The decision not to proceed with the complaint against St Albans-based Peter John Lashmar goes against the advice of its own reviewer of complaints, angering the alleged victim, IT specialist David Shaw. The independent reviewer considers disciplinary decisions made by the institute when a complainant is unhappy about action not being taken. However, the institute is not obliged to follow the advice of the reviewer, who in this case recommended the institute reconsider. Shaw blasted the 'lame' responses of the institute, adding: 'How can a public and so-called professional body allow such unprofessional behaviour to continue.' He added: 'This is a prima facie example of why self-regulation should be stamped out.' The former partners fell out in 1996. Lashmar allegedly began a campaign of harassment by filling out requests for information in newspapers resulting in Shaw being deluged by mail and phone calls. Lashmar also submitted a false claim for an alleged debt, for which the institute fined him £2,000. The institute said it decided not to proceed against Lashmar over the harassment as its handwriting expert expressed the view that it was only 'probable' that Lashmar had filled in the newspaper coupons.
Kicking Palantir off of AWS is among their demands, too
Rafaela Vasquez was watching The Voice at the time of the crash, new evidence shows
PUBG price slashed on Steam after selling more than 50 million copies - as daily player numbers plunge
Use the same password for every website? It might be time to change them all