The Lincoln man convicted with attacking another male with a hammer in Lincoln last year has been handed an 18-year prison sentence.

Kris James Bradley (23) of Kent Street in Lincoln was handed the sentence for attempted murder at Birmingham Crown Court on March 31.

Kris Bradley will serve a custodial sentence of 15 years, of of which he will serve at least 10 in prison before being released on licence.

Meanwhile, Daniel Ross Burrell (22) of St Nicholas Street in Lincoln was convicted of assisting an offender. He was sentenced to four and a half years in prison.

Finally, Alex Taylor (22) of Eastbourne Street in Lincoln pleaded guilty to encouraging or assisting the commission of an indictable offence at an earlier hearing. He was given 16 months in prison.

As previously reported, the incident happened at around 12.50am on September 1, 2013, on Hungate in Lincoln, an area with bars and clubs.

A man from Scunthorpe, Matthew Probert (21), was attacked with a claw hammer, which was left embedded in his skull.

Speaking today, the victim’s father, Mark Probert, said: “We are extremely satisfied as a family with the outcome of the trial against all three defendants and the sentences passed today, to what was a truly horrific and unjust act of violence against my son Matthew.

“We would like to thank Lincolnshire Police for their sterling support immediately after the attack and their meticulous investigation in securing a justified conviction. I would also like to thank personally the CPS and legal team involved.”

“It goes without question, if it was not for the immediate and prompt assistance and first aid given to Matthew by the door supervisors and emergency services at the scene, the outcome could have been a far lot worse, and therefore a sincere and heartfelt thanks must go to all personnel who were involved.

“The doctors and medical teams at both Lincoln and the Sheffield Royal Hallamshire hospitals must also be thanked for the outstanding treatment and care that was given to Matthew.”

“Finally a big thank you must go to all close family friends and well-wishers, many of whom we don’t know, who expressed their kind words of support to both Matthew and the family.

“Matthew continues to make small steps daily to a remarkable recovery and as such he has very much learnt to take every day as it comes.

“Let’s not forget the seriousness of the injuries he sustained and as such we are all very attentive to the length and time the healing process will take for him to make to a full and healthy recovery.”

DC Martin Ryder of Lincolnshire Police added: “The actions of Christopher Bradley showed nothing other than an attempt to kill Matthew Probert.

“In many ways the physical injury he sustained that night, however horrific, is now only one element of his continuing recovery.

“Matthew was on the brink of beginning a professional career in the sport of rugby which he loves, but now he faces the challenges of rebuilding his future, his confidence and his fitness.

“Long after the media and police have left his life this will be Matthew’s real challenge but I am hopeful through his positive attitude and continued support from his family and friends that he will have a bright and successful future.

“As police officers we are here to assist in the course of justice and try to protect the public whenever possible from dangerous individuals such as Christopher Bradley.

“I know that in some small way the conviction of Bradley, Burrell and Taylor has given Matthew and his family some comfort. If we have managed to prevent a similar attack in the future through these convictions then that is clearly something to be thankful for.

“The response of the public on that night was superb and for that reason, and through our determination as investigators, such attacks remain extremely rare in our city and county.”

A former Pizza Express female employee in Lincoln is taking action after alleging that the firm squeezed her out of a job because she got pregnant, a tribunal has heard.

Judge John McMillan was told at the opening of a three-day employment tribunal held at Lincoln Magistrates that claimant Jennifer Sammut (28) has taken action based on maternity discrimination.

Miss Sammut was a chef at Pizza Express and had hoped to return after the birth of her two-year-old daughter Bella in 2012.

Read the court reports from day one, day two, day three, our roundup and our analysis

— Update at 5pm on April 14

The woman claims her employer discriminated against her because she was pregnant, and says she felt bullied before her maternity leave started, the tribunal was told.

Jennifer Sammut said she was given a dressing down for being late one morning at Pizza Express, even though she was three minutes early.

“I was reprimanded, but I was not late,” she said. “I wasn’t wrong, but I felt I needed to explain that I would have been there earlier If I hadn’t had to stop to be sick. I was told morning sickness was not an excuse.”

The tribunal heard that Miss Sammut felt exhausted during the early stages of her pregnancy. It was put to her that her exhaustion was noticeable and her employer suggested she be moved from her job as chef in the kitchen to waitressing.

“That is not what I was told,” she said. “I was told I was being demoted to waiting staff. I felt bullied into taking that demotion. Nothing was mentioned about my exhaustion. As my pregnancy progressed, it was felt that my belly was going to get bigger, and there was limited space in the kitchen.”

Miss Sammut wanted flexible hours to suit her child care arrangements when she was due to return to work in December 2012, but none could be found to suit, the tribunal was told.

Miss Sammut mentioned that a chef brought in to cover her maternity leave was given a permament contract, and she felt she would not be welcome back.

It was put to her that the new chef’s contract was changed because he was replacing hours lost by another colleague who had taken time off sick with stress, and there was nothing sinister in the appointment, the tribunal was told.

Pizza Express representative Ian Hartley said it was a question of balance. The company could not give her the 16 flexible hours across the day she wanted, but Miss Sammut said she had been willing to compromise or take other jobs such as cleaning, but was rejected. This could only be possible if she gained hours at the expense of other staff losing hours.

The hearing is set to last for two more days.

Read the latest from the second day of the hearing

A Lincoln woman is taking action against her former employers, Pizza Express, who she says sacked her because she was pregnant, claims she was never told that working three days per week was impossible because of other workers’ shift patterns, a tribunal has heard.

Jennifer Sammut (28) told the hearing that she had heard that giving her the hours she wanted would displace the hours other colleagues could work.

Read what happened in the first day in court

She felt the company failed to investigate the times she could have worked properly and based it on incorrect facts.

She also claimed that her allegations she was bullied before her maternity leave started were not properly looked into by her former employers.

She said “I just wanted my job back. I wanted to work, to put clothes on my daughter’s back.”

When put to Miss Sammut again that giving her the hours she wanted would displace other shifts and leave limited rota options for other staff, she said “I only wanted 16 hours – there are 40 to be worked in a week.”

— Updated at 5pm on April 15

There was no intention to discriminate against a female employee who was told she could not return to her job as a pizza chef after the birth of her baby, a tribunal heard.

Pizza Express Manager Shelley Whitworth said all options to accommodate flexible working hours were looked at to help Jennifer Sammut get back to work.

Giving evidence on the second day of the hearing at Lincoln Magistrates Court, Mrs Whitworth said no compromise could be reached between Miss Sammut’s need to work around child care and the firm’s business needs.

“She wanted two days from 9-5 but that was not possible because it would only leave one day shift for five or six chefs to argue over,” she said.

Representing herself, Miss Sammut cross-examined the witness and put to her that she had no experience in handling flexible working applications.

She also failed to give out the correct email address and phone number for Miss Sammut to submit her application, but Mrs Whitworth denied this saying that she didn’t know it and had no reason to use it in the past.

Mrs Whitworth also denied that she told Miss Sammut that she had to put her daughter with a child minder until as late at 10pm in order to be able to work.

“I was throwing out all sorts of options, trying to reach a compromise, but she wanted the hours 9am to 5pm two days per week,” Mrs Whitworth said.

She also denied that she had tried to make Miss Sammut agree to staying on later after 6pm when her child care would no longer be available.

“I just wanted to know how flexible she could be within the hours she had, but I never suggested that she put her child in care until 10pm, nor that she had to stay longer, then maybe a few minutes after her shift ended, for the staff changeover if necessary,” she said.

The tribunal, which continues tomorrow, was told that in arranging flexible working time it was also up to the employee to be flexible enough to reach a compromise that would suit the needs of the employer and employee.

A couple from Lincoln have been sentenced each to three years in prison after stealing more than £200,000 from vulnerable people via a charity they were running.

Peter Childs (61) and Alison Childs (48) exploited vulnerable members of the Lincoln and District Mencap charity (LDM) based on Tentercroft Street over a number of years through their handling of funds.

The charity was affiliated to Royal Mencap, but operated independently with help from charitable donations and a grant from Lincolnshire County Council.

The couple were on trial at Lincoln Crown Court over the past six weeks.

Dishonesty offences

The charity works with residents with varying degrees of learning difficulties and helps them to live independently in the community.

Some of these people paid regular Utility and Maintenance Payments (UMP) to the charity so they could pay bills on their behalf.

However, while this money would legitimately go towards bills, the amount required by the Childs couple was higher, meaning they could keep surplus for themselves.

For example, two brothers were members who lived together in a small flat and paid over £30,000 cash in UMP to LDM between 2006 and 2011 for the payment of their water, gas, electricity and telephone bills.

In 2007, Alison Childs instructed staff at LDM to collect savings from members to assist them in their financial management. The pair, Richard and Roger Fogg, handed over about £13,000 in savings.

The members gave this money in good faith that it would be secured for their future needs, however it was kept and spent by the Childs couple.

Then, in September 2007 the couple employed Lithuanian woman Inga Stasytyte as their housekeeper.

However, instead of paying her wage themselves, the pair claimed she was an employee at LDM and she was paid her salary from the charity.

Additionally, Peter Childs fathered a child with Stasytyte, but claimed she was on LDM maternity leave in order to receive maternity pay. The charity also ended up paying around £9,000 in rent to Stasytyte.

In 2010, Peter Childs suffered a stroke and Alison became his carer, meaning she spent less time at the LDM offices.

Despite this, she still ordered the collection of the UMP payments and attended the office to collect the cash.

However, it was at this point staff, handling more tasks now the Childs were out of office more, began to notice the UMP payments were excessive in comparison with the bills.

Accommodation officer John Webb then investigated the payments by members and reported the fraud to the police.

A police financial investigation headed by John Hopkinson and DC Helen McGill found on January 1, 2006, the four accounts belonging to LDM had a total credit of around £75,000, but in November 1, 2011, the accounts were in debt to around £1,800 despite the £103,000 grant from council.

The majority of this loss went from LDM to the Childs’ personal accounts to fund their lifestyle.

When questioned about the dishonesty offences both denied the charges, with Peter Childs stating he was entitled to the money as honorariums for his various roles within the charity and Alison Childs denying any involvement in LDM finances.

Guilty plea

The trial contained 29 counts of offences of theft, fraud by false representation and fraud by abuse of position.

Prior to the trial, Peter Childs pleaded guilty to one count of false accounting in relation to the payments made to Inga Stasytyte and abuse of his position by dishonestly using the savings belonging to five of the members for his own purposes.

The jury found the couple guilty of:

• 13 counts relating to theft of UMP from 13 of the members of LDM between January 2006 until November 2011.
• 12 counts relating to the defrauding by abuse of position of the Cold Weather Payments and the DLA for 12 of the members of LDM.
• One count against Alison Childs in relation to the savings of five members that Peter Childs had already pleaded guilty to.
• One count of theft of savings from one other member for which both were also found guilty.

Prison sentence

At the end of the trial, Judge Sean Morris, Recorder of Lincoln, made special mention of Sarah Circk and John Webb and awarded them the High Sheriff Award and £400 each for their diligence in exposing the Childs’ offending.

DC Helen McGill, of Lincoln CID, said: “I am very pleased with the sentences, I think they accurately reflect the seriousness of the offences.

“What Peter and Alison Childs did was systematically exploit vulnerable people who trusted them and gave them in good faith money that they thought would be secure for their future needs.

“It has not only had a terrible effect on the victims, some of whom handed over thousands of pounds, but could also have a wider impact on the trust people have in charities.

“We hope that the seriousness of the sentences imposed today tells people that Lincolnshire Police works hard to bring to justice anyone committing these types of offences, and sends a very strong and clear message to any criminals committing similar offences.”

A rota was created for a male employee who asked for reduced hours when he was ill, day three of the employment tribunal looking into pregnancy discrimination allegations at Pizza Express in Lincoln has heard.

Jennifer Sammut (28), the claimnat, said she was told she could not work day shifts over two or three days because it would be unfair to other staff.

Read the court reports from day one and day two

However, the tribunal heard that the male employee suffering stress was given day and short shifts, and these were also made available to Miss Sammut towards the end of her pregnancy, when she became exhausted.

Pizza Express manager Shelley Whitworth says these shifts then disappeared from the rota in May after the male employee left and Miss Sammut went on maternity leave.

Regional manager Steven Brighty chaired an appeal meeting after Miss Sammut’s application for flexible working was turned down. He was accused of bias when he upheld the original decision that flexible working for Miss Sammut would be unfair on other staff.

He said: “I was completely independent and had no preconceived idea of the issues that were brought up and discussed in that meeting.” He said he trusted Mrs Whitworth’s judgement and professionalism based on how she managed the business and treated her staff.

The hearing continues. This story will be updated later in the day.

Two Lithuanian men were handed jail sentences at Lincoln Crown Court for a series of high-value car thefts in Lincolnshire and surrounding areas.

Andrius Jonaitis (33) from Harlaxton, Grantham, was jailed for four years and six months for eight offences of motor theft.

Modestas Gruzdziunas (31) also from Harlaxton, Grantham was given a 12 month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty to two offences of attempted theft.

The Lithuanian men were arrested in Lincolnshire after a cross-county investigation in November 2013 in Lincolnshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire and Cambridgeshire.

It was found the duo stole a number of expensive cars by breaking into them, usually via sunroof, and using an On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) device to clone keys and drive away in minutes.

The device was found at Jonaitis’ home, with two blank Range Rover keys.

Overall, the pair stole 10 4 x 4 vehicles, all without the original keys. The stolen vehicles were valued at around £60,000 each new, or £300,000 second hand.

Investigations began after a Range Rover Vogue TDV8 was found in the car park of The Premier Inn, Grantham.

The vehicle was parked securely in the middle of the car park, but displayed different registration details on the number plate and tax disc. The car had been stolen from Lowdham in Nottinghamshire.

Two days later, a Land Rover Range Rover Sport was stolen from New Street, Sleaford. The owner had both sets of keys at his home address, but there was glass on the floor where the vehicle was parked.

Police found the car had a tracking device installed, so within minutes managed to locate it on the A46 in Lincoln.

At 8pm that night, a car approached the Range Rover and two men got out — one of which was Jonaitis.

He looked around the car, trying to make sure no-one could see him, while the other man waited in a Mazda.

Jonaitis tried to escape on foot when police approached, but he was quickly caught and arrested on suspicion of theft of a motor vehicle. Gruzdziunas was also arrested at the scene.

After this, it was soon found that the pair had stolen five other vehicles, one of which was in Lincolnshire.

DC Richard Nethercott, of Grantham CID, said: “The fact that the judge in this case has seen fit to remove these two men from the streets for such a lengthy period of time accurately reflects the gravity of their offending.

“For the victims, these crimes have caused them distress, a lot of inconvenience, and a lot of time putting things in order after their vehicles were targeted.

“Jonaitis and Gruzdziunas were involved in this complex, organised, and very technical conspiracy to steal high-value cars where the vehicles and victims were specifically targeted. For that reason, these two men very much deserve the prison sentences they have been handed.

“Lincolnshire Police carried out an in-depth investigation that spanned not just our own county but that of our neighbouring forces as well.

“By working with experts and colleagues in other forces and securing convictions in this case we hope that a very strong and clear message is sent to other criminals involved in this type of crime – that they will be identified and they will be brought to justice.”

A company accused of discriminating against a pregnant employee has denied allegations that managers demoted her, replaced her and left her no alternative but to resign.

An employment tribunal held at Lincoln Magistrates Court heard that senior staff at the city’s Pizza Express restaurant had suggested that Jennifer Sammut (28) be moved from her job in the kitchen to front of house so that she did not work in extreme hot or cold temperatures or carry heavy boxes in her condition. It was not meant as a demotion and there was no intention to change her pay scale.

Manager Damian Maloney said: “Rather than being seen as a problem, pregnant staff returning to work are seen as an asset – especially if they can work very busy times like weekends.”

Operations manager Carl Stokes said there were hours waiting for Miss Sammut on her return from maternity leave. He said a replacement chef brought in to cover her period of absence was given a permanent contract due to other staff leaving while she was away.

Head chef Lakshama Fennell-Ross denied he had said morning sickness was not an excuse when on one occasion Miss Sammut was accused of being late. He denied he reprimanded her her for not working quick enough or hard enough.

“We had a discussion about how a very busy shift had gone afterwards but I did not reprimand her,” he said.

On the occasion when he had discussed with her manager Shelly Whitworth about her changing roles, Mr Fennell-Ross said Miss Sammut wanted to keep the hours she had and did not want to work as a waitress.

“She was suffering from exhaustion and she was emotional as well which is why she could have been upset at that meeting,” he said.

He denied that he was suggesting that she had burst into tears because she was a hormonal pregnant woman.

The three-day hearing has now ended.

Read the court reports from day one, day two and day three

The tribunal panel will meet again in May to decide the outcome of the case and notify the parties by post with full reasons given for the decision they make.

If Miss Sammut wins her case a remedial hearing will be held to decide on compensation, if appropriate, on a date to be fixed.

It’s not easy for an amateur to battle against the legal system and professional lawyers, but single mum and former pizza chef Jennifer Sammut faced that adversary for what she believes was the right thing to do.

The 28-year-old, with an 18-month-old daughter, is on a low income and couldn’t afford professional legal representation when she decided to take her former employers Pizza Express to a tribunal claiming pregnancy and maternity discrimination.

She faced her opponents in senior management, and their qualified and articulate advocate, with courage and gave as good as she got – if a little wayward and irrelevant at times because of her inexperience.

She delivered her cross examination with intelligence, passion and gritty determination to try and prove her case and said after the hearing that she felt it was the right thing to do.

Her former employers denied all the allegations.

She brought her claim in July 2012 before the introduction of fees for tribunal hearings came in April 2013. She would not be able to afford the payment today.

If forced to pay she would have had to abandon her case and she would have felt that justice was not heard.

Whether justice is done remains to be seen until the Tribunal panel in Lincoln decides the outcome in May based on all the evidence they have read and heard.

Government made the changes to Tribunals in a bid to help small businesses which claimed too often cases with no merit were brought before Tribunal hearings.

This led to high costs in responding to action brought against them — or expensive settlements to avoid the costs of legal action that might be brought against them.

Unions say people who feel badly treated at work should have an easy and affordable means of redress and they are against the changes.

Read the court reports from day one, day two, day three, and our roundup

A Lincoln man has been jailed for two years for killing a pedestrian at a Lincoln crossing, after wearing the wrong glasses while driving.

Lincoln Crown Court heard that Peter Conroy (73), who is blind in his right eye and has impaired vision in his left, drove into Audrey Noden (93) and her daughter Margaret Elvidge (63) at a zebra crossing on Boultham Park Road on September 4, 2012.

He was driving a Ford Mondeo at 15mph when he hit the two women. Mrs Noden was rushed to hospital with a fractured pelvis and leg.

She spent a month in hospital before being transferred to a nursing home where she later died.

The court heard that Conroy had been wearing his reading glasses at the time, instead of his long vision spectacles, and had reportedly narrowly avoided two other crashes before the incident.

Conroy, of Shakespeare Street in Lincoln, was recovering from a stroke at the time and had ignored signals from other motorists suggesting him to pull over.

Conroy had also failed to reveal that he was partially blind and suffered from glaucoma on his driving license renewal.

He was given a roadside eye test at the scene to test the legal sight requirement of 20 metres. He was at less than four metres before he could give an accurate reading.

Conroy was jailed for two years and banned from driving for 10 years.

His licence has already been revoked by the DVLA.

A man appeared at Lincoln Magistrates Court on Saturday, May 24, charged with two counts related to human trafficking and sexual exploitation in Lincolnshire.

Marcin Wawrzynowski (29), of Grosvenor Road in Skegness, was one of the three men Lincolnshire Police arrested on May 22 on suspicion of being involved in human trafficking in the Kirton area near Boston.

The other two, a 22-year-old man from Hounslow and a 34-year-old man from Skegness, have been released on police bail to return to the police station at a later date for further enquiries.

Wawrzynowski was charged with two counts under the Asylum and Immigration Act 2006 of intentionally arranging or facilitating the travel of a person within the UK/another country with a view to their sexual exploitation.

He was remanded in custody to appear at Lincoln Crown Court via video link on May 29.

An asbestos removal company has been fined more than £150,000 after it exposed workers to dangerous fibres during the demolition of a former school building in Lincoln.

Angus Group Ltd, based in Paisley, Scotland, was found guilty at Lincoln Magistrates’ Court on May 27 of eight breaches of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006, and was fined £109,000 and ordered to pay a further £42,100 in costs.

Magistrates heard that Angus Group Ltd did not properly manage the removal of asbestos-containing materials at the site of the former Ermine Infants’ School on Thoresway Drive in Lincoln during March 2012.

Angus Group Ltd were sub-contracted to carry out the asbestos removal work on behalf of the contractors demolishing the school, owned by Lincolnshire County Council. The site was being demolished after the school buildings were replaced by a new school.

Before work began, an asbestos survey was carried out to identify the areas in the building containing asbestos, and recommending how this was to be treated to ensure safe removal.

The survey found the end walls of the school’s main hall were covered in a spray-applied coating of asbestos, and should therefore be removed by a licensed contractor under safe, controlled conditions.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigations found these recommendations were ignored by Angus Group Ltd. The asbestos spray coating on the main hall walls was chiseled off using power tools without any screens, enclosures or air extraction systems in place. Asbestos-containing material was bagged and carried to a skip outside.

Angus Group Ltd notified the main contractors that the asbestos removal work on the main hall was finished, but when the project agents and main contractors visited the next day, they found the hall covered in dust and patches of asbestos material still on the wall.

HSE discovered a catalogue of safety breaches at the site during their investigation. The exact location of asbestos material wasn’t identified, and the work only took one day to complete rather than the planned seven.

Risk assessments were too generic; enclosures, segregation and containment measures were inadequate; plans lacked detail; access and transit routes through the buildings weren’t clear; employees lacked specific instruction, and there was no reference to the original asbestos survey in the plan.

HSE experts concluded the company’s safeguards to control the asbestos risks were seriously inadequate leading to an unnecessary release and spread of dangerous asbestos fibres and dust.

The plan and risk assessment for the asbestos removal work in the building’s boiler room were also found to be confused and a decontamination unit was not powered. HSE served a prohibition notice to halt the work on the boiler room until the unit was properly powered and working.

Fifteen of the 17 samples taken in and around the hall proved positive for asbestos. A later analysis, which included other parts of the building, found asbestos fibres in 15 of 34 samples, indicating asbestos had spread throughout the building.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Martin Giles said: “Angus Group Ltd is an experienced licensed contractor, and was fully aware of all the hazards and all its responsibilities to ensure safety at all times.

“It is deplorable a company that does know better failed to properly manage the dangers of this hidden killer.”

A Lincoln doctor has admitted failings after he misdiagnosed a patient with piles instead of bowel cancer.

Lincoln man Mark Browne (46) died in 2012 after he was told in 2008 by Dr Nicholas Smith of Birchwood Medical Practice he had piles, and a rectal growth wasn’t spotted.

The Lincoln GP admitted liability at High Court in Nottingham in 2013, with Browne’s widow and three children receiving undisclosed compensation this week.

In court, it was heard that Dr Smith had not taken the patients’ symptoms into account, and had not carried out a proper examination.

The family solicitor added that had the growth been spotted, Mark Browne could have survived.

Dr Smith failed to comply with NICE Referral Guidelines because didn’t refer his patient to a cancer consultant within a fortnight.

It was only nine months later after symptoms persisted that Browne visited another GP and was referred to hospital.

After radiation chemotherapy and surgery, Mark Browne died in August 2012.

Mark’s widow, Teresa Browne said: “Mark was a very hard-working, loving husband and father. We had been married for 17 years. When he was first diagnosed with bowel cancer it was a huge shock but he was determined not to give in.

“Just two months after the first operation in February 2010, he started training at the local gym because he was an active person who hated being stuck in the house.

“He insisted on returning to work as a road-builder in May even though the chemotherapy made him feel unwell.

“Follow-up appointments with the oncologist initially suggested Mark was in remission but our world was shattered when we were told in March 2011 that the cancer had spread to his lungs and it was not treatable.

“Mark continued to work for as long as he was able to but in the final months he became pretty much housebound.

“I gave up work and provided all his care, including washing him and changing his clothes and our elder daughter helped to run the house and look after her sister and younger brother.

“Mark slipped into a coma on 7th August 2012 and died in his sleep two days later.”

She added: “My husband put his complete trust in his GP and when he reassured him that there was nothing seriously wrong he believed him.

“In hindsight we both wished he’d got a second opinion or questioned the doctor again when things didn’t clear up. My advice to anyone in a similar situation is to insist on a second opinion or second examination – even if you think you are being a nuisance – rather than risk what happened to Mark.

“Doctors are only human – they’re not 100% infallible – and sometimes get things wrong. On this occasion our GP made the wrong call and by the time we found out it was too late for Mark.”

“I still grieve for my husband and it’s very painful for me to talk about what happened. However, I made a promise to Mark before he died that I would speak out and share his message that men should listen to what their bodies are telling them and act accordingly.”

Neil Clayton of Lime Solicitors said: “If Dr Smith had correctly referred Mark in December 2008, and Mark had been operated on shortly afterwards, it could have avoided the return of the tumour and he would in all likelihood still be alive today.

“Mark was a much-loved husband and father of three and was also a well known and respected member of his local community.

“He was a keen bodybuilder and to see such a fit and active person suffer a slow, painful and ultimately fatal illness was heartbreaking for all his family and friends.

“Although nothing will turn back the clock, today’s settlement will provide some financial help to the family he leaves behind.”

Campaigners against Lincolnshire County Council’s decision to cut library services attended the High Court on Tuesday, July 8, for the first of a two-day judicial review of the case.

Some 10 members of the Save Lincolnshire Libraries campaign group attended the hearing, as Lincoln resident Simon Draper, and his wife Timber, challenged the County Council over their decision to hand over more than 30 libraries to volunteers.

The executive at the council approved plans to save £2 million in December 2013 — a settlement that would cut more than 170 jobs.

In addition, opening hours at the remaining libraries would be reduced and mobile libraries were to be withdrawn from over 100 villages.

Under the plans, the Central Library would remain the only library in the city under the authority’s control.

Cutbacks questioned

Speculation over the necessity of the council’s £2 million cutback preceded the review as the Executive reported a significant underspend for 2013-2014.

John Hough, Leader of the Labour opposition at the County Council, said: “The council ignored the overwhelming public opposition to its proposals to demolish and destroy the important and highly valued service that it had provided.

“With the recent news that the council had a huge underspend of more than £62 million last year, the premise on which the original consultation was carried out ‘that it had to save £2 million immediately’ has been shown to be false.”

Phil Dilks, Shadow Executive Member for Libraries, added: “It’s an absolute scandal that Lincolnshire County Council has so much sitting in the bank which was collected in council tax last year and not spent on vital services at the same time as decimating our library service for the sake of saving under £2 million.”

The judicial review argues that:

• Lincolnshire County Council will no longer be providing a comprehensive and efficient library service as required by section 7 of the Public Libraries and Museums Act.
• The consultation process was unlawful on the grounds that the outcome of consultation had been pre-determined and the basis of the information given for it was misleading.
• The council failed to give proper consideration to the needs of vulnerable people including the elderly, children and disabled people as required under the Equalities Act.
• The council did not give sufficient consideration to the bid from Greenwich Leisure to run the library service as required under the Localism Act.

Day 1

Day one of the review began at the Royal Courts of Justice, at the High Court in London at around 10.30am.

Barrister David Lawson, representing Simon Draper, spoke about the popularity of the service and that cuts will hit elderly users, the unemployed and parents.

In addition, the barrister spoke about the council’s failure to properly consider a proposal by Greenwich Leisure, a charitable social enterprise, to take over the service.

The judge agreed that the bid to take over the facilities by Greenwich was not flawed.

Judge agrees the Greenwich leisure bid wasn't flawed. However council says it was #libraryjudicialreview

— Simon Draper (@simondraper) July 8, 2014

Representatives of the campaign group then accused the County Council of ignoring the Localism Act, which was formulated to give more decision making powers to individuals and communities.

Now talking about the Tories flagship "localism act" and how the council ignored it #libraryjudicialreview

— Simon Draper (@simondraper) July 8, 2014

Speaking after the first day of the judicial review had come to a close, Simon Draper said: “It was quite a rollercoaster in the high court today, going from high to low and to high again.

“I was very impressed with our barrister who really got to the heart of the matter, though he is not a Lincolnshire man, the effect of the council’s library plan on the most vulnerable people.

“I am a full time carer to my disabled wife Timber so this point is also at the heart of why I decided to take this stand. I really hope we win this, for all the people who will be crushed if the professional library service becomes threadbare in Lincolnshire.”

Campaign group member Julie Harrison added: “Today seems to have gone very well indeed, the judge certainly understood the points we were making and campaign members feel optimistic but until the defence speaks tomorrow it is hard to be sure.

“The particular issue that seems to be in our favour at the moment is the application by Greenwich Leisure which was not given any consideration by the council, this clearly did get the judge’s attention. Earlier on the judge seemed to think only having Tier 1 and Tier 2 libraries classed as ‘statutory’ was also an issue.

“Tomorrow there are other points to be put by our barrister, then it’s over to the legal team from the county council.”

— Later update: Councillor Nick Worth, Executive Member for Libraries, said: “Now the campaigners have had their say, we’re focusing on presenting our case, which we believe will demonstrate that our decision was taken in a legal and proper manner.

“Under our plans, we’d have even greater library provision while also making substantial savings – we’re determined to do all we can to make sure residents don’t miss out.”

Proceedings continue on July 9 and supporters are encouraged to follow the review’s progress @savelincslibs and #libraryjudicialreview.

The outcome of the hearing is expected to be known several weeks after the Judicial Review.

Campaigners against cuts to Lincolnshire libraries services have appeared at the High Court in London for the second and final day of a judicial review into the case against Lincolnshire County Council.

As previously reported, the first day on July 8 was concluded with campaigners feeling “optimistic” about their case.

During day 2 in court, the judge listened to legal representatives from the County Council, including questions over library service obligations to provide access to computers and the internet.

The council’s representative also said they had been planning the cuts since 2010.

Breaking news from #libraryjudicialreview @thelincolnite: @simondraper "Council has just admitted they've been planning the cuts since 2010"

— Save Lincs Libraries (@savelincslibs) July 9, 2014

Barrister on behalf of case instigator Simon Draper, David Lawson, continued to present a list of groups that would be affected by the £2 million worth of cuts.

Now talking about how a lot Lincolnshire residents dont have access to cars and that the council didn't take in mind #libraryjudicialreview

— Simon Draper (@simondraper) July 9, 2014

…just 4m from Lincoln, would not be able to reach a library by public transport within LCC's own 30 min rule [2/2] pic.twitter.com/U4PR4OctNn

— Save Lincs Libraries (@savelincslibs) July 9, 2014

Judge agrees with lawyer that the 30min drive is not a recommendation and the council was wrong to insist that it was #libraryjudicialreview

— Simon Draper (@simondraper) July 9, 2014

The two-day review was concluded with the judge stating that a decision is expected to be made by the end of the month.

Councillor Nick Worth, Executive Member for Libraries, said: “We’ve made our case as best we can, and feel that we’ve answered all the points raised by the campaigners.

“Before making our decision, we carried out extensive consultation and thoroughly considered the impact on our residents, and hopefully we’ve been able to demonstrate that to the court.

“However, it is now up to the judge to decide whether our decision was taken in a legal and proper manner.”

Simon Draper said: “We started the 1st day thinking we had a 50/50 chance at winning. By lunch that had risen to 60/40 and by today, with the judge agreeing that we had made our point on 2 of the 4 grounds, we are hoping we have a much better chance.

“We learned that the cuts to the libraries was being planned from before 2009, but throughout the election they was denying the cuts.

“Also, Greenwich Leisure, a non-profit Org Bid, was a lot stronger then we was led to believe.”

A Lincoln firm has taken on a national bank and won £176,000 after it was mis-sold a loan package.

The business took a loan with the bank, one of the country’s biggest, but it was forced to pay higher than necessary repayments for years.

The company spent four years trying to get a resolution from the bank before winning the compensation with Bridge McFarland solicitors.

The solicitor leading the case, Rob Ripley, said it was just one example of a widespread problem of small companies struggling to get fair compensation from banks.

The incident started in 2008, when the business took out a loan to protect itself against the risk of rising interest rates, on the bank’s recommendation.

However when rates dropped, the business was stuck with higher than needed repayments.

Rob Ripley said: “It is a significant sum for any business, and many small firms have become insolvent in recent years as a result of much smaller losses.

“In this case we were acting for a family business. The owner was devastated by the problems its bank caused but we persisted and challenged the bank after it adopted the remarkable approach of admitting mis-selling but denying causing financial losses.”

The client added: “Constant rejection of any claim is disheartening. The result was fair, justified and will make a tremendous difference to our business. The past five years have been harrowing.

“The bank closed its doors to our claim and refused to re-open or permit appeal. I will always be indebted to Rob and hope that others will benefit from this stalwart approach.”

A Lincoln woman who repeatedly left her rubbish bins out in the street was taken to court and fined £100, in a first such case brought on by the City Council.

Lincoln Magistrates Court heard on July 21 that Victoria Todd, 28, of Coulson Road, was given two opportunities to remove the bins before a fixed penalty notice was issued.

After failing to pay the fine, Ms Todd was taken to court, where she admitted ignoring a legal notice and failing to ensure her bins were removed from the street after collection.

She was given a six month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £100 costs after failing to comply with a section 46 notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

Sam Barstow, Service Manager for Public Protection and Anti-Social behaviour at the City Council, said: “Bins on the street can be a real problem for people making their way around our city.

“In particular, those who are disabled, pushing push-chairs or carrying a good handful of shopping bags can find it a real struggle to navigate past bins on public footpaths.

“Bins also detract from the quality of our neighbourhoods and drag the image of an area down.

“The city council, its partners and community members take pride in the city street scene and we collectively seek to make improvements wherever possible. This work is part of that ambition.

“This is the first court case taken by the City Council under a new procedure for dealing with these types of issues and so this result is particularly encouraging.”

Anyone who experiences problems with neighbours leaving their bins out can call the Public Protection and Anti-Social Behaviour Team on 01522 873378.

A house builder and a Lincoln scaffolding company have been fined a total of almost £28,000 including costs after two bricklayers were injured falling from unsafe scaffolding in the city.

The two men were working working for Persimmon Homes Ltd on a development site in Ploughman’s Lane, Bunkers Hill, Lincoln, when the incident happened on April 4, 2012.

On Monday, July 28, Lincoln Magistrates Court heard the men had begun working on a scaffold platform six metres from the ground, which had been loaded with materials, when it collapsed.

They fell around two metres on to a platform below.

One, a 62-year-old from Rossington, South Yorkshire, broke his left foot. He was unable to work for nine weeks.

The second man (29), also of Rossington, bruised his neck and twisted his knee. He missed one day of work.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found The Cathedral Scaffold Company Ltd, based on Dixon Way in Lincoln, had not constructed scaffolding to bridge the gap between two neighbouring properties “to a recognised design”.

The company failed to fit standards to transfer loads to the ground and a four board-wide working platform, as required by Persimmon, into the gap.

Despite giving a Handing Over certificate to Persimmon, setting out weight restrictions, no strength or stability calculations had been undertaken by either defendant.

Persimmon subsequently overloaded the platform, causing it to collapse.

Persimmon Homes Ltd, of Fulford, York, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8(b)(i) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £10,426 costs.

The Cathedral Scaffold Company Ltd, of Dixon Way, Lincoln, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8(b)(ii) of the same Regulations and was fined £4,000 with costs of £5,500.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Linda-Jane Rigby said: “Unless a scaffold is a basic configuration described in recognised guidance it should be designed by calculation, by a competent person, to ensure it will have adequate strength and suitability.

“The design information should describe the sequence and methods to be adopted when erecting, dismantling and altering the scaffold. That did not happen in this case.

“Persimmon accepted handover of the scaffold and subsequently overloaded it, causing it to collapse.”

A Branston man has been ordered to pay out over £800 in court fees after household waste he cleared from his mother’s house was dumped on a roadside by a “mobile scrap collector” he said he hired.

Ryan Barnett was entrusted with clearing his mother’s garage on Magnolia Close in Branston while she was on holiday in February 2014.

After clearing a quantity of household waste, Barnett hired a scrap dealer at a cost of £40, but failed to take any details or take steps to check credentials.

Meanwhile, North Kesteven District Council environmental health officers responded to a number of reports of fly-tip at Hall Lane, Folly Lane and Barn Lane in Branston.

Officers found a large freezer with food waste, household items, a number of refuse sacks and items relating to the property on Magnolia Close.

Through checks, they spoke to the householder who advised that her son Ryan Barnett was responsible for clearing the waste.

Ryan appeared at Lincoln Magistrates Court on July 21, and pleaded guilty to failing to check authorisation to transport the waste, contrary to section 34(2a) environmental Protection Act 1990.

The act stipulates that: “It shall be the duty of the occupier of any domestic property to take all such measures available to him as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that any transfer by him of household waste produced on the property is only to an authorised person or to a person for authorised transport purposes.”

He accepted that all of the waste apart from two items was from his mother’s house and said he had given it to a mobile scrap collector.

Barnett was fined £300, ordered to pay £500 in costs and a victim surcharge of £30.

NKDC has not been able to trace the person directly responsible for the dumping.

Cllr Richard Wright, NKDC’s Executive Board Member responsible for waste services and enforcement, said: “This case highlights the importance of making sure you know who it is you are using to take your waste as you can’t always be sure that people will do as they say they will.

“A much cheaper course of action would have been to make use of the comprehensive range of services we offer to help residents dispose of their waste safely, securely and with confidence.”

NKDC’s Bulky Waste Collection Service where removal of up to three large items, such as mattresses, TVs, appliances, carpets and furniture costs £11, or £22 for up to six.

The former Chief Executive Officer of the Priory Federation of Academies based in Lincoln has been formally charged with offences relating to fraud by abuse of position.

Richard Thomas Gilliland (63) of Moraira, Spain, formerly of Collingham, Nottinghamshire, was charged with six offences relating to an investigation into his time at the federation.

Meanwhile, the former Finance Director of the federation, Stephen Roger Davies (57) of Doddington Park, Lincoln has also been charged with three similar offences.

As previously reported, in 2012 the Education Funding Agency (EFA) found a number of issues concerning Gilliland’s spending and management of the Federation’s finances.

The report found Richard Gilliland used federation resources to buy personal and “inappropriate” items, including training for his son, personal tax advice and DVDs.

The items were bought on a federation credit card and then delivered to the academy address, while invoices for training his son appeared to be altered in an attempt to obscure the identification.

The scandal led to a number of resignations and replacement of senior trustees, as well as the production of a new action plan to prevent financial mismanagement in future.

The men have both been released on bail to appear at Lincoln Magistrates Court at 10am on Thursday, September 11, 2014.

A murder suspect held at Lincoln Prison whilst awaiting trial was mistakenly set free by staff — despite his pleas to remain.

Reporting restrictions on the case and incident were lifted at the weekend, and the jury in the case was discharged for legal reasons last week.

Earlier in the month, Lincoln Prison staff allowed murder suspect Martynas Kupstys (25) to leave the prison free, handing him his belongings.

Kupstys was awaiting trial at Lincoln Crown Court alongside his brother-in-law Andrus Giedraitis (29) for a murder charge after Latvian man Ivans Zdanovics (24) was found dead in his home in Gainsborough in January 2014.

Despite Kupstys’ pleas that to remain held at the prison as he should be getting onto the prison bus to the court to begin his trial, staff asked him to leave.

He sat at the bus stop outside Lincoln Prison on Gretwell Road for three hours until staff located him and returned him to the prison.

The court and staff only realised their mistake when Kupstys did not show up with the other defendants in the prison bus.

The mistake meant that the murder trial collapsed, with the case set to resume in court in March 2015.

According to the Ministry of Justice, an investigation is now underway to understand why the incident happened, as well as an urgent review of the overall prison, which consistently suffers from overcrowding issues.

It is believed Kupstys had been confused with another inmate who had completed his sentence and was due to be released at the same time Kupstys would be placed onto the prison bus.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “A prisoner from Lincoln was released in error on 8 August. The police were notified immediately and he was arrested within hours. An investigation by a senior governor has been launched.

“We take public protection extremely seriously and this type of incident is a very rare but regrettable occurrence.”