Marine Seismic Survey

Marine Geophysical Exploration

Page 2 of 4

Asking Norway’s PGS for Answers is Criminal Defamation in Thailand?

PGS’ John Francas, UK Head of Legal, is the first and only PGS agent to contact me directly regarding my blog post articles content. Yet, PGS UK directors and former secretary filed criminal defamation claims in Thailand without any official and legitimate investigation as described within the 2017 PGS Responsibility Report. There was no examination of the published content and/or dialogue with the accused.

Last e-mail to John Francas, PGS UK, Africa, Middle East Head of Legal (29 May 2019). No response nor answers. Was PGS Exploration UK Limited sponsored litigation in Thailand, which only purpose seemed to be to terrorize, harass and stalk a victim of their crimes and a whistleblower, legal and compliant? How was it paid for Directors Rune Olav Pedersen, Gottfred Langseth, and Christin Steen-Nilsen? These should be simple questions to answer. If Francas, Pedersen and their Thai lawyer cannot answer and explain clearly and definitively that their litigation is legal and compliant, I can only assume that it is NOT, and continue my job to warn stakeholders of the dangers of PGS ASA business practices.
Silence-The Ultimate Control and Power Over Another

Ethics and oversight are what you eliminate when you want absolute power.

DaShanne Stokes

Whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men. 

John Stuart Mill

One of the most destructive ramifications of evil despotism is the controlling of individual will and freedom through the creation of conditions that force undesirable choices which would never even be contemplated under normal and reasonable circumstances.  One of the most vividly dramatic examples of such despotic evil is depicted in the 1982 movie, Sophie’s ChoiceSophie’s choice is deciding which one of her two children shall live or die.  If she does not choose one to live, both will die. It is a choice given to her by a Nazi officer upon their arrival to Auschwitz.  Of course, it was really no choice at all, but a cruel and sadistic act of control and dehumanization.  In September 2018, two criminal claims were delivered to my wife’s house in Thailand by a Thai law firm representing the directors of PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY (PGSUK).  PGSUK directors are executives of Norwegian parent company, Petroleum Geo-Services ASA (PGS): Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS CEO and President; Gottfred Langseth, PGS CFO and EVP; and Christin Steen-Nilsen, PGS Chief Accountant.  I had just embarked alone on a journey to visit the USA the day before.  I received copies of the claims by e-mail, but they were in the Thai language.  This delivery terrified my wife and my in-laws, and news of it terrified my elderly mother and my family members in the United States.  My mother-in-law went to the hospital and I was on the other side of the world managing this reality.  I have questioned the propriety and legality of these delivered claims.  What I know for certain is that the delivery of these claims did not meet the ethical values test.  Therefore, a company that claims that their decision-making processes are guided by shared Values and a Code of Conduct, and align themselves with the UN Global Compact Principles, cannot be really acting compliant if their decisions and actions do not comport to their published values, but rather deceive, cause terror, hardship, and illness instead.    

Sophie’s Choice (1982)

The second claim was put forward by Carl Richards, who resigned as PGSUK secretary on 25 May 2018, and apparently also stopped working as Head of Legal for the PGS UK.  (Richards resignation as PGSUK secretary is part of the public record and can be obtained at UK Companies House website.)  On 5 April 2018, I had received an e-mail from a personal (non-PGS company) account purporting to belong to Richards.  Within this e-mail, Richards threatened legal action against me in Thailand for my online blog publications and image cartoons I had published. How can a Thai law firm possibly know what is defamatory regarding Richards, better than Richards himself? Richards requested that I remove content which referred to him personally.  Richards made it clear that he was not acting in his official capacity as PGSUK secretary.  At the time, I actually tried to engage Richards and stated my position as a whistleblower and also requested proof of identity before I engaged in any more substantive discussion.  I never received a response to this e-mail.  On 17 May 2018, I received an e-mail from a person purporting to be a Thai lawyer stating that they represented Carl Richards.  Again, I did not ignore the e-mail.  I stated my position that I claimed to be a whistleblower. I did remove some content, but again also requested proof of identity and credentials before I continued the conversation further.  When there was no response, I reasoned that these threatening e-mails were without legal merit and I began to republish some content.  The issue that bothered me most was that Richards was acting on behalf of himself and not as PGSUK secretary.  Richards had never confirmed his identity and so I decided to e-mail him at his PGS address, which I had remembered from the years we worked together in England.  I received an auto-response from his e-mail which stated that he had resigned.  (Usually, e-mails to PGS / PGSUK agents receive no response.) An auto-response e-mail provided contact information for the PGS EAME legal counsel, John Francas, who has become directly involved in these PGS Thai-UK-Norway legal issues centered around human rights and whistleblowing as a USA citizen working in England.

Carl Richards, Arbitrary and Capricious Company Secretary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited. (24 February 2018) inspired the first communication regarding my online public interest disclosures. PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY, sponsored my Tier 2 visa. I am a USA citizen. I believe that I was defrauded and illegally terminated from employment for being a foreign-worker whistleblower. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen were directly involved. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
How Corrupt Bullies and Lawyers Ruined a Marine Geophysical Company (20 May 2018) was resent to PGS UK lawyer, John Francas. There is no legal way that John Francas can make a definitive statement regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY personal data processing or the integrity of my personal data without establishing the that legal and compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination because these have never been authenticated. Former PGSUK secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. John Francas is part of the conspiracy now. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.

As alluded to, I am a USA citizen and was sponsored to work in England on a Tier 2 visa by PGSUK.  PGSUK also sponsored my Thai national wife and dependent children.  It is my belief that I was illegally terminated from employment with PGSUK through the use of a fraudulent settlement contract agreement supported by forged documentation for being a whistleblower.  PGS / PGSUK actions have exploited my status as a foreign worker to escape accountability for their alleged criminal acts.  This includes their devious way in which the criminal claims were delivered.  Was it legal for PGS to share my personal (passport) data with the Thai legal firm so that they could stalk me and know my address and when I was departing Thailand?  I see myself as both a victim of crimes perpetrated by company agents, notably the directors and former secretary who put forth the claims in Thailand, as well as a whistleblower.  I have proclaimed this throughout many of my publications.  This was also pointed out to Richards and his Thai legal counsel.  Richards was PGSUK secretary when the e-mails from him, and later his Thai counsel, were received, even if Richards only wanted to act in his own best interest with his claim apart from PGS.  The Confidentiality terms and conditions contained within the PGS UK Personnel Handbook, as well as the terms and conditions of the employment termination settlement contract, apply under the laws of England, where the contracts of employment and termination were both signed.  The terms and conditions expressly protect whistleblowing, citing the UK Public Interests Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA).  Beyond this, Pedersen was PGS General Counsel and a member of the Compliance Hotline Team, prior to his ascending to become PGS CEO and PresidentPedersen should have a very thorough legal understanding of PIDA, as well as Norway’s Workers Environment Act (WEA), whistleblower protection laws.  However, any such knowledge is not related to me through his actions or responses to queries. Were the claims brought forth in Thailand a breach in the Confidentiality terms and conditions under both the employment contract and subsequently signed employment termination settlement contract, both governed by English Law?

Despots prefer the friendship of the dog, who, unjustly mistreated and debased, still loves and serves the man who wronged him.

Charles Fourier

It is a criminal offence in England and Wales for someone to harass you or put you in fear of violence. The law states that harassment is when a person behaves in a way which is intended to cause you distress or alarm.  To be guilty of the offence of stalking the offender must, on at least two occasions, indulge in conduct that causes the victim harassment, alarm or distress.

Peoplesafe Website

The complaints delivered in Thailand were a composite of several blog posts articles and image files, some published over a year before the delivery. The content was translated from English to Thai language.  Any one of the published articles would have been breach of the Confidentiality terms and conditions within the two contracts signed by me and governed by the laws of England, if not for PIDA.  In 2017, I began a Twitter™ whistleblowing campaign and created and tweeted several image files.  Richards had mentioned that his LinkedIn photo was copy-righted.  So, I did see this as a concern.  The tweets, which often had images including portrait pictures, would either link images or the message to my personal website blogs or a Pinterest™ gallery.  The Pinterest™ gallery would also have other images and links to the different blog post articles.  My first blog post article that named names was,  An American, the UK Data Protection Act, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Tyranny of “Accurate Data” [3 July 2015].  Inspired by my October 2014 submission of a subject access request (SAR) to PGSUK citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Through my SAR, I received the contents of my personnel file.  My personnel file contained fake data.  I complained about the contents vigorously.  Settlement contracts are very binding.  Even if three sets of crooked lawyers agree to illegally process fake data as real data, it seems to take an act from God to unbind any such agreement.  On 22 December 2014, PGSUK sent me a letter and essentially stated that I was in breach of the settlement contract for not accepting fake and defamatory data as my true and accurate personal data, as DPA required.  Several blog post articles later, PGSUK still never took action on any perceived breaches in the termination settlement contract.  In 2014, Richards was PGSUK secretary and Pedersen was PGS General Counsel. They were both in the position to do so. But, in September 2018, the directors and former secretary filed two criminal defamation claims in Thailand?  How can it be legal and compliant to simply bypass company policy and previous legally binding agreements under English law and instead rely on the unsynchronized laws of another country to take away the right under law and contract of protected public disclosure? Further, if Richards, PGSUK directors and PGS Compliance refused to authenticate that compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination settlement agreement, then what legal basis or documentation supports legal criminal defamation claims in Thailand? The alleged criminal abusers are using every avenue, legal or otherwise, to silence their accuser. 

I signed what I now believe was a fraudulent settlement contract supported by forged documents on 5 December 2013. In October 2014, I discovered that my former employer, PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY was uttering forged documents in my personnel file. The conspiracy of uttering forged documents is a serious crime. The letter written 22 December 2014 threatens litigation if I do not accept the defamatory forged documents as my true and accurate personal data. I began my whistleblowing blog campaign 3 July 2015. PGS never took ANY legal action. I believe that the reason no action has been taken under the settlement contract governed by English law is because such action would reveal illegal processes and documents were used to terminate a foreign worker whistleblower. David Nicholson, PGS UK Human Resources (HR) manager created and/or signed most every one of the forged documents and was directly involved in the alleged non-compliant and illegal acts and processes. Many PGS agents and third-parties participated in the conspiracy.

Processing a subject access request should be pretty straight-forward and not so controversial.  But, when the Company is uttering forged instruments that were used to process a termination settlement contract on false pretenses, it is problematic for all those directly involved in such a criminal conspiracy because it’s a serious crime.  The settlement contract was proffered to me following the submission of a formal grievance complaining of being a target of bullying, harassment, and discrimination based on my nationality and Tier 2 visa status.  I believed that the company performance management system was being ignored, along with UK labor laws.  The company was trying to place me on a performance improvement plan (PIP) so that they could terminate me for cause.  Looking back, accusations of breaking UK labor laws and health and safety concerns made within the contents of my grievance qualified as whistleblowing.  In England, termination settlement contracts require the employee to engage a solicitor.  Of course, as a foreign worker not completely familiar with English employment law, I knew that I needed such counsel.  But, how did fake data that contradicted the data provided to my counsel get processed?  The fake data supported a defamatory performance-based termination.  How can a company simultaneously apply to renew the Tier 2 visa and place the same employee on a PIP?  I do not think that is legal because foreign workers displace non-immigrant workers who themselves could also be trained to perform in the position.  There must have been a conspiracy to process the fake data.  My solicitor recommended an “enhanced” settlement contract agreement in lieu of proceeding through the Company procedures or legal processes.  Of course, as a harassed foreign worker, I was receptive to leaving.  However, I never agreed to the defamatory narrative.  None of the documents relevant to the termination settlement contract bare my countersignature and contradict e-mail records.

It took me too long to realize that what made the termination settlement contract so binding was that all lawyers involved had to cooperate and agree on processing the fake data – or utter forged documents, which is a crime.  I was gaslighted and defrauded by my own hired solicitor.  (1) These claims have been published for some time now, as well. (2)  Philip Landau remains silent, as do all the conspirators. (3)  In 2016, following several accusatory blog publications and comments made in the PGS LinkedIn™ space, I also submitted another SAR and report to the PGS Compliance Hotline contacts.  However, if there had been any non-compliant or illegal acts committed first in 2013, two of the PGS Compliance Hotline contacts, Terje Bjølseth, PGS SVP Global Human Resources, and Pedersen, would be directly implicated.  The cover-up continued and I again wrote about it in a blog post article, The Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Ambush Meeting and the Definition of Fraud (24 May 2016)This was actually the second blog post article where I presented evidence and made my case that PGS was processing fake data to support the termination settlement agreement.  The first blog post article was, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign II : A Bully Targets Reprise (20 September 2015)The titles of my publications alone could be a breach in the PGSUK Confidentiality terms, if not for PIDA.  In 2016, I wanted to know if the articles had been read and if responsible individuals had viewed the contents of my personnel file and investigated.  Apparently, nothing like this happened. PGS did not alter or question their personal data processing or provide any additional information to me beyond what was provided with the 2014 SAR, of which the provided contents of my personnel file was almost entirely disputed.  

Loyalty is such a force for destruction because it readily clashes with genuine virtues such as honesty and fairness—all while seeing itself as superior to those virtues.

Rob AsGHar, Loyalty Isn’t A Virtue, It’s The Enemy Of Workplace Ethics

Corruption in oil production – one of the world’s richest industries and one that touches us all through our reliance on petrol – fuels inequality, robs people of their basic needs and causes social unrest in some of the world’s poorest countries.

UNAOIL: THE COMPANY THAT BRIBED THE WORLD

The General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR), which replaced DPA, came into full effect on 25 May 2018.  Since many of the principals involved with the grievance were no longer with PGS, I decided to submit another SAR.  Richards was now gone.  Although, in hind sight, Richards should have been, and likely was, involved in forming the responses for both the 2014 SAR and 2016 SAR.  I submitted the initial 2018 SAR request to Francas, and of course this first request was not answered.  With GDPR, PGS appointed a Data Protection Officer, Daphne Bjerke.  I communicated with her (office) to process my 2018 SAR.  PGS Compliance Hotline contacts, Pedersen and Bjølseth, who were directly involved in the alleged crimes involving both my termination settlement contract and the 2014 SAR, would no longer be direct contacts and able to cover-up – so I hoped.  This would be an integrity test for the DPO to see if DPO would do their job according to their legal responsibilities or shill for their leadership.  I want to point out that I am the data subject.  I know what happened, and I have e-mail evidence which supports my truthful narrative.  Further, I have launched on a multi-year blog campaign stating my case and PGS has never once responded or commented on the queries embedded within the blog post articles.  Eventually, I did get a response to my SAR from Francas.  In my view, PGS once again failed the integrity test and never addressed the authentication issues around the defamatory data being processed in my name within my PGSUK personnel file, which have always been the central issue.

There is no legal way that John Francas can make any definitive statements regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY personal data processing or the integrity of my personal data without establishing the that legal and compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination because these have never been authenticated. Former PGSUK secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. John Francas is part of the conspiracy and cover-up now. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
There is no legal way that John Francas can make any definitive statements regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY personal data processing or the integrity of my personal data without establishing the that legal and compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination because these have never been authenticated. Former PGSUK secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. John Francas is part of the conspiracy and cover-up now. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
There is no legal way that John Francas can make any definitive statements regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY personal data processing or the integrity of my personal data without establishing the that legal and compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination because these have never been authenticated. Former PGSUK secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. John Francas is part of the conspiracy and cover-up now. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
There is no legal way that John Francas can make any definitive statements regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY personal data processing or the integrity of my personal data without establishing the that legal and compliant processes and documents were used to affect my termination because these have never been authenticated. Former PGSUK secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. John Francas is part of the conspiracy and cover-up now. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
This response is technically incorrect. There was also an additional SAR submitted to the PGS Compliance Team in 2016. At this time, I had published several blog post articles on LinkedInd™ Pulse platform, as well as posted several queries on the PGS LinkedIn Comment space. The PGS Compliance Team in 2016 would have recognized that I was whistleblowing and challenging the integrity of the documents being processed within my PGSUK personnel file which formed the basis for my termination from employment. The 2016 e-mails and LinkedInd™ comments were also provided to GDPR@pgs.com with my 2018 SAR.

I did complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), again.  However, this time I copied many people on my complaints and queries, in addition to the ICO caseworker.  I copied Francas, Pedersen, Langseth, Bjerke, as well as new PGS UK Personnel Manager, Gareth Jones, and new PGS General Counsel, Lars Mysen on my complaint e-mails to ICO.  I also copied (UK) ActionFraud (police).  These e-mails never received a response, as well.  I also published blog articles and began publishing the unanswered “open letters.”  The 16 July 2018 SAR response also establishes PGS’ position that the terms and conditions of the termination settlement contract, signed 5 December 2013, is still in effect.  This includes PIDA protections.  While in the USA, I also published several “open letters” addressing the recently received claims and inquiring about their propriety, especially with regard to PIDA.  I had ended my visit to the US early and returned to Thailand to address the criminal complaints.  I never received any response to these e-mails / open letters!  There was actually a tight time-frame to prepare which involved my having to also translate content from English to Thai language.  The overwhelming majority of content used to form the complaint pre-dated the 16 July 2018 SAR response from Francas.  This begs the question as to why PGS / PGSUK did not exercise on the “breaches” in the referenced 5 December 2013 termination settlement agreement? 

PGS / PGSUK also never provided any evidence that the contents of my personnel file data had been authenticated.  The complaints keyed in on phrases written and image files, but not the personnel file documents and e-mail records.  PGS never conducted an investigation or provided results.  So, how could the data which comprised the complaint be legal and compliant when it was the product of accused criminals under the laws of England and not legally verifiable and compliant processes? Defamation – the untruth of my base claims – was never legally determined or related to me prior to the criminal complaints being delivered in Thailand. Both the Thai law firm and Francas can only base their legal decisions on the integrity of the source data. Francas provided his SAR report without actually examining the personnel file data and establishing that legal processes and documentation were used to affect my termination settlement contract. I know this – because, I know. No blog campaign could endure so long if everything I wrote was untrue. The reason that the Thai claims were voluminous is because they were created by cutting and pasting from multiple articles and content over a span of several months and years. I have been asking for answers for a long time. Any one of the articles could have been a breach in the Confidentiality terms and conditions. Therefore, I cannot see how the criminal complaints put forth in Thailand by the directors and former secretary of PGSUK were legal, and further believe that they were a form of extortion/blackmail to silence an accuser and victim of crimes.

Unanswered Open Letters: 

Criminal claims were delivered 10 September 2018 with scheduled initial court proceedings 29 October 2018.

Blind belief in a authority is the greatest enemy of truth.

Albert Einstein

Inside each of us, there is the seed of both good and evil. It’s a constant struggle as to which one will win. And one cannot exist without the other.

eric burdon

When I returned to Thailand from my shortened USA visit, I had to shop for criminal lawyers in a foreign country because the directors and former secretary of PGSUK did not want to answer simple questions in English by e-mail, but felt that translating pages of content from English to Thai language was a more effective and less expensive way to resolve their issue? Perhaps they thought a criminal trial of a former employee would improve the company reputation and show their values? There was not too much time to fully state my position in the Thai language. I prepared my defense to the claims regarding my published content. However, I am a person who considers process above content. I questioned the propriety of the claims and basis in process. Were the claims the product of legal and compliant processes? I translated previous threats of legal action, such as the 22 December 2014 letter, as well as the 16 July 2018 letter. Both of these letters representing the same company cited the terms and conditions of the 5 December 2013 termination settlement contract, which included PIDA provisions. I also had translated the Confidentiality clauses in the PGS UK Personnel Handbook and my termination settlement contract. And I translated information about PIDA and WEA. I also was preparing a defense of the substantive content of my publications and what they were based on. In Thailand, lawyer(s) for the claimants and defendant meet at a pretrial hearing to see if things can be worked-out without a trial. PGS proffered a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) settlement to drop criminal charges. This would save me attorney fees and provide a more certain outcome. I was advised by my lawyer and family to accept the terms of the NDA.

I agreed to sign the NDA. But, I believed then that it was overly limiting and had a very broad jurisdiction of enforcement in both Thailand and Houston, Texas! I thought it implausible that terms and conditions of a contract signed in Thailand could be easily enforced in the USA. But, I am no lawyer. I was told to remove all content that mentioned PGS or any of its agents. My Thai IP registered website had to be taken offline and any other social media accounts from Pinterest™ to Tumblr™ had to be cleansed. There was a period of time, I think it was 10-days, to firm the agreement. I was simply not happy with the limiting of my published content. My blogs were my voice for justice. I have always felt that I was the one who was violated and wronged. I believed that I was the victim of crimes perpetrated by PGS / PGSUK. I submitted my first report to UK ActionFraud (police) 24 August 2015. (PGS was made aware of this.) For some time, the ActionFraud report was also published online. During this acceptance and repentance period, I tested the NDA by blowing the whistle to a non-PGS entity. Some how, PGS was informed about it. PGS stated that this was a breach in the NDA and threatened to proceed with another criminal trial scheduled for 29 January 2019. At this point, I was becoming frustrated with my hired counsel. For some reason, my lawyers seem to forget or not advance the merits of my position and counsel to capitulate to PGS wishes.

Of course, this traumatized me and my family once again. In December 2018, I became a Thai Buddhist Monk for ten (10) days to gain merit and soothe the Thai side of my family especially. Becoming a monk in Thailand is a big deal, and while the circumstances that brought me to that place were not the best, the experience will be with me for a lifetime. However, while I was at the waht (temple), the Thai registered site was taken down completely. This was before any trial or examination of the content. PGS again decided not to proceed to criminal trial and I wrote two apology notes for my offensive content. However, time passed and I became more and more uncomfortable with the constraints on my published content. I read more about PIDA and discovered that the restrictions on published content was not enforceable. Similarly, WEA states that such agreements are illegal. This emboldened me to test the restrictions in the Thai NDA. That’s where we are now. I do not believe that directors of a UK company can enforce terms and conditions which restrict content. Defamation and unpleasant truths are very different things. I also read that what happened to me in Thailand seems to correlate with extortion. The criminal complaints in Thailand were totally unnecessary and mostly served to terrorize and silence accusations of director and former secretary wrong-doing, just as I had stated a year ago. John Francas has never scheduled a discussion, or answered any of my questions.

Post Thai NDA E-mails/Communications

Communications with PGS engaged Thai Law firm and John Francas, PGS UK Head of Legal

I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
When Human Resources is Corrupt (10-August-2015)
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY. Former secretary Carl Richards and directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Mob Values (16 June 2016)
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I am whistleblowing again. I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.
I do not believe the claim put forth in Thailand was legal or compliant. There is no legal way that a Thai law firm could put forth a defamation claim regarding PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England KT13 0NY former secretary Carl Richards. PGSUK directors Jon Erik Reinhardsen (former-Norwegian); Rune Olav Pedersen (Norwegian); Gottfred Langseth (Norwegian); and Christin Steen-Nilsen have been requested to authenticate documents and processes used to support my termination by settlement contract. They have refused. Therefore, the only information that the Thai lawyer / law firm has is hearsay from alleged / accused criminals. I have reported to UK ActionFraud (police), but with no ACTION or INVESTIGATION all that is left is FRAUD. Demand police investigation for the health and safety of the industry.

Was the nopgs.com website taken down legally?

A report, once again, has been submitted to PGS Compliance. I await their response.

A good company is reflected in its financials, and for PGS, the financials don’t look good. This is a fast-fail analysis, which means I won’t be spending too much time on the company, given that there is a universe of better – https://simplywall.st, Petroleum Geo-Services ASA’s (OB:PGS) Sustainability In Question?

###

Landau Law Didn’t Like My Trustpilot Review?

It is why we are so ambivalent about whistleblowers. Are not they really just whiners and malcontents? For if they are not, then the whistleblower reveals by contrast the cowardice of us all.

Charles Frederick Alford, What Makes Whistleblowers So Threatening?

Landau Law complained that this review violated Trustpilot Policy. Luckily, Trustpilot did not agree. The TRUTH should never violate any legitimate policy. (Thank you Trustpilot for providing qualified assessments to your users.)

DEMAND POLICE INVESTIGATION – SUPPORT WHISTLEBLOWING and the VICTIM OF CRIME. DO NOT SUPPORT CORRUPTION!

Principal, Philip Landau, Employment Law Solicitor was paid by me to represent my interests between October – December 2013 when he was a Principal with Landau, Zeffert, and Weir Law.

I do not believe that Philip Landau represented me well at all. I have only asked one question of Philip Landau and my former UK employer. Can you please show me that legal processes and documentation were used to process the termination of a USA citizen, Tier 2 Sponsored employee? Philip Landau refuses to respond to this “simple” query! Unfortunately, so does ActionFraud (UK Police) and my former UK employer. It’s as though Landau and my former employer are guarding the same secret.

Landau, Zeffert & Weir (LZW) Represented Me?

Philip Landau, London Employment Law Solicitor, Represented a Tier 2 Visa Holder?

Philip Landau – London Employment Solicitor pre-Settlement E-mails

My Philip Landau and Watson, Farley & Williams (WFW) London Solicitors Testimonial (Updated 9-Apr-2017)

###

Equinor – Investigate your Chairman of the Board Nominee

Equinor’s nomination committee should be ashamed of themselves for re-nominating Jon Erik Reinhardsen as Chairman of the Board of Directors without fully investigating allegations of his crimes and human rights abuses of an American citizen.  Me and my family are victims of his abuses in power and breaches of many provisions of the Code of Practice.
Equinors valgkomité bør skamme seg over at de skal nominere Jon Erik Reinhardsen til styrets styre uten å undersøke påstand om hans forbrytelser og menneskerettighetsbrudd av en amerikansk statsborger.  Meg og min familie er ofre for hans misbruk i kraft og brudd på mange bestemmelser i anbefalingen.
Comprehensive data protection laws are essential for protecting human rights – most obviously, the right to privacy, but also many related freedoms that depend on our ability to make choices about how and with whom we share information about ourselves. My base claims are that my former employer uttered forged defamatory documents to process a settlement contract agreement used to terminate my employment under false pretenses. They are processing fake data as my personal data. I have requested a police investigation.
Confidentiality: Employees’ right to whistle blow according to Norway’s Working Environment Act 2005, may only be limited by law. Confidentiality agreements, instructions, regulations etc. that limit an employee’s right to whistle blow are therefore illegal.
Norwegian Geo-Services Company UK affiliate directors – former colleagues of Jon Erik Reinhardsen – put-forth criminal defamation claims against a self-proclaimed foreign-worker (USA citizen) whistleblower living in Thailand. Most of the written-about alleged crimes and corruption happened when Reinhardsen was a director of the UK affiliate. I believe this legal action is/was a violation of both the Norway Worker Environment Act (WEA) and UK Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) and tantamount to extortion. I also believe that it was an abuse of the Thai criminal justice system. The UK affiliate dropped criminal charges following the signing of a settlement contract with no whistleblower protections. But, they still threaten me if I continue to blow the whistle. Norway, please investigate Jon Erik Reinhardsen’s cabal.
Corrupt Compliance – Corporate Governance – Does not respond to whistleblowing.
Open Letter to Petroleum Geo-Services ASA Board of Directors   
(18-Jun-2017)
No Response Ever Received
Whistleblower Procedures are Ignored and the whistleblower – victim of abuse – and his family dismissed. There is NO GOVERNANCE nor JUSTICE when procedures and laws are ignored – ONLY CORRUPTION IS LEFT!

Norwegian Geo-Services Company Corrupt Governance / Compliance do not Respond to Whistleblowing

2016 Exchange with Norwegian geo-services on  LinkedIn comment space.  These comments, along with e-mails to the Compliance Hotline contacts, are ever answered. any substantive questions and would delete them.  I eventually was restricted from LinkedIn for asking my former employer to resolve the truth about the crimes they are accused of.

Norwegian Geo-Services Company Corrupt Governance / Compliance do not Respond to Whistleblowing

How a Dysfunctional, Corrupt and Non-Responsive Compliance Program Harms the Reputation of the Company, Industry, and its Professionals by Covering-up a Conspiracy to Utter Forged Documents used to Terminate a Whistleblower under False Pretenses.

When I felt that my own professional and personal reputation had been defamed, I submitted a thorough formal grievance challenging the management of my employer directly to substantiate their orally and written aspersions.  I am now a former employee. I am a USA citizen who was sponsored to live and work in England on a Tier 2 visa, along with my wife and dependent children.  The Company that I worked for was an affiliate of a Norwegian Geo-Services company (NGS and NGSUK). When I tried to find redress through practicing my legal right under employment and contract law to initiate the grievance procedures (outlined within the UK Company Policy Handbook), this right was impeded through management’s conscious efforts to bypass the processes and  laws governing my employment as a foreign worker.  My rights were manipulated and denied and the health and safety of my family placed in danger through these same consciously violent acts. I was a foreign worker with no ties to the local community to find support. The Company and its Core Values is where I had placed my trust. But, this trust was betrayed categorically. The workplace was toxic and dehumanizing. When I finally did submit my workplace grievance, it pointed to multiple social and contractual breaches by the Company. But, I would not leave without defending my rights, dignity and reputation as a professional.  I tried to follow the rules.  My former employer presented me with an unprofessional, defamatory letter that contradicted most every rule of professionalism and civility. It was cowardly and an abuse of position. I responded to these aspersions upon my character and professionalism in the form of a grievance. Within my written grievance, I affirm:

A main motivation for my response in the form of a grievance is that one should never allow a defamatory statement to go unchallenged. Silence is perceived as acceptance. If one does not respond about what has been said and written about them – especially at a professional level – then it must be true.  – Steven D. Kalavity, 20 September 2013 Grievance Document

On 15 July 2013, the Company renewed their sponsorship of a Tier 2 visa allowing a foreign worker to fill a position that a local hire cannot. On 24 July 2013, the same Company wants to investigate placing this employee on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), following their raising concerns about the propriety of an “ambush meeting” which they were called to attend with NO NOTICE. Ambush Meeting’s are a common tactic used by workplace bullies. Following this meeting, I requested minutes of the meeting, how the meeting conformed to Company policy, and stated that I wanted to file a grievance. I was denied all of these requests. I have reason to believe that the 13 June 2013 was likely not compliant and subsequent actions/decisions by the Company were carried out to cover-up and escape accountability. How else could I still be blogging about it with so many unanswered questions?

Employer personnel files contain the documentation that is needed to provide an accurate view of an employee’s employment history.  The documentation supports the employer’s decisions and must be of a legal standard to protect the employer in a potential lawsuit.  Most employee personnel files will never be tested in this way.  But, this is the standard and basis for maintaining such records.  The personnel file contents demonstrate the employer’s rationale behind hiring, promotions, transfer, rewards and recognition, and termination decisions.  Outcomes are the derivative of processes and are only valid to the extent that the processes followed legal and compliant practices as prescribed in policy which is guided by employment law.  My grievance was grounded in the belief – no, my firm knowledge – that my personnel file data was intentionally defamatory and the byproduct non-compliant processes. However, rather than resolve the issue professionally in accordance to Company policy and procedures, my former employer decided to amplify the non-compliance and process – utter – knowingly defamatory forged documents which would be used to justify terminating the target of health-harming abusive behaviors on false pretenses. This would allow those with entrusted power to act irresponsibly and contrary to their duties to uphold policy and the law and most important, escape any accountability.

Ten months after I left England, I submitted a subject access request to NGSUK citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998.  I discovered that defamatory and inaccurate personnel records populated my personnel file contents.  This was done intentionally by NGSUK to create a false history of my employment which would obviously would harm me for future opportunities.  This was the basis for my filing a grievance in the first place and why defamation was specifically an issue that was brought up.  Another key issue brought up within my grievance document was that NGS Core Values were being ignored.  NGS Core Values and NGS Code of Conduct are specifically mentioned within the terms and of my original employment contract.  I knew that management had breached these terms and conditions through their deliberate and destructive decisions focused on me.  I was a target of workplace gang-bullying, harassment and discrimination. My reliance on Core Values was of principal importance because of the fact that I was a USA citizen working in a foreign country guided by foreign laws. The Core Values represented the common understanding of how decisions would be determined. The UK Company also sponsored me on a Tier 2 visa. How could a UK Company legally sponsor a USA citizen whom they believed was a poor performer? The Tier 2 visa is designed for filling positions that cannot be easily filled by local talent.

The best way for an individual or company to maintain a stellar reputation, first and foremost, is to be proactive and ensure that one’s decisions are guided by ethical values.   Enterprises must be principled and resolute about following such guidance.  The UK Companies Act 2006 clearly establishes that directors and secretary (“directors”) have the fiduciary duty to protect the reputation of the company that they direct.  Employee’s, present and former, are bound by contractual Confidentiality terms and conditions, such that they will not engage in activities and public disclosures that will negatively impact the business.  This, of course, includes the Company’s reputation.  The exception to any such public disclosures are protected disclosures, or whistleblowing.  Such protected public disclosure is provided through the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) and is specifically referenced within the NGSUK Policy Handbook.

Most people when accused of a crime that they are innocent of will vehemently proclaim their innocence and take action in the moment and not wait over three years to be outraged and file criminal defamation charges in a foreign country.  We must concede that the reaction of NGS / NGSUK directors and former secretary is not normal. 

At what point are such publications the fault of those charged with guarding the company reputation?  Where was the proverbial “line in the sand” in terms of what disparaging commentary would be tolerated?  The first and only official condemnation of my postings came in the form of a criminal complaint made by the NGSUK directors more than three years after my first blog post article naming names.  Prior to being President and CEO, one of the directors of NGSUK was NGS General Counsel and Legal Compliance.  I believe that he oversaw the creation and uttering of the forged documents which became “my accurate personal data.” This General Counsel ascended to be an Executive Vice President and then CEO, in spite of being highlighted as one of the perpetrators within in many published blog post articles.  As a member of the Legal Compliance Team, several e-mails were directed to him and his team.  All e-mails directed the Compliance Hotline were not answered at all.  I did have some exchange with other compliance team members.  Between April to September 2016, I complained to the Compliance Team on several occasions.  I provided published blog article content and links for their consideration.  The final blog article sent specifically to the attention of the Compliance Team and was titled The Crimes of <COMPANY CEO>. 

Many of the same claims that were directed to prior CEO within my 2016 blog publications are repeated within future blog post articles, but the new CEO was the focused.  My intention was to make sure that the same base complaints pronouncing the truth continued to be broadcast and considered relevant.  I continued publishing content and expanding the recipients of my complaints because the many issues important to me were never acknowledged or resolved by parent company agents or, most notably, the directors of the UK affiliate.   

I have always requested a thorough third party (police) investigation. That’s all.

If the UK affiliate directors were truly confident of their innocence, they would have invited such an investigation to exonerate themselves.  This is what they should have done. An updated report was submitted to UK ActionFraud (police) accusing the directors of criminal behavior. This report was also published online my former website for some time.  No one from the UK affiliate ever addressed or sought to clarify the accusations made or asked for the reports removal.  Current publications implicate the same people as the articles published and forwarded to the Compliance Hotline in 2016.  The CEO reneged on his duty to defend the reputation of the Company in 2016, as the e-mails below clearly show.  So, who bares responsibility for damage to that reputation in 2018? The Companies Act 2006 states that it was always the responsibility of its directors.

 ###

Philip Landau, London Employment Law Solicitor, Represented a Tier 2 Visa Holder?

o1 November 2013 to 4 December 2013

First Contact with Philip Landau with Landau, Zeffertt, and Weir Employment Solicitors (LZW) was on 11 October 2013 through an article he had penned comment space. Philip Landau was formally engaged 22 October 2013.

Philip Landau Counseled me from 11 October 2013 through the eventual signing of a settlement agreement 5 December 2013. Almost two-months to negotiate a settlement?

Why am I able to blog about a settlement contract negotiated and signed by myself and Philip Landau on 5 December 2013? My first blog post article that challenged the UK policy handbook and the signed settlement Confidentiality provisions was published 3 July 2015 on LinkedIn Pulse. I have long contended that this settlement contract is a fraudulent instrument. In September 2018, my former employer initiated criminal defamation proceedings against me in Thailand (where I reside with my Thai wife) to stop the publication of blog articles on a dedicated website which I had viewed as protected public disclosure, or whistleblowing. This site with an IP address in Thailand was taken offline. I had written blog articles about my former counsel, Philip Landau, as well. However, the Confidentiality terms within the 5 December 2013 settlement contract agreement were never invoked in the over three (3) years of pursuing answers and justice from outside England, where the laws of England governed my contract of employment as well as the 5 December 2013 settlement contract.

The criminal defamation claims were dropped by my signing a new settlement agreement in Thailand proffered by the same Company who signed the 5 December 2013 settlement contract. The main difference is that the new settlement contract signed in Thailand does not include protection for whistleblowing (Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 [PIDA]). Which settlement contract takes precedence? To me, this confirms the illegitimacy of the 5 December 2013 settlement contract negotiated and signed on my behalf by Philip Landau. It also makes me question the legitimacy of the new settlement contract signed in Thailand. My former employer, an English Company, has a Thai law firm / lawyer on retainer to monitor my publications.

In October 2014, about a year after I had initially contacted Philip Landau, I submitted a subject access request (SAR) to my former employer citing the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). As part of my request, I received my Company personnel file. What I discovered were forged documents supporting a performance based termination. Because all lawyers involved were compromised to utter forged documents to support this settlement contract agreement, I could not rely on normal avenues of legal redress. I complained vociferously to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). But, they could take no action because of the binding nature of settlement agreements. I began publicly disclosing these issues in blog articles (LinkedIn Pulse), 3 July 2015. I submitted a report to UK ActionFraud (police) 24 August 2015. ActionFraud has never investigated my allegations. ActionFraud have relegated my reporting of crimes as the product of a disgruntled former employee. But, beyond the fraud perpetrated against me and my family, there required conscious deceptions made to UK government agencies, such as UK Border Agency and also the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). I was a foreign worker on a Tier 2 visa.

It appears to me as though Philip Landau uttered forged documents created by my former employer to affect an illegal settlement contract used to terminate my employment for being a whistleblower. That’s why no one wants to invoke its non-disparagement clauses!

Communications between Philip Landau and myself prior to negotiations, 11 October 2013 to 31 October 2013, are chronicled in the blog post article, “Philip Landau Represented Me?”

The fact that I am a Tier 2 visa holder should be very important. But, its importance is minimized, along with the health harming aspects of being a target of workplace gang-bullying (mobbing). Mobbing implies upper management involvement in the harassment and bullying. Philip Landau put the health, safety and well-being of me and my family at risk through advancing an inappropriate settlement contract agreement predicated on poor performance. Philip Landau also participated in the defamation and professional blacklisting . Is it even legal for a Company to both sponsor an foreign worker on a Tier 2 visa (shortage occupation list) who the Company believes is a poor performer? I always alleged that the Company performance management system was abused by the bullies to threaten and intimidate their target – whistleblower.

The settlement contract negotiations led by Philip Landau initiate with my employer remarking that they would be completely happy with my remaining employed. However, later that month, there is pressure to have me sign the agreement and place me on “garden leave” to get me out of the office. I was complaining of being bullied and harassed – gang-bullied – to someone seasoned in such abhorrent workplace behaviors. (So, of course my employer is happy with my staying!) Landau never really talks about the bullying, harassment, discrimination, and defamation claims. I had already paid Philip Landau (LZW) when negotiations commenced. I had also mentally prepared myself to get out of danger and leave my job. Philip Landau was supposed to be helping me accomplish this in the most advantageous way for me.

My employer engaged law firm Watson, Farley, and Williams’ lawyer Rhodri Thomas, to represent them in the negotiations. My Employer often used the firm Watson, Farley and Williams. In fact, Watson, Farley, and Williams, advised on the processing of the Tier 2 visa application for me and my dependent family members “leave to remain.” My employer had written a letter of sponsorship to UK Border as recently as 15 July 2013. Also, ACAS (Advisery, Conciliation, and Arbitration Service) explicitely states that when grievances and disciplinary issues coincide, they can be discussed at the same time. This settlement contract negotiation bypassed both the prescribed (Company) grievance and disciplinary procedures. Further, if grievance procedures constitute part of the employment contract, as it did in my case, such an settlement offer is another breach of contract by my employer. The submitted 20 September 2013 formal grievance had identified many others.

This is all gaslighting. My employer wants to illegally terminate me for blowing the whistle. Philip Landau, LZW (at the time, now with Landau Law) and Rhodri Thomas, Watson, Farley and Williams are complicit in this conspiracy. Note, I say that, “I am the only one playing by the rules.”

The Company opens with the attitude that they are happy with my staying. I was claiming being a target of health harming gang-bullying. Of course they want me to stay! Philip Landau answered very few questions. At this point, the outcome had been predetermined on the 25 October 2013 Memo. I was being forced to endure the health-harming workplace until I signed a settlement agreement. I told Philip Landau about visits to the GP and that the GP would assign an “unfit note.” Philip Landau would do nothing. I would remind him about the Tier 2 visa issues, and Philip Landau would do nothing! In the end, my employer just wanted me out of the office! I signed the contract, but was placed on “garden leave.” I was in a foreign country with my family! How depraved can my employer and solicitor be?!

OHN Report Withheld from me During Negotiations while Philip Landau was Engaged as my Counsel/Solicitor. This OHN Report is not being processed as my personal data. I submitted a subject access request to the OHN.

In October 2014, I submitted a subject access request citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 to discover what personal data was being processed by my former employer about me. I was shocked to find forged instruments relating a false narrative. The Information Commissioner’s Office could not help me. The data had been signed-off by Philip Landau, my solicitor, as well as my employer and their hired counsel at Watson, Farley and Williams.

The entire grievance pivoted around defamation and misuse of the Company performance management system. Human Resources (HR) was being weaponized by the Company in their health-harming gang-bully – mobbing campaign. On the final day before signing the ill-fated settlement agreement, I sought assurances that the personal data being processed about me was fair and accurate. The assurance provided to me was a conspiratorial misrepresentation. On 22 December 2014, the Company wrote me a threatening letter regarding my questioning the integrity of the data being processed in my name. The Company agreed to process a 5 December 2014 e-mail citing many – not all – of the problems in my personal data. Isn’t this an acknowledgement that forged documents were uttered to process the settlement agreement?

This is why I want a criminal police investigation. I contend that this was all a conspiracy to defraud and defame a whistleblower and terminate his employment illegally, but make it all look legal. I have been blogging for the legal justice that I was denied me by the Company since 2013. The Company, with Philip Landau’s help, was able to deny my legal right to proceed through grievance procedures and not be held accountable for many, many policy and ethical breaches.

Philip Landau has never explained what happened in spite of several requests.

###

Professional Codes of Ethics and Whistleblowing

Dear John, et al.
Why do I write my blogs? You know why, really. But, for the record, I publish in pursuit of the truth and justice that was denied me and my family by the evil that you represent. The silence and abuse of power can only protect evil so long.

It is high time that scrutiny is placed on the use of [Non-disclosure Agreement] NDAs in circumstances in which there is a clear imbalance of power between parties. Evidence suggests that they are used as a tool of abuse to scare victims into silence and suppress vital evidence from emerging.

Kevin Hollinrake, MP,
Non-disclosure agreements are being abused to scare victims into silence, says Yorkshire MP
Uttering a forged instrument is a criminal offense. When a person knowingly publishes or puts into circulation any forged or altered financial document, legal document or other writing with the intent to misrepresent it as true and defraud others it amounts to uttering a forged instrument.
A criminal conspiracy takes place when two or more people get together and plan to carry out a course of conduct which will necessarily involve the commission of an offence. In other words, more than one person agrees to do something which will involve committing a crime.
Truth, Justice and the American way …
In the absence of truth, power is the only game in town. – Richard John Neuhaus
A confidentiality clause or ‘gagging clause’ in a settlement agreement is not valid if you’re a whistleblower.
It is unethical for a lawyer to threaten to present criminal, administrative or disciplinary charges to obtain advantage in a civil dispute. Extortion constitutes a threat to accuse someone of a crime, or to expose or impute to him any significant misconduct, accompanied by a demand for payment “or else.” 

Extortion is the use of a threat to extract money from someone. Blackmail consists of threats made to gain anything of value from the other person, such as money, property or sexual favors. Blackmail, therefore, is broader. The threats themselves may be the same — such as the intention to inflict injury on someone else — but the nature of what the person seeks in return is the distinction.

Professionals have a responsibility to reveal unethical or illegal conduct by corporate board of directors’ and / or company executives. In fact, it is the definition of professionalism which supersedes technical proficiency.

The Society for Exploration Geophysicists Code of Ethics states:

It shall be your duty as a geophysicist, in order to maintain the dignity of your chosen profession to [abide by the Code of Ethics].

CIPD Code of Professional Conduct

Demonstrate and promote fair and reasonable standards in the treatment of people who are operating within their sphere of influence

The Norwegian Lawyers Rules for Good Practice states:

A lawyer’s task is to promote justice and prevent injustice.

The UK Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code of Conduct states:

[Lawyers should always] uphold the rule of law and the proper administration of justice

Whistleblowers who are victims of crimes and abuse are attacked for being true Professionals!

###

UK Companies House Public Record

Available Online – Companies House

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is pgs-terror-org_2.png
In September 2018, I believe that the directors of Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) UK affiliate perpetrated extortion to silence protected public disclosure misusing / defrauding the Thailand criminal justice system to take down nopgs.com
,where the IP address was registered.  For over three years of publishing evidence of PGS board & executive fraud, Rune Olav Pedersen and Gottfred Langseth breached Norwegian (Worker’s Environment Act) and UK (Public Interest Disclosure Act – PIDA) whistleblower protection laws.  The evidence which was posted showed PGS defrauding UK and Norwegian government agencies through knowingly processing defamatory false instruments created to destroy the professional life and reputation of a foreign worker whistleblower.  This deception also has been perpetrated by the PGS USA affiliate in Houston where the false defamatory personal data was shared.  Pedersen & Langseth have overseen the mobbing, bribery, embezzlement, and fraud carried out to destroy a USA citizen whistleblower since 2013.  PGS had denied a US citizen the opportunity for legal redress through denying the legally guaranteed grievance process in 2013.  This effort required a conspiracy of actors inside and outside PGS. EVP Per Arild Reknes signed defamatory false instruments processed to deceive and “show” proper steps were followed when they were not.  Berit Osnes has been directly involved in perverting the course of justice since 2016 by aiding PGS compliance to “cover-up” their illegal acts.  Osnes abrogated  fiduciary duties under the Norwegian Code of Practice.  Workplace Mobbing is psychological terrorismPerpetrators of violent abuse, fraud, bribery and extortion must be held accountable for the health and safety of workers.
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019-pgsuk-directors.png
PGS Exploration UK Limited Directors are executives of PGS ASA (formally Petroleum Geo-Services ASA) [PGS]: Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS CEO & President; Gottfred Langseth, PGS CFO & EVP; Christin Steen-Nilsen, PGS Chief Accountant

Berit Osnes was an employee board of directors member on the Audit Team. She never responded to my concerns of PGS Compliance Team corruption. Rune Olav Pedersen was General Counsel and Legal Compliance prior to his rapid ascension to PGS CEO and President. He has been a principal in the alleged fraud, bribery, extortion, and embezzlement scandal. Terje Bjolseth, SVP Global HR is also a compliance team member, received the original 20 September 2013 grievance and signed the alleged forged 25 October 2013 MEMO.

Investigate Gareth Jone, PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, KT13 0NY, Human Resources (HR) Manager.
Investigate Gareth Jone, PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, KT13 0NY, Human Resources (HR) Manager.
Disturbed by the contents of my personnel file received through a subject access request in October 2014, PGS Exploration UK Limited wrote me a letter 22 December 2014 to clarify their position and threaten future litigation if I continued my inquiries. The 22 December 2014 letter is signed by David Nicholson, HR Manager (then) on behalf of PGS Exploration UK Limited (Directors: Jon Erik Reinhardsen, Gottfred Langseth, Christin Steen-Nilsen and Secretary Carl Richards.) The 22 December 2014 letter is ridiculous and raised more questions than it answered.
Carl Richards wanted me to delete all content mentioning his name. However, if one accepts the role of director or secretary there details become part of the public record.
In 2013, Rune Olav Pedersen was PGS General Counsel and Legal Compliance. Terje Bjolseth received the 20 September 2013 grievance document, chaired a 14 October 2013 grievance hearing along with EVP, Per Arild Reksnes. Both signed a important defamatory forged (alleged) document processed within my personnel file.

FACT: I am a US citizen. PGS Exploration UK Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, England, KT13 0NY [PGSUK] sponsored my Tier 2 visa to work in England from 27 September 2010. PGSUK then applied for my leave to remain (renewal) 15 July 2013. PGSUK also sponsored my dependent wife and two children

2013 PGS Exploration UK Limited Directors are executives of Norwegian parent company Petroleum Geo-Services ASA (PGS) [recently changed to PGS ASA].

  • Jon Erik Reinhardsen, PGS President & CEO
  • Gottfred Langseth, PGS EVP & CFO
  • Christin Steen-Nilsen, PGS Chief Accountant
  • Candida Pinto, PGSUK lawyer (before 13 September 2013)
  • Carl Richards, PGSUK lawyer (after 13 September 2013)

This is public information which directors agree to be shared with the public, including potential customers. I do not believe that directors have the legal authority to prohibit publishing their public information online as it relates to protected public interest disclosures (UK Public Interest Disclosure Act – PIDA), or whistleblowing, relating to the public alleged corrupt and criminal acts. Responsible directors should investigate allegations. Demand police investigation.

I have evidence that PGSUK is uttering forged documents as personal data used to illegally terminate a whistleblower. PGSUK also has provided duplicitous information to UK Border Agency.

Companies House data is public information which directors agree to be shared with the public, including potential customers. I do not believe that directors have the legal authority to prohibit publishing their public information online as it relates to protected public interest disclosures (UK Public Interest Disclosure Act – PIDA), or whistleblowing, especially as it relates to alleged corrupt and criminal acts perpetrated by COMPANY DIRECTORS!

Law abiding and responsible directors should investigate whistleblowing allegations.

Corrupt corporate hierarchies have virtually unlimited resources at their disposal that can be aimed to disempower and silence their victims.

###

Why is there No Investigation when Proof is Provided?

Victims of Corporate Crime and Abuse do not Possess the Legal Authority to Hold Those with Entrusted Corporate Power Accountable, only Government Law Enforcement Does.

I’ll be the first to admit that, public safety, it’s a new thing for this agency.

Alan Steen

I stood there amazed. I found it all hard to believe, that I, Des Nilsen, had actually done all that.

Dennis NilSEN, Scottish serial killer and necrophile

Open Letter to Board of Directors (18-Jun-2017)

The Norwegian Code of Practice for

Corporate Governance

To me, the thing that is worse than death is betrayal. You see, I could conceive of death, but could not conceive of betrayal. – Malcolm X

First, organizations might desire leaders but they structure themselves in ways that kill leadership.

Gareth Jones, The Real Thing (interview)
If the challenge doesn’t scare us, then it’s not that important. – Simon Sinek
A lie has many variations, the truth none. – African Proverb

When you were thinking rationally, you made a decision that was supposed to manifest your values. But then in the heat of the moment you skipped it. Now, this isn’t some hard activity we’re talking about. It doesn’t take much skill to close the computer, stand up, and walk away. But even though it’s simple, it’s anything but easy.

CARL RICHARDS, Time off is a prerequisite for good work (Not a reward for it)
That what you think that you are, that, you are. – Carsten Ostergaard Pedersen
Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid. – Ronald Reagan
Prayers said by good people are always good prayers – Willa Cather

###

Toxic Workplace Culture Information for Foreign-worker Whistleblowers

Toxic Workplace Culture Information for Foreign-worker Whistleblowers

###

Landau, Zeffert & Weir (LZW) Represented Me?

LZW Principal Phlip Landau is now with Landau Law (since January 2014)

WHY I WANT A POLICE INVESTIGATION

Initially Reported to ACTIONFRAUD 24 August 2015 – Never Investigated! This further damages the victim of crimes and harms all stakeholders dependent on knowing the truth and seeking justice.

My first contact with Philip Landau was made online following my reading an article published by him. It was this public professional expertise and notoriety which gave me a feeling of trust in contacting him and eventually engaging him. Philip Landau advised me from 11 October 2013 to 5 December 2013. Within my short initial inquiry seeking guidance, I highlighted:

  • I was a foreign worker being sponsored by a UK Company on a Tier 2 visa
  • I was being harassed, bullied and discriminated against (nationality) in the workplace
  • I believed that the UK company employer sponsor had breached their duty of care, duty of trust and confidence contractual obligations and had violated the Health and Safety Act 1974, as well as other things.
  • I had initiated the grievance process but was being proffered a settlement contract prior to a grievance hearing and I stated my UK employer was trying to “buy me off.”

Was this protected public disclosure or whistleblowing?

I was a foreign worker, US citizen, being sponsored by a UK Company on a Tier 2 visa. I was being bullied and harassed in the workplace and had submitted a grievance 20 September 2013 complaining of those issues. The bullies were framing a performance based termination, as if I were a UK/EEA resident worker. My grievance complained about abuse of the performance management system as a weapon used to bully, harass and intimidate me.

5 October 2012 UK Company personnel file meeting memo included in my personnel file (top). This was a secret meeting which I did not attend. I had been the target of negative workplace behaviors and had started to bring it to the attention of my boss’ boss (SS) and the HR Manager (HRM). (I was being gang-bullied (mobbed) and was beginning to complain.) HRM, et al. started the process to pad my personnel file with documentation supporting poor performance so that I could be terminated for cause. HRM is not following UK Company Personnel Handbook processes, procedures or best practices. There is no data to support such a malicious and unprofessional assessment and conclusions. Therefore, this is defamation and not privileged content. I believe that the HRM, SS, my supervisor (S), with authority from UK Company directors and secretary not sharing this information with is a breach of my contract of employment and their Duty of Care obligations to me and my family, whom they are sponsoring on dependent Tier 2 visas. This also shows that they are all knowingly in violation of their sponsorship requirements to UK Border Agency, by advancing the Tier 2 visa renewal process if they truly had these concerns. Landau should have also known about this document and never mentioned it to me, as well.

Philip Landau, was provided with a Redacted Copy of my 20 September 2013 Grievance Document Presented to the UK Company Employer Sponsor of my Tier 2 Visa.

Grievance Table of Contents, Preamble, Key Points, Summary

20 September 2013 Form of Grievance Presented to UK Company Tier 2 visa Sponsor
This is an actual excerpt from the grievance document which I presented to Norway Company executives, as well as UK Company executives 20 September 2013. Landau was contacted 11 October 2013 following my meeting with the UK Company HR Manager (HRM), 10 October 2013 at which time the HRM proffered an initial settlement contract agreement TO STOP THE LEGALLY GUARANTEED UNDER CONTRACT GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES which were initiated 20 September 2013. A grievance hearing was scheduled for 14 October 2013. Landau received a copy of my 21 page grievance with names redacted on 11 October 2013.

Even though some of Philip Landau’s initial advice seemed odd, I needed to trust him because I was a target of health harming workplace bullying and foreign worker. I had to do something and trust someone.

I feel that Philip Landau violated that trust categorically. He has never addressed my published concerns or private e-mails. Philip Landau has remained silent and will not simply explain what happened?

  • Philip Landau counseled to NOT follow the grievance procedure and to instead move toward an “enhanced settlement” with the UK employer sponsor of my Tier 2 visa.
  • Philip Landau minimized the importance and significance of being on a Tier 2 visa, my legal basis for being employed in England/UK, and my claims of discrimination based on nationality
  • Philip Landau never spoke directly about the prime motivation behind the presenting the grievance which were the health and safety concerns to me and my family being a target of workplace gang-bullying/mobbing.

Pre-Settlement Communications with Landau, Zeffertt and Weir Law (Philip Landau) [10 October 2013 to 30 October 2013]

The entire premise of my grievance was my disputing my UK employer’s attempt to place me on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). I Recognized it as a tactic of bullies and knew there was no documented basis to support a legitimate PIP. It appears as though Philip Landau helped create the documented basis out of whole cloth with my UK Company employer and Tier 2 visa sponsor.

I eventually did sign a settlement contract agreement.

My employment with the UK Company Tier 2 sponsor was terminated by the settlement agreement forwarded by Philip Landau and his assistant, Holly Rushton on 31 December 2013.

Sensing retaliation/blacklisting by my former employer, I submitted a subject access request citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) while in Houston, Texas. The contents of my UK Company personnel file contains defamatory forged instruments supporting a performance based termination. Philip Landau and Holly Rushton will not explain how this is possible? I do not know how a performance based termination is legal for a Tier 2 visa holder.

24 July 2013 Bully Defamatory Ambush Letter

I had only seen one (1) of the documents being processed within my UK Company personnel file prior to my receiving the personnel file in late 2014 in Houston, Texas. This one (1) document, a letter from my employer dated 24 July 2013, was the basis for my 21 page grievance supplemented by another 45 pages of evidence to support my presented argument. The 20 September 2013 grievance document is not being processed in the body of my personnel file and is only referenced within the signed settlement contract agreement. Only the settlement contract agreement bares my signature. It stands to reason that the dated documents were referenced and processed during settlement contract agreement negotiations, along with the grievance document, especially since defamation and misuse of the performance management system were specifically cited within the grievance document. The most significant alleged forged document is dated while Philip Landau was engaged as my representative solicitor on 25 October 2013.

25 OCTOBER 2013 MEMO

UK Sponsor Company Tier 2 Visa renewal process for US worker was initiated 15 May 2013 . The UK Company used the counsel and advice of a law firm, Watson, Farley and Williams (WFW) to advise on the preparation of Tier 2 visa application documents. What personal data was provided to WFW by the UK Company sponsor to support the application? WFW also advised and participated in the settlement contract agreement (SCA) negotiations from 1 November 2013 to 5 December 2013 that terminated my employment with the UK Company.

The Norwegian Geo-Services Company (NGSC) UK affiliate employed legal firm Watson, Farley & Williams (WFW) to counsel and review my Tier 2 visa application and dependent family members documentation. It was my claim that the Norway Company and UK affiliate BOTH owed ME and MY FAMILY a Duty of Care, and this duty was not fulfilled..

My former employer is currently uttering defamatory forged instruments. Defamatory forged instruments were created so that a foreign worker whistleblower could be illegally terminated for “performance” based reasons, rather than a claim for harassment, discrimination, bullying, defamation, and breach of contract at many levels. HR3 currently presides over these knowingly false instruments designed to blacklist the USA citizen whistleblower. HR3, a UK citizen, was working in Houston, Texas sharing the defamatory personal data to blacklist me. Any experienced HR professional would know the documents being processed were both non-compliant and illegal. HR3 processed the contents of my personnel file contents in 2013. HR3 should have also been aware of visa requirements for both UK and USA employees. UK Company claims that HR3 was an employee of UK Company in 2013 because sharing UK Company personal data would be a violation of the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) and now General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR). This contradicts his online LinkedIn profile. Further, I believe that it would have been illegal for UK Company to employ a “poor performer.” However, by making me a poor performer, this false information illegally verified by bribed lawyers could be shared with potential employers. This is blacklisting, which is illegal – also IN TEXAS. Further, misrepresenting HR3s agency to Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who oversee DPA/GDPR compliance, they were ALSO misrepresenting to the USA Immigration service. The Norway geo-services company needs to explain and be held accountable, starting with HR3! , The previous HR Manager in 2013 and has created and signed many of the (alleged) forged instruments which populate my personnel file. I did not work directly for Nicholson and the instruments have no counter-signature and are factually inaccurate. Yet, Philip Landau and Holly Rushton, who represented me, along with Rhodri Thomas, with Watson, Farley, and Williams – all experienced employment law solicitors processed these?
The grievance itself is almost irrelevant. The advice at this stage should have really focused on the grievance process. I was being gaslighted by Landau – an EXPERIENCED UK EMPLOYMENT SOLICITOR who had published content on such matters. It is how I discovered him.
For over a week, NOBODY from the NORWAY or UK COMPANY had contacted me with regard to the 20 September 2013 presented grievance or 14 October 2013 grievance hearing. The issue of my Tier 2 visa is brought-up in the 20 September 2013 grievance document. Indeed, the only reason relocation was likely considered in the settlement contract agreement terms and conditions was the fact that I was a foreign worker who insisted on at least being repatriated. ALL communications were through Philip Landau, who never seemed to address the stonewalling that was going on. I could not conceive of the Norway/UK Company behavior from former colleagues and so-called professionals.

20 September 2013 Grievance Document Presented to Norway / UK Company executives and also to my hired solicitor, Philip Landau. Philip was formally engaged (paid for services) on 22 October 2013.

The 24 July 2013 Ambush Letter:

I believe that Philip Landau must have been complicit in Uttering Forged Instruments. He has never explained the personnel records to me.

(Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3) was included with the 20 September 2013 presented grievance. However, the 11 September 2013 scheduled meeting was rescheduled for 20 September 2013. Among other things, this letter shows a collective conspiracy of intent by UK Company directors and secretary to bypass the UK government UK Border Agency legal reporting requirement and use forged defamatory personnel file records to harm and illegally process a termination of a Foreign Worker Whistleblower on a falsified basis. The personnel file references the 11 September 2013 meeting that never happened and omits the 20 September 2013 grievance document, except within the settlement contract agreement. Landau was reminded of this in the 24 October 2013 e-mail. I have to believe that Landau was complicit in uttering forged instruments/documents used to terminate my employment. Landau has never offered an explanation.

The 25-October-2013 MEMO is a FORGERY.  The Memo is not mentioned in a 25-October-2013 e-mail from my solicitor, Philip Landau (LZW).  Why not?  I believe Landau is compromised and allowing my legal rights to process my grievance to be denied through advocating a settlement agreement.

Landau knew that the copied recipients of the Memo had been accused within my grievance of misconduct, bullying, harassment and discrimination, along with my immediate supervisor.  There was no contact from any UK / Norway Company agents, most notably, the hosts following of the 14 October grievance hearing.  No minutes or right to appeal were ever provided, as required.  How is this possible for an experienced solicitor like Philip Landau?

It seems the entire fraud had been mapped out at this point. Nothing that I told Landau was considered. Watson, Farley and Williams’ Rhodri Thomas was gaslighting the performance narrative, even though ACAS states that both grievances and disciplinary matters c/should happen at the same time. The settlement was negotiated as a performance based settlement. The 25 October 2013 Memo was created to make it look like processes to support the performance based termination occurred. Problem is, NOBODY is INFORMING UK BORDER AGENCY, even after I bring up the matter of my Tier 2 visa MULTIPLE TIMES. NOT BEING AN EXPERT IN IMMIGRATION LAW IS IRRELEVANT. Watson, Farley and Williams is a large firm with many qualified lawyers on matters of visa’s. Why did Rhodri Thomas not question a performance based termination settlement contract agreement? The Norway/UK Company used one set of data to process the Tier 2 visa and ANOTHER FAKE SET OF FORGED DOCUMENTS to process the whistleblower termination. Conspiracy to defraud?

Two Years Too Late, Subject Access Requests to Watson, Farley & Williams and LZW confirms that Fake Data was used to process my termination settlement contract agreement.

« Older posts Newer posts »