All Members
The Management Committee for 60+ "Sixty Plus"

On Wednesday 18.5.94, I went to see Ms Geraldine Timlin and Mr Ian MacAulay at the 60+ "Sixty Plus" offices, regarding my application for a written reference, to assist me in my search for employment.

A copy of this invitation from Ms Geraldine Timlin is enclosed.

At this meeting, Mr MacAulay appeared to be playing the part of an observer and said almost nothing. I found Ms Timlin's reasons for not giving me a reference an insult to the mind.

The reference that I wanted was essentially an up-dated version of the reference that she gave me a year ago, a copy of this is enclosed, the information it contains is as true today as it was then.

Ms Timlin gave two reasons why she would not provide me with a reference, it is difficult to decide which reason stinks of corruption the most. It beggars belief that she even thought of trying to get me to accept her rationale.

Quite some time ago, Ms Geraldine Timlin allocated a job to me that was a bit different, it was a job that was going to "pay" me. At this time, Ms Timlin was aware that I was in an anxious frame of mind, because I was getting reminders about my unpaid TV licence. I am unemployed and have been prosecuted once already for non-payment.

This job was far bigger than anything that was normally undertaken by 60+ "Sixty Plus" as part of it's "practical help" scheme. The job was to be done for a woman called Ms Davies, of No 1, Yatton House, Dalgarno Way, London W10. I have to say that I am unsure about that address. But the name of the house is certainly correct. The task to be undertaken, was to wash from top to bottom, and then re-paint a fire damaged room. It took about a week to do.

Although unemployed, I did not quote Ms Davies a price for the job from the outset. I realised that she herself was not rich, and left the price of the job "open". I felt sure that I would be offered enough cash to buy my TV licence, plus a few beers. That would get me off the hook and I would be satisfied.

When the job was completed, Ms Davies said:- "I have no money just now, but there will be something for you at the office next week". I did not approach her again, but waited to hear from her. She eventually came into the 60+ "Sixty Plus" office, I was not around, but she spoke to Ms Timlin. I was told by Ms Timlin that Ms Davies wanted to see me, to give me a couple of packets of cigarettes as payment for the work that I did for her. A couple of packets of cigarettes? At the time, this appeared to be as much of a surprise to Ms Timlin, as it did to myself.

Ms Timlin told me that Ms Davies was not available by phone, and that she, "Ms Timlin", was far too busy to go and see her to sort things out. Ms Timlin also pointed out that Ms Davies was frequently out, and that I should put a note through her door if I did not find her in when I called. I wrote a note to Ms Davies and showed it to Ms Timlin, it was at Ms Timlin's suggestion that I re-wrote the note, adding some indication of urgency and asking Ms Davies to contact the 60+ "Sixty Plus" office, this I did. I then delivered this letter myself, and put it through Ms Davies letter box.

I would like you to take note of what I have said in the above paragraph, it might prove to be highly significant.

Ms Davies had no way of knowing that I was going to see her a second time. I went to see Ms Davies after she had contacted 60+ "Sixty Plus" to say that she knew nothing about any sort of promised payment, this was in response to the note that I had put through the door at Ms Timlins suggestion. When I got to Ms Davies flat (I went direct from 60+ "Sixty Plus" it was an unplanned decision) I got the feeling that the situation was "stage managed". Ms Davies had a friend with her, a woman who just sat and said nothing, there was an air of "preparedness" about her. I told Ms Davies that there had been some confusion, and suggested that we go into her kitchen to discuss the situation, this we did, for a very brief time. Ms Davies agreed to come to the 60+ "Sixty Plus" offices, to have a meeting to resolve the situation, this was at the invitation of Ms Geraldine Timlin. This meeting was attended by Ms Davies, Ms Geraldine Timlin, Ms Patricia Mohabier and myself, I, however, was asked to leave the room for the latter part of the meeting. Before I left the meeting, it had been established and agreed by all, myself included, that the misunderstanding was entirely the fault of Ms Geraldine Timlin of 60+ "Sixty Plus", and that Ms Timlin had allocated the job to me while under the wrong impression.

I have neither seen nor heard of Ms Davies since then. That is, not untill my meeting with Ms Geraldine Timlin and Mr Ian MacAulay on 18.4.94. At this meeting, Ms Timlin pointed out that there had been two reports from female customers that they had felt threatened by me. One of the customers was the Ms Davies that I have spoken of already. I am a complete stranger to Ms Davies, and given the situation (of Ms Timlins making) I can understand how Ms Davies may have been harbouring all sorts of fantasies about me. The other complaint, it is alleged, took place in the last two months. I don't know anything about it and Ms Timlin won't tell me.

Even if this second complaint is true, and I dispute that, I still have a very good record for the past two years. Being a member of the human race, I am allowed to have the odd "off day".

Yours sincerely

Sean Bryson