The Mayor has responded
The Mayor has now responded to our letter under the pre-action protocol. Unfortunately, rather than withdraw his decision, he has sought to justify his unlawful consultation, despite it attracting further criticism this week on prime time TV, with Rhion Jones, of the independent Consultation Institute, describing it as "abysmal" on BBC 1's London Evening News. We are consequently ...Read More >>
My name is Paul Kohler. In 2014 I was attacked by 4 men who forced their way into our family home one evening. Thankfully I was saved by the bravery of officers from my local police station, who arrived within 8 mins of my eldest daughter dialling 999, and rescued me from, what would otherwise have been, a murderous assault that left me with extensive injuries and permanent double vision.
The Mayor of London is now closing that station, along with at least 36 others in the capital, after a cursory and inadequate public consultation. I want to take him to court to ensure he consults Londoners properly and gives sensible consideration to the various options available to him.
Why is the Mayor of London closing police stations in a period of rising crime and increased terrorist threat?
The government has cut over £1billion from the Metropolitan Police budget and the Mayor is closing the police stations to partly cover the funding shortfall.
Why challenge the Mayor's decision if it was the result of Government cuts?
I am not blaming the Mayor for the Government's inexplicable decision to cut police funding at a time when both crime and terrorist activity are on the rise. However I am challenging his inadequate and partisan approach to the problem, which was described by the independent Consultation Institute as "the worst consultation of 2017". The Mayor's decision to restrict London to only one 24/7 police station per borough, for example, is far too rigid and ignores the needs of different areas. He has also failed to provide any hard evidence or figures to support his various assertions of the savings to be made and the efficiencies to be gained, nor to back up his assurance that his policy will not put Londoners at greater risk.
Why does it matter?
It is important that Londoners are permitted to exercise their right to be properly consulted and listened to before decisions are made that affect their daily lives. I do not believe any sensible consultation would have resulted in the Mayor confirming nearly all his original proposals, which were the result of an unimaginative, simplistic and inadequately researched assessment of the capital's current and future policing needs.
What will the money be used for?
I have instructed the leading public law solicitors, Leigh Day, and one of the top silks in the field, David Wolfe QC, who have both agreed to act on a heavily discounted basis. The initial target will pay for their substantive advice and all correspondence under the pre-action protocol with the enhanced figure set to cover the subsequent court costs.
Londoners deserve a meaningful consultation that addresses, rather than ignores, their concerns over the closure of so many of their police stations and with your help we can make that happen.
The Mayor has responded
The Mayor has now responded to our letter under the pre-action protocol. Unfortunately, rather than withdraw his decision, he has sought to justify his unlawful consultation, despite it attracting further criticism this week on prime time TV, with Rhion Jones, of the independent Consultation Institute, describing it as "abysmal" on BBC 1's London Evening News. We are consequently continuing to prepare our case and are now seeking the help of anyone who made a written response to the consultation. If you did, and are willing to share it with me and our lawyers, please forward it to firstname.lastname@example.org
We've issued the Mayor with formal notice under the pre-action protocol
The starting pistol in Paul Kohler v Mayor of London for Policing and Crime has now been fired.
Sadiq Khan today received a formal legal letter stating that we believe the original consultation and consequent decision were legally flawed and unlawful on two grounds:
1) In making the decision the Mayor unlawfully applied specific cost saving criteria which had not been explained to consultees and meant certain matters were predetermined.
2) The Mayor failed to give proper consideration to the consultation responses.
I have consequently asked him to set aside his decision and conduct a second lawful consultation; following which he has been asked to conscientiously consider the responses and make a fresh decision. Failing that he is required to provide various information within 10 working days which we will review before seeking permission to proceed with Judicial Review.
A copy of the letter will be posted to all those who have pledged their support in my next email update.
We've hit our initial target
I am pleased to report we hit our initial target last night allowing us to proceed with issuing a formal letter to the Mayor under the pre-action protocol informing him that we are considering applying for judicial review.
Unfortunately announcements to the press, from his office, show little evidence the Mayor is willing to back down and it thus looks likely we will end up in court. I am consequently continuing to appeal more widely for funds to meet the costs of the likely battle and have been fortunate to secure some press interest over the last couple of days, including both an article in the Times and appearances on ITV London News, Good Morning Britain and the Vanessa Feltz Show on Radio London.
I am also delighted to have been asked to write the following op ed by the Daily Mail, which is their main feature in today's edition. I'd be grateful if you could share it amongst family, friends and colleagues, throughout London, as I am now keen to reach all those affected by these cuts.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5192945/PAUL-KOHLET-police-stations-shut.html
There are no public comments on this case page.