK requested from LZW and PGS ASA / PGSUK several times from 14 October 2013 – 5 December 2013 that personal data being processed by PGS ASA / PGSUK be provided to the data subject, SDK, during the termination settlement contract negotiations. This material data was intentionally withheld from the data subject SDK when the termination settlement contract was negotiated and formed. SDK was unaware at the time that his legal counsel was a double-agent and co-conspirator assisting in the confidence fraud with co-conspirators PGS ASA / PGSUK and WFW to harm a foreign worker.
Following the signing of the 5 December 2013 termination settlement agreement by SDK, SDK returned to the country of his citizenship, USA. In fact, the terms and conditions of the 5 December 2013 termination settlement agreement included provisions for the reimbursement of household moving costs from Weybridge, England to Houston, Texas, USA. The reimbursements related to the 5 December 2013 termination settlement contract terms and conditions were not paid until May – June 2014. Thus, the 5 December 2013 termination settlement agreement terms and conditions were not fulfilled until the reimbursement payments were made to SDK. (SDK never liked these terms and conditions including payments made after the signing of the 5 December 2013 termination agreement, but accepted them on advice and recommendation of his counsel, Philip Landau / Holly Rushton.) The SDK personal data processed to support the termination settlement contract had never been truthfully related by LZW to client, SDK. Most every contract provision requested by SDK to his solicitor, Philip Landau / Holly Rushton, was not accepted into the final termination settlement agreement.
PGS ASA / PGSUK, WFW, and LZW cooperated in the conspiracy, gas-lighting (misrepresentation/fraud) and withholding of information from SDK until he agreed, under duress, to terms and conditions that by in large benefited PGS ASA / PGSUK who had been accused through a workplace greivance submitted 20 September 2013 of workplace mobbing, harassment, discrimination, breaching the terms and conditions of the original employment contract and UK employment laws. PGS ASA / PGSUK obstructed my legal rights, under contract governed by the laws of England to submit a grievance. However, I insisted. The grievance which SDK delivered to PGS ASA / PGSUK 20 September 2013 met the standard of protected public disclosure (whistleblowing) described within the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA).
PGS ASA / PGSUK illegally retaliated against my whistleblowing through denying SDK his legal right to proceed through the grievance process described within the PGS UK Personnel Handbook. PGS ASA / PGSUK, WFW, and LZW cooperated in denying SDK his legal right under contract governed by the laws of England. PGS ASA / PGSUK, WFW, and LZW also did not process a report submitted by an occupational health nurse who diagnosed stressed health conditions and recommended follow-up check-up. The OHN report (by Maggie Bream) also contradicts the documented narrative being uttered by forged documents within SDKs PGS ASA / PGSUK professional personnel file. PGS ASA / PGSUK, WFW, and LZW processed defamatory forged documents and withheld a medical report recommending medical care to support an illegal termination settlement contract used to illegally terminate a foreign worker whistleblower. Throughout this conspiracy to defraud and defame (professionally blacklist) the target of health-harming workplace abuse, PGS ASA / PGSUK, WFW, and LZW also violated foreign worker employment reporting provisions (Tier 2 visa sponsorship of worker and dependent family members) and withheld or fabricated material immigrant worker data from UK Government Border Agency. Concurrent to all this, PGS (Petroleum Geo-Services) ASA Board of Directors were pursuing membership status into the UN Global Compact making commitments to work against the many human rights and employment law violations that PGS ASA Board of Directors had just perpetrated against a foreign worker whistleblower. Disgusting!
The legal agreements between PGS ASAs UK affiliate, PGS Exploration UK Limited and SDK are governed by the laws of England. The Confidentiality terms and conditions prohibiting parties from disparaging one another were included within the original employment contract signed in 2010 as well as the termination settlement agreement/contract signed 5 December 2013. The legal bar for disparagement is much lower than defamation. Yet, PGS ASA never chose to litigate on contractual breaches governed by the laws of England? In April 2018, PGS Exploration UK Limited Secretary, Carl Richards, hired Thai legal firm Duensing Kippen to file criminal defamation charges while the foreign worker (USA citizen), victim of crimes and whistleblower resided in Thailand. How is this legal and not a breach in the original terms and conditions of the contracts governed by the laws of England? Why is this not fiduciary negligence for the Secretary of a English company not to act on breaches in the legal terms and conditions of a signed legal instrument? There can be no defamation without disparagement. Further, under English law, defamation is not a crime. The whistleblower and crime victim regarded the threats from Carl Richards and Duensing Kippen lawyer Tippaya Moonmanee to be extortion / blackmail. Further, how can an agent of a company governed by the laws of England give legal authority to a (foreign) lawyer to bypass legal agreements that they are bound to in their resident country. PGS ASA does not list any subsidiaries in Thailand.
SDK had stated within several publications that he was a whistleblower and therefore his content was legal and protected under the terms and conditions of the Confidentiality clauses both in the original employment contract and the 5 December 2013 termination settlement agreement / contract. In fact, the intent of these public disclosures was to force PGS ASA to act on the terms and conditions of their contracts. The main topic of the public disclosures was that PGS ASA is uttering defamatory forged documents as SDK personal data. This fraudulent data was illegally used to support a termination settlement contract under false pretenses to the detriment of a whistleblower who had revealed several compliance and legal breaches through SDKs submission of a workplace grievance, 20 September 2013. The law providing legal protection for whistleblowers which is referenced within both the terms and conditions of these contracts is the UK Public Interests Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA). I do not believe that litigation initiated on behalf of an agent of / or an English company has the authority to take away that legal right. An English company actions cannot be above the laws of England. Therefore, I have always regarded the PGS ASA subsidized litigation in Thailand against a whistleblower as illegal. The legal and contractual obligation of PGS ASA UK is to investigate whistleblowing claims and not to retaliate against the whistleblower, SDK. Retalitation against whistleblowers is illegal.
SDK believes that his original whistleblowing claim was obstructed through a confidence fraud. PGS ASA, represented by the UK affiliate of firm Watson Farley & Williams and SDK legal counsel, Landau, Zeffert and Weir Solicitors (LZW) [now Landau Law] who acted as a double-agent, participated in a confidence fraud where uttered forged defamatory documents were created and / or processed to support an illegal termination contract. SDK has alleged and published online evidence that supports claims that PGS ASA bribed all of the lawyers involved with negotiating the illegal settlement contract which obstructed and deprived SDK his legal rights under English law and contract to file and process through the steps a workplace grievance. The workplace grievance submitted by SDK met the standard of whistleblowing defined by PIDA. These illegal actions facilitated the illegal termination of employment of a foreign worker whistleblower. PGS ASA processed the forged and defamatory content with the sinister and criminal intention to blacklist their victim of crimes from future employment in the geophysical exploration industry. The corrupt board of directors participated in this fraud of the marine seismic industry. Their illegal retaliation of a whistleblower was carried out to preserve a ficticious principled company reputation which cared for the health and safety concerns of its workers. Following this confidence fraud, PGS ASA publicly announced their membership in the UN Global Compact (23 December 2013) which admonishes every and all actions which PGS ASA had just participated in! PGS ASA even had the audacity to feature one of the main criminals in their confidence fraud, Simon Cather, Marine Contract Africa Regional President, as their anti-corruption role model within the PGS ASA 2013 Responsibility Report! This punctuates PGS ASAs disrespect for customers and shareholders through publishing known falsehoods intended to entice investment and confidence in PGS ASA. PGS ASA did not only defraud and defame a whistleblower, but defrauded the entire marine seismic industry. PGS ASA and Watson Farley & Williams’ NOT invoking the Confidentiality Clauses in the Contracts that they formed demonstrates either a reckless disregard for the PGS ASA reputation that they have a fiduciary responsility to protect or active participation in crimes against a whistleblower. Thus, any damages to PGS ASA reputation is in fact in either case the fault of the PGS ASA board of directors.
A person purporting to be PGS Exploration UK Limited company secretary, Carl Richards, first threatened legal action as a private person from an unverified personal e-mail account. Had my content been in breach of any legal agreements, Carl Richards on behalf of PGS Exploration UK Limited should have referenced the signed legal agreements governed by the laws of England and not litigation in Thailand. “Carl Richards” who sent this e-mail never verified his identity nor answered a plethorad of legal questions. “Carl Richards” was asking for the removal of posted articles with his name mentioned only. Whistleblowing articles had been posted since 3 July 2015. Under the UK Limitation Act 1980, the applicable limitation for defamation is one year from the date of accrual of the claim, which in libel claims accrued at the time of publication. This would mean no action could be made on my publications predating March 2017. Further, PGS ASA had never fulfilled their fiduciary obligation to investigate my whistleblowing claims. PGS ASA compliance was contacted multiple times from April – September 2016 (these communications have also been posted) and provided content and links to content to reference for comment. PGS ASA never even commented on any content. I do not believe that Carl Richards could legally launch a claim divorced from his legal position with PGS Exploration UK Limited. PGS ASA, as usual, never answered any of these questions.
In September 2018, PGS ASA, delivered “Legal Claims” to SDK in Thailand. PGS ASA had never commented or reached out to SDK about his publications prior to delivering “criminal defamation” charges through through legal firm Duensing Kippen. Duensing Kippen lawyer Tippaya Moonmanee had never stated she was representing PGS ASA prior to this time. In fact, Carl Richards had been explicit in the fact that he was prosecuting his case apart from PGS ASA as an individual. Two criminal complaints were delivered to the address where I was residing in Thailand just after I had departed. I was not there to receive these threatening “Legal Notices” which were written in the Thai language. The summons’ were also written and e-mailed to SDK in the Thai language to SDK (or his relatives) in Thailand. Neither Carl Richards not PGS ASA had ever specifically identified defamatory content. PGS ASA wanted all SDK publications to be removed and refer to all content published on private site nopgs.com erroneously as “defamatory.” I considered this global misrepresentation of my legal and protected public disclosure (under English law) to be fraudulent.
Lawyer Tippaya Monmanee with Thailand legal firm Duensing Kippen contacted me by e-mail in May 2018 threatening legal action on behalf of Carl Richards. At this point, PGS ASA had never answered several important questions. However, as I was residing in Thailand at the time, I had to take these e-mails seriously. I did not then, and do not now, regard the litigation initiated in Thailand as legal. Defamation implies a false statement. I had taken care not to write known falsehoods and also supplemented my allegations with evidence (email and other time-tagged records). From April – September 2016, SDK sent several emails with content or links to my legally protected public disclosure to PGS ASA Compliance Hotline. PGS ASA never acknowledged nor investigated my evidence supplemented accusations of criminal and non-compliant acts by parties who processed the 20 September 2013 grievance / whistleblowing document. PGS ASA and Carl Richards’ objective was to force the removal / de-publication of evidence of PGA ASA board of directors and executive non-compliant and criminal acts. The new litigation is sponsored only by PGS ASA. Carl Richards, who initiated the sham litigation, has dropped out of site and is not included in the more recent “Legal Notices” which falsely claim my legal and protected public disclosure under English law is “criminal defamation” in Thailand.
PGS ASA is actively continuing their misinformation campaign through labeling SDK published content as “defamatory” and not sincere legally protected public disclosure. PGS ASA continue to their defamation and defrauding of a foreign worker whistleblower. PGS ASA is able to promote personnel (bribe) to protect the false narrative and the PGS ASA board of directors from explanation and accountability. PGS ASA board of directors and executives are knowingly misrepresenting SDK personal data that they process as legal and accurate even though the forged documents do not bare the signature of the data subject and contradict facts contained within e-mail documents. SDK personal data being processed by PGS ASA does not meet the most basic legal standard or best practices. Norway’s government has been anemic in their actions to investigate whistleblower claims and protect the economic interests of PGS ASA investors. It seems that the Norwegian government sponsors, protects and promotes corrupt corporate executives in order to preserve Norway’s false reputation as a much lower corruption country to entice business.
PGS ASA (PGS), a Norwegian based multi-national company with affiliate offices located around the world, believes that I have damaged the company brand and its agent’s reputations to a criminal level – in Thailand? By PGS ASAs own acknowledgement, the brand value has been diminished thousands of dollars (USD) through their extortive pursuit of legal justice in Thailand. PGS ASA hired Thailand legal firm Duensing – Kippen to deliver these civil and criminal complaints on behalf of their UK affiliate PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (PGSUK) to their former worker contracted under the laws of England. By what legal authority can lawyers in Thailand deliver such complaints? PGS ASA has no affiliate offices in Thailand and besides no contracts were ever signed between us even if they did. UK Legal firm, Watson, Farley and Williams advised on these contracts governed by the laws of England? Why isn’t their competence being challenged?
PGS ASA has already acknowledged that the PGS ASA brand has been damaged to a criminal level. Their Thai claims state financial damages, as well. But whose fault are these damages really? Real legal due process has been thwarted. Citizens of Norway and the world must ask what levels of corruption must exist within the Norwegian corporate governance processes that would allow a Norwegian company board of directors and executives the ability to solve problems outside the corporate legal framework of Norway? Similarly, for the UK affiliate, outside the legal framework of England? I have published real evidence that the PGS ASA board of directors and executive management were very directly involved in a criminal conspiracy and assault of me and my family – emphasis my children! I have begged for intervention by government law enforcement to conduct a thorough investigation. There has been no answer to reasonable requests from from a dysfunctional UK ActionFraud. I was a foreign worker employed on a Tier 2 visa when I was an initial victim of crimes perpetrated by the Norwegian organized crime syndicate UK affiliate. I have had to be bound by the legal framework under the laws of England for several years. PGS ASA has been able to ignore legal contractual confidentiality clauses explicitly in place to protect against disparaging public disclosure.
It is the board of directors job is to guide the business legally and successfully. These are concurrent and not mutually exclusive requirements. In Norway, legally means following the laws of Norway and not the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand. For directors of an English company, this similarly means that the laws of England must be followed. It is my view that such a reliance on the Thai legal system by Norwegian company PGS ASA demonstrates serious corruption. At the very least, such directing and management demonstrates serious dysfunction of internal governance processes. It is not legal to pay someone to commit a crime on your behalf. Diana Lovejoy, a USA citizen, was sentenced to 26 years to life in prison for hiring a man to kill her husband. The would be assassin was sentenced to 50 years to life. Her husband was not killed, but the hiring of someone with the intent to kill was a serious crime in of itself. By what legal authority does the PGS ASA board of directors have to hire a Thai legal firm to exercise defamation claims outside the legal contractual confidentiality clauses governed by the laws of England? I have asked several times, how can one be guilty of criminal defamation under Thai law and not in contractual breach under English law when the “plaintiff” is an English company governed by the laws of England? How is no response by PGS ASA general counsel Lars Mysen not fraud?
PGS ASA hired Thailand law firm Duensing – Kippen to break UK laws provided through contract. Duensing – Kippen harassed, blackmailed and extorted me and my Thai family members. In fact, much of this harassment was done to my Thai family members whilst I was in the USA. PGS ASA did not possess the legal authority to deny me my rights under English law, and therefore neither does Duensing – Nippen as an agent of a company governed by the laws of England. I believe that PGS ASA bribed Duensing – Kippen to break English and Thai laws on their behalf, which is illegal! My published disclosures claim that PGS ASA legal advisers under English law, Watson, Farley and Williams were previously bribed to utter forged documents to support a false pretense for a fraudulent settlement contract agreement. Both PGS ASA and Watson, Farley and Williams also withheld advised medical treatment and destroyed evidence to affect the fraudulent settlement contract. PGS ASA board of directors oversaw and approved of all of these violent illegal premeditated acts intended to harm a whistleblower and his family. NO LAWYERS REPRESENTING PGS ASA CAN AUTHENTICATE THE PROCESSES AND DOCUMENTS USED TO TERMINATE MY EMPLOYMENT. Which means PGS ASA and their legal advisers are all involved in a health harming criminal conspiracy to defraud and defame a whistleblower. Norway promotes and protects these accused criminals rather than investigate them!
Executives who do not recognize harassment and workplace bullying as a serious health and safety issues are not qualified to lead offshore operations. Executives who engage in fraud, bribery, and defamation to pervert the course of justice and hide their crimes should be in jail!
I am a USA citizen married to a Thai woman. From September 2010 – December 2013, I worked in England. PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY (PGSUK) sponsored me on a employment Tier 2 visa (Special Occupation List). My wife and I, along with our Thai – USA citizen children were all sponsored by PGSUK to live in England. D We were all owed a Duty of Care by PGSUK when we lived there from 26 September 2010 – 31 December 2020. PGS violated the terms and conditions of my employment contract multiple times. When I complained to key Norwegian executives about the misconduct, breach of contract, health and safety violations, and violations in UK law, parent company, PGS ASA retaliated. I was illegally terminated through fraudulent contract supported by uttered forged documents intended to illegally blacklist me in the industry. The fraud reached the very top of the organization and its board of directors. Watson, Farley and Williams negotiated the final termination settlement contract terms and conditions, as well as advised PGS on my Tier 2 visa. All involved lawyers have remained silent.
Duensing – Kippen decided to aid in the assault and robbery of me and my law – abiding Thai family. Duensing – Kippen’s threats terrorized my mother – in – law to the extent that she went to the hospital. She was very very traumatized and made ill by the illegal actions taken by Duensing – Kippen.
The charges drafted by Duensing – Kippen are fraudulent and supported by no evidence whatsoever. All lawyer refuse to acknowledge my publications as legal and protected public disclosure exposing criminal activity at the highest level of three (3) organizations: PGS ASA, Watson, Farley & Williams, and Landau Law (formally LZW Solicitors). The three (3) companies, two of which are law firms, participated in forming the final termination settlement contract which I claim to be fraudulent. All agents mentioned within my publications are all located in England. The contract is written in the English language. However, PGSUK is paying Duensing – Kippen to translate publications from English into Thai? .
Duensing – Kippen has decided to become an active part of the criminal conspiracy and cover-up through further damaging and traumatizing the victims crimes perpetrated by their client, PGS Exploration UK Limited. THESE ARE MY CLAIMS, BACKED BY DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE. I PLEA FOR A FAIR AND OBJECTIVE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION – what PGS ASA policy promises. UK Police are disfunctional and have refused multiple reports/requests to investigate.
Duensing – Kippen has no verifiable / legal evidence of defamation by SDK. The 2019 claims have never been delivered to the defendant. PGS ASA through Thailand law firm Duensing – Kippen deliver their claims in the Thai language to the home of SDK Thai relatives and not his legal address. PGS ASA and Duensing – Kippen demand that I travel from USA to Thailand to address these legal claims when my publications have already provided evidence that PGS ASA bribes lawyers to pervert the course of justice. PGS ASA has been accused since 2016 of criminal conspiracy and bribing Watson, Farley & Williams (UK) and Landau Law (UK) to utter forged documents and engage in fraud to damage a USA citizen whistleblower. Duensing – Kippen has been aware of my claims of being a whistleblower since 2018 when Carl Richards, former PGS Exploration UK Limited company secretary, initiated threats of legal action in Thailand. I posted then that I believed his threats to be blackmail/extortion. I continue to believe this today. Duensing – Kippen and PGS ASA have always ignored my claims that my publications were legal and protected. PGS has never followed the laws of England nor the UK company policy. PGS has never investigated my claims.
Their client is uttering forged documents that were used to support the illegal termination of a Tier 2 sponsored visa holder. PGS ASA and Watson, Farley & Williams UK affiliates have defrauded UK, Norway, USA, and Thailand government agencies. PGS ASA & Watson, Farley & Williams have misrepresented defamatory forged documents as legal documents. PGS ASA and Watson, Farley & Williams have also misrepresented protected public disclosure (whistleblowing) as defamatory in the Thai legal system through law firm Duensing – Kippen. I can prove it in ENGLISH. Translation into Thai language is wholly unnecessary misappropriation of resources by PGS ASA to deflect from their crimes commited under the laws of England. If what I have written in the English language is defamatory, why is it necessary for a UK company whose contracts are written in the English language governed by the laws of England to translate into the Thai language? How did Duensing – Kippen determine the published content was defamatory (untrue and harmful)?
USA FIRST AMMENDMENT RIGHTS TRUMP A FRAUDULENT COMPROMISE AGREEMENT PROFFERED BY PGS ASA, A NORWEGIAN COMPANY, TO NEGATE TWO PREVIOUS AGREEMENTS SIGNED BY THE WHISTLEBLOWER AND PGS ASA UK AFFILIATE, PGS EXPLORATION (UK) LIMITED. BOTH SIGNED AGREEMENTS CONTAIN NON-DISPARAGEMENT CLAUSES GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF ENGLAND. BOTH AGREEMENTS ALSO PROTECT WHISTLEBLOWERS THROUGH THEIR REFERENCE OF THE UK PUBLIC INTEREST DISCLOSURE ACT 1998 (PIDA). GLOBAL LAW FIRM, WATSON, FARLEY, & WILLIAMS UK AFFILIATE ADVISED ON BOTH OF THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS AS WELL AS ADVISING ON THE USA CITIZEN WHISTLEBLOWER EMPLOYMENT (TIER 2) VISA. WATSON, FARLEY, & WILLIAMS ALSO HAVE OFFICES IN THAILAND. WHY ISN’T PGS ASA USING WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS TO ADVISE ON THEIR CRIMINAL THAI DEFAMATION CASES?
SINCE 2016, SDK HAS PUBLISHED DOCUMENTATION TO SUPPORT ALLEGATIONS THAT WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS AND PGS ASA WERE INVOLVED IN A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO UTTER FORGED DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT AN ILLEGAL TERMINATION OF A FOREIGN WORKER WHISTLEBLOWER. PUBLISHED DOCUMENT EVIDENCE ALSO SUPPORT ALLEGATIONS THAT SDK COUNSEL MISREPRESENTED THEIR CLIENT – ME – AND ALSO WERE BRIBED TO UTTER FORGED DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT A DEFAMATORY FALSE PRETENSE FOR THE TERMINATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. IT IS MY BELIEF THAT WATSON, FARLEY, & WILLIAMS HAS BEEN DRIVING THE ILLEGAL PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL DEFAMATION CHARGES AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWER SDK TO ILLEGALLY FORCE THE DEPUBLICATION OF EVIDENCE (DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE) SHOWING WATSON, FARLEY AND WILLIAMS, PGS ASA, LANDAU LAW (FORMERLY LZW SOLICITORS, LONDON). PGS ASA AND WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS HAVE ENLISTED THAI LEGAL FIRM DUENSING – KIPPEN TO PROSECUTE FRAUDULENT CLAIMS AND TO BLACKMAIL AND EXTORT THE WHISTLEBLOWER AND HIS THAI FAMILY INTO SILENCE.
DUENSING – KIPPEN CASE IS BASED ON FRAUD AND FORGERIES. THE TRANSLATION OF PUBLICATIONS FROM ENGLISH TO THAI DEMONSTRATES THE CORRUPTION AND IDIOCY OF PGS ASA AND WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS BOARD OF DIRECTORS’. PGS ASA; WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS; AND LANDAU LAW ARE COMPANIES GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF ENGLAND.
THAI LEGAL FIRM DUENSING – KIPPEN IS REPRESENTING COMPANIES GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF ENGLAND AND DOES NOT POSSESS THE LEGAL AGENCY TO BREACH ENGLISH LAW AND CONTRACTS ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS.
PGS ASA, WATSON, FARLEY & WILLIAMS, AND LANDAU LAW HAVE NEVER EXERCISED CONTRACTUAL PROTECTIONS FOR DISPARAGEMENT CONTAINED IN CONTRACTS GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF ENGLAND BECAUSE ANY LITIGATION CITING THE LAWS OF ENGLAND WOULD REVEAL THEIR PARTICIPATION IN A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD AND DEFAME A USA CITIZEN HEALTH AND SAFETY WHISTLEBLOWER.
There is very little for any whistle blower to gain from deception and distortions. By action and words, several concerns have been presented with supporting evidence.Boycott Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Capital Markets (25-Jul-2016)
These prose chronicle multiple infractions of corporate governance, as well as provide evidence of serious wrong-doing that should sound alarms whether true or false. Either way, the publications should prompt action and engagement. The articles have been viewed by thousands within and outside the marine geophysical sector. They show-up in first page results to Google™ searches associated with PGS CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen.Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Veneer of Governance (8-May-2016)
A fair and thorough investigation addressing a whistleblowing claim is my legal right under English law and contract. Such a request is not defamation. PGS ASA (PGS) has been defrauding and defaming me since before June 2013. There has been a continuum of perverting the course of justice with the malicious intent to harm me and my family physically and financially. PGS’ behaviors have been cruelly abusive and illegal. Thus, the collective silence of the abusers. And PGS and several of its corrupt agents know it. This is why PGS has had to bribe lawyers and other internal and external personnel to manipulate the fair legal processes owed me under law and contract. Through bribing lawyers, avenues of legal redress are obstructed. Victims of PGS ASA et al. crime and abuse cannot find justice – easily. Just as shameful has been the (alleged) illegal acts conducted on PGS’ behalf by co-conspirator, law firm Watson, Farley and Williams (WFW). The most relevant document for all the lawyers mentioned within my blog post articles is to explain the 25 October 2013 Memo signed by (then) PGS EVP Marine Contract, Per Arild Reksnes and PGS SVP Global HR Terje Bjølseth.I believe that PGS and WFW owe me hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of (USA) dollars for their breaches in contract along with fraud, perverting the course of justice, and other illegal acts. Likely several PGS and WFW executives should go to prison too. The police need to take white-collar crime more seriously. Dysfunction and apathy destroys victims lives. The stakes are high. My initial whistleblowing claim was made in June 2013. Most every personnel and personal action taken by PGS to respond to my whistleblowing has been wrapped in illegal conspiracy. PGS and WFW have knowingly defrauded UK and Norway government agencies. This is why principals PGS and WFW refuse to detail the documentation supporting their decision making process. However, PGS ASA Capital Markets investors must demand a thorough investigation and audit as part of their fiduciary duties they own their stakeholders.
The vantage point of time-passed and actions taken has allowed me to construct the breadth of the deceitful cruel and illegal actions taken against me and my family. I have not been a quiet victim of PGS and WFW crimes. Since I first became aware of PGS’ nefarious and illegal behaviors, I have shared it publicly through blog post articles. My first blog post article which named names was published on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform (LI) 3 July 2015. PGS and WFW continued to defame me through their choosing not to invoke the non-disparagement (Confidentiality) terms and conditions within the employment contract and subsequent termination settlement contract which rests at the center of my blog posts. Instead guilty parties and/or their enablers anonymously make their false claims of defamation to LI administrators. PGS and WFW did not want to address the published content and claims within my blog post articles in a courtroom. PGS and WFW did not want to clarify or correct the content and claims. PGS and WFW wanted my voice silenced and the content and claims de-published because they were fact-based whistleblowing exposing corruption. In August 2016, I was restricted from LI. The social media network for professionals was unintentionally (we hope) aiding and abetting corruption through restricting my account that published protected published disclosure and credible allegations of criminal activity. PGS and WFW never had to address my publications as whistleblowing which is protected within the Confidentiality clauses of both contracts. WFW formed these contracts on behalf of PGS’ UK affiliate, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (PGSUK). Following my restriction from publishing on LI, I continued publishing content on my own dedicated website, nopgs.com (NO Psychopaths in Geo-Services). I also started using Twitter™ to publish my whistleblowing claims and to link/direct users to more detailed articles with evidence of PGS/WFW wrong-doing published on nopgs.com.
Throughout 2016, I tried multiple times to contact the PGS Compliance Hotline to voice my concerns, but never received a response. I also contacted WFW risk and compliance and received similar stonewalling. PGS further defamed me to the entire LI community through stating that they carried out a thorough investigation when they never did. I am certain of this because I know the facts. I am the subject of my personal data. I know exactly what happened. By this time, I had determined that both PGS and WFW, including compliance, were corrupt and vested in a cover-up. It also began to be clear that my legal counsel, Philip Landau with employment law firm Landau, Zeffertt and Weir Solicitors (LZW), had also been compromised. In other words, in actuality, I had had no real legal representation for my grievance – which met the criteria for whistleblowing – with PGS. WFW represented their client and my employer, the PGSUK in an illegally rigged settlement negotiation process that bypassed my legally guaranteed rights under English employment laws. With WFW guidance, PGS bypassed legally guaranteed grievance process steps as well as precautions for stressed employees, as I had stated that I was. The most significant aspect of being the mark of a conspiracy to defame and defraud in retaliation for my June 2013 whistleblowing was the fact that I was a USA citizen employed through PGSUK sponsorship of my Tier 2 visa. With all of my avenues of legal recourse compromised, the cabal was able to gaslight and break English laws with relative ease. This was all premeditated perverting the course of justice and fraud with the knowledge that such action harmed the health and safety of their target of abuse. The objective of my online publications have been to provoke PGSUK into exercising the terms and conditions of my original employment contract and especially the termination settlement agreement contract which was the outcome of the rigged negotiations between PGS, WFW, and LZW which were predicated on forged defamatory documentation.
Also, I had always wanted to go through the legal grievance process. PGSUK offered the settlement to avoid the grievance process. The underlying performance issues were never substantiated by any process or documentation and were in fact the basis for my grievance in the first place.My Philip Landau and Watson, Farley & Williams (WFW) London Solicitors Testimonial ( 8 November 2016 updated 9 April 2017 )
The mob exists in a make-believe world and then makes their decisions based on the fabricated self-delusion that they do not. PGS executives say that they have core values, but they do not apply them to their decisions. PGS executives say that their health and safety statistics are above industry standard, but they suppress and remove health and safety concerns from consideration and publication.Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Mob Gaslighting (30-Jun-2016)
My publications have provided e-mail and other evidence supporting my allegations. PGS, WFW and LZW have publically misrepresented my whistleblowing, which was always legal and protected public disclosure within the definition of the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA), to be defamation. PGS, WFW and LZW are all aware of this and that is why no legal action has ever been taken under the laws of England that governed my employment contracts. In September 2018, the directors of the PGS UK affiliate, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (PGSUK), 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY (PGSUK); Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS CEO; Gottfred Langseth, PGS CFO; Christin Steen-Nilsen, PGS Chief Accountant, along with former secretary and PHS UK Head of Legal, Carl Richards, delivered criminal defamation claims to the house where I lived in Thailand. I was not there. I had just left Thailand for the United States (US) and was not able to receive the claims in person until I returned (earlier than planned) in October 2018. That’s right, a multinational marine geophysical service company based in Norway with affiliate offices located around the world believes that I have damaged the company and its agent’s reputations to a criminal level – in Thailand? Over three years since my initial publications on LI had passed, PGSUK and Carl Richards delivered summons and criminal charges of defamation while I traveled abroad. PGS does not list any offices in Thailand. On the other hand their legal representation in my case, global legal firm WFW, does have an office in Bangkok, Thailand. However, WFW has never threatened any legal action against me in spite of the fact that WFW has been mentioned in several of my articles. A different legal firm, Duensing Kippen – Attorneys & Arbitrators is representing PGS interests in Thailand.
Since July 2015 my published articles have been intended to alert PGS stakeholders of these risks. PGS has a legal department that employs lawyers whose responsibility is to review PGS business contracts and ensure that they do not expose the company to excessive risks. It is my belief that PGS’ inability to resolve contractual issues within the constraints of jurisdictional clauses exposes corrupt and incompetent management and is therefore a significant capital markets risk. Both the original contract of employment and the termination settlement contract are governed by the laws of England. Further, WFW was involved in forming the terms and conditions of the original contract of employment, assisting in the Tier 2 visa application and approval process, as well as the eventual settlement agreement which I claim is a fraudulent instrument predicated on forged and defamatory documents. PGS and WFW have refused multiple requests to confirm that the same documentation used to obtain the Tier 2 visa was also used to form the terms and conditions of the termination settlement contract agreement? Both of the legal contract agreements between PGSUK and myself were advised by WFW. Only the original employment contract and the termination settlement contract agreement bare my countersignature. All of the other personnel file documentation are signed by HR personnel and not my immediate supervisor.
This begs the question as to how did WFW ensure the accuracy and legitimacy of the signed termination settlement contract? And also, how can their be criminal defamation claims in Thailand and no breach in the non-disparagement terms and conditions in either one of the contracts governed by the laws of England? WFW is a global law firm with office in both England and Thailand. WFW advised on both the original employment contract and subsequent termination contracts which both contained Confidentiality clauses citing PIDA protections. So, how has WFW advised PGSUK in their legal actions in Thailand with firm Duensing-Kippon (DK)? The compromise agreements that I was forced to sign under threat of prosecution for criminal defamation in Thailand bypass the WFW advised legal agreements formed under the laws of England. WFW certainly should be advising PGSUK in their Thailand legal actions. WFW has never been included directly in the “legal notices” sent to me in Thailand by DK. Why not? DK is essentially being used to disassemble WFW advised agreements and take the dispute out of the legal jurisdiction of England and into Thailand. This benefits all conspirators, most notably PGS and WFW. PGSUK, an English company, is investing significant resources to stay out of the English legal system. I cannot see how this is legal under the Companies Act 2006 or English contract law. PGS, WFW, and DK remain silent, as does LZW (now Landau Law) who was supposed to represent my interests from October – December 2013.
The only formal employment action between me and PGSUK was the grievance. There were only threats of a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) being investigated, which I qualified as harassment and bullying.What #PhilipLandau, #London #EmploymentLaw Solicitor taught me about Settlement Contracts (30 April 2017) p128-129
Most of all, PGS executives have abused their positions and violated their agency responsibilities of trust and confidence and duty of care to maintain a healthy and safe workplace. Forgery and the uttering of forged instruments is criminal behavior.The Crimes of Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen (4-Sep-2016)
Where does DK get its legal agency to bypass agreements formed under the laws of England? DK is an agent of PGSUK, an English company governed by the laws of England. DK cannot assume authority to break the laws of England or legal agreements that PGSUK does not legally possess as a principal. DK can only legally exercise the legal authority possessed by PGSUK. This is why I regard the legal actions being taken against me and my family in Thailand to be fraudulent. Further, there remain several pertinent unanswered questions by WFW, PGS, and LZW. How can a “poor performing employee” be legally sponsored and employed on a Tier 2 visa? WFW advised PGSUK on my Tier 2 sponsorship and reviewed all documentation submitted to the UK Border Agency in both 2010 and again in July 2013 for the visa renewal. The other question is how was the personnel file documentation establishing “performance issues” articulated within the PGSUK 24 July 2013 letter (signed by David Nicholson) vetted for process compliance, accuracy and legality? The opening negotiations by PGSUK by their representative WFW counsel, stated:
WFW has no authority nor qualified privilege to assess my performance as a Tier 2 visa sponsored employee of PGSUK. Without credible and compliant process documentation, WFW is defaming and defrauding me on behalf of PGSUK. And my counsel, LZW, is allowing this to happen? Similarly, the 24 July 2013 letter which was the predicate for my subsequent filing of a workplace grievance 20 September 2013 is defamatory as well. Without credible and compliant process documentation, PGSUK (i.e., directors and secretary) is defaming me because malicious prose also have no qualified privilege. Further, PGSUK have no direct knowledge of my work performance. I worked for no director nor secretary directly. My immediate supervisor, Edward von Abendorff, PGS Marine Contract, VP Contract Sales – Africa, has not signed any of the pertinent documentation, nor has the subject of any performance reviews, me! Even von Abendorff would not possess qualified privilege if their were malicious intent, such as bullying and mobbing an employee that they supervise to escape accountability for misconduct. PGS, aided by WFW, LZW and DK, have illegally weaponized the human resources department through the misuse of employment lawyers. Lawyers involved within my dispute with PGS have not performed their legally prescribed duties to their ability, but rather advanced a false narrative to protect PGS ASA. Lawyers involved in my case with PGS ASA have uttered forged documents lauding a defamatory narrative. The central question is what would motivate lawyers to behave this way?
When I eventually did deliver my formal grievance complaining of workplace bullying and harassment, along with multiple departures from PGSUK policy and UK contract and employment laws, I cited that the three principal bullies were, in fact, behaving with arbitrary caprice.Carl Richards, Arbitrary and Capricious Company Secretary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (24 Feb 2018) p112-118
I have not received any requests to stop publishing my pieces by anyone, including those within PGS. The simple truth is that what I have published is indeed true. I know it. Many know it. As time passes and the truth is no longer disputed what will remain, at the very least, is a chronological record of non-action and apathy by PGS executives.Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign 2 (20-Sep-2015)
There is no normal legal pathway that could describe how a contract dispute governed by the laws of England would be finally resolved within the Thai criminal justice system. The principal reason that contracts define legal jurisdiction and applicable laws is so parties of a a contract can plan and understand the rules of resolution if breaches occur. Settlement agreements are very binding. The laws of England are remarkably different then the laws of Thailand. Why would PGS ASA consider them interchangeable? I have for several years disputed the legality of the termination settlement contract agreement that was signed by myself and PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY [PGSUK] 5 December 2013. This contract is governed under the laws of England. I cannot force PGS Exploration (UK) Limited to invoke contractual terms and conditions which are designed to protect parties from publishing disparaging content about the other party. I cannot not be blamed for their collective apathy and negligence.
What was the point of the inclusion of such non-disparagement clauses? PGS ASA has never challenged public accusations of non-compliant and/or criminal acts of named PGS agents, most notably their former CEO and President, Jon Erik Reinhardsen. PGS ASA has never financed an investigation that would absolve themselves. PGS ASA has also never cited the public disclosures as a breach of contract. Instead, new litigation that bypasses the terms and conditions of currently enforceable agreement is initiated in Thailand? PGS ASA General Counsel, Lars Mysen, and PGS UK Head of Legal, John Francas, both refuse to explicitly confirm whether such litigation in Thailand is legal and/or compliant under the laws of England. PGS ASA could litigate under the Laws of England and exonerate themselves. The UK Companies Act 2006 makes it clear that it is the fiduciary duty of company directors (and secretary) to both follow English law as well as protect the company brand and reputation. There simply cannot be any criminal defamation in Thailand without their first being a breach by the other party of the Confidentiality terms and conditions of a contract governed by the laws of England.
I believe that John “Fraudster” Francas, newly appointed Head of Legal, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY (PGSUK), is a liar, cheater, and fraudster. I believe Francas is a mercenary with legal credentials being paid and misused by corrupted interests to obstruct justice. Francas knows what he is doing. If Francas believes my claims are defamatory, then I implore him to make his legal case.John Francas, Arbitrary and Capricious, Head of Legal, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (21 July 2018)