To: Steve Conlan
Longbridge Advice and Resource Centre
Dear Steve,
Birmingham Music Network Project One/mentoring
Subsequent to our conversation on 31st March, I’m writing to confirm what I told you on the
telephone, so that you might pass it on to the committee at your meeting on 24th April. Namely:
1. I was employed as a mentor by Project One last spring
2. I was given no time limit for my two mentoring projects. I specifically checked whether there was one because the people I was mentoring required a few hours per month, nothing more, so to reach 30 hours would take a while.
3. I was not informed that Project One was ending or had ended. Just as I was preparing to finally invoice Project One I was horrified to hear a rumour that it had ended.
4. Since the Project One office now appeared to be non-contactible, I immediately submitted two
invoices via Mark XX XX. These were both for £599.25 and dated 9th February.
5. I have not heard anything since.
I would remind the committee that by asking me to do work and promising a specific rate of pay for it, Project One were entering a legally-binding contract. Since LARC were the contract holders for Project One as I understand it they remain legally liable for that contract and its associated liabilities.
In that light I await hopefully a payment from LARC for the outstanding amounts.
Your sincerely,
Jon Cotton
From Jon re: LARC refusing to pay him
Hi Mark
Just a quick word. Thought you might like to know the LARC finally paid me after I reminded them of their legal liability to pay me for work contracted. They ummed and arred and put it to 'the committee' who requested evidence that I had been asked to do the work officially. I forwarded dates and times of meetings with you and then with Ian Campbell, and some emails between myself and the girl who I met with Ian (sorry, forget her name) and finally they paid up.
However, when Steve Conlan (Conman?) called to tell me such, he also asked me to not mention to anyone else that I'd been paid because 'my claim looks genuine, however we had many non-genuine ones' (I paraphrase).
I didn't agree to this verbally or otherwise as I think it's only fair those with genuine cases know someone else has been paid, I thought they had a bloody cheek to ask me to do any such thing, and it reinforced my impression that I was dealing with a clan of the masons rather than a legally accountable business. So I am hereby ignoring their request.
So there you go, please pass on this info to anyone with a genuine claim who has not been paid. Hope all's well.
Jon
14/6/2006
From Anthony in respinse to JOn's email:
Unfortunately not surprising that there continue to be problems and illegal withholding of public monies.
Also interesting that the Directors of BMN were also not exempt from the mishandling of funds surrounding this project - I am personally still owed about £350 that the (Remaining) project staff at the end of the project denied finding an entry for on the data - base, apparently/conveniently for me having been listed as acting as a mentor.
Apparently this was the case for several mentors - as the previous admin person failed to record these details and contractual arrangements!
BMN LTD also being owed over £1000 by LARC and who knows who else
wasn't entered onto the paperwork and never got paid.
Absolutely disgusting and inexcusable behavior by all the staff on the project, the financial managing agent LARC and therefore LSC.
Anthony
On 13 Jun 2006, at 12:43, Iron Man Records wrote to Ben at Blue Whale Studios:
Hi Ben,
get in touch with Jon cotton as he has managed to get his invoices paid, see email below, i've copied scott and anthony in so they can see whats been going on too.
I find the concept of so called "Non genuine claims" unbelievable. who would put in a non genuine claim for work they have done or go through the trauma of having to deal with steve conman conlan!!
cheers
mark
ps Jon, can you ask steve conlan to forward any so called Non genuine claims to me as i would like to see who they are. If anthony scott and myself deem them to be indeed 'non genuine' then we can take action. however, i do not believe any non genuine claims have gone in at all and steve conlan is trying to make out their complete inability to manage an lsc project is somehow somebody elses fault! I find steves handling of this episode entertaining
