Voters in Queen’s Park have been left frustrated after receiving either automated or standardised replies from their councillor.
Councillor Chandni Mistry, who was expelled from the Labour Party over election irregularities, has claimed that there were “technical issues” with her emails, preventing her from responding to inquiries.
When the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) contacted Councillor Mistry in January, the response email said: “Due to recent technical difficulties, your email may have bounced and be undelivered.
“I am working to sort this matter, please contact me via other methods as stated on the councillor website. I apologise for the inconvenience.”
Kemptown residents faced similar issues when they tried to contact her mother, Councillor Bharti Gajjar, who was also expelled from Labour in December.
Councillor Gajjar’s response said: “This email address may be experiencing technical dificulties (sic) resulting in your email being bounced back or undelivered. Please use alternative contact methods as publised (sic).”
Brighton and Hove City Council said that there were no “current difficulties” with either email account.
St Luke’s Residents’ Association received automated responses after repeatedly inviting Councillor Mistry to a meeting last month.
Residents wanted her views on the proposed admission changes at St Luke’s and Queen’s Park primary schools and her support as they drew up their response.
When Councillor Mistry eventually responded, she asked for any questions to be submitted in writing, saying that she would send a written response.
In his response to Councillor Mistry, residents’ association chair Simon Charleton said: “Residents really wanted to meet you in person rather than remotely by email and I remain keen to progress that personal meeting.
“Our other councillor (Tristram Burden) holds regular surgeries in the church hall so we get a chance to quiz him and hold him to account in person and we would much prefer to meet you in person.”
Mr Charleton told the LDRS: “Despite numerous emails we have never had an actual response to any of our multiple queries and requests for her help.”
Former council leader Nancy Platts, who stepped down as a councillor in May, contacted Councillor Mistry to ask how she intended to represent the ward after she left just 50 minutes into the meeting of the full council on Thursday 1 February.
Councillor Mistry walked out as Councillor Burden was responding to a deputation about safeguarding vulnerable people after a tenant died in temporary housing.
Councillor Gajjar left five minutes earlier.
Ms Platts, a Queen’s Park resident, received an automated response to her email which said: “Due to a higher than expected volume of inquiries, responses may be delayed. Please refer to the council website for alternative contact methods.”
After contacting Councillor Mistry about her early departure through the Ask Your Councillor section of the council website, the response she received said: “Thank you for taking the time to write to me, I appreciate your support and effort.
“Should you require any ward-related assistance, please feel free to contact me or my co-councillor.
“The most up-to-date information including intention for ward surgeries/contact details are listed on the council website.”
Ms Platts said: “Thousands of people took the time and trouble to have conversations with candidates and then go out and vote for Chandni Mistry and Bharti Gajjar to be their local councillors at the local elections.
“It is now their job to properly represent their communities at council meetings.
“That means listening to members of the public who come in to ask questions and put deputations or petitions to full council. Their voices deserve to be heard.
“It is a basic duty and should be an absolute priority for councillors to fully participate in the whole meeting by listening, asking questions on behalf of their constituents and voting.
“It is downright disrespectful to leave a full council meeting after less than an hour and even more so when a member of the public is presenting what was a quite distressing deputation.”
The Local Democracy Reporting Service has emailed Councillors Mistry and Gajjar for comment four times since Wednesday 24 January, asking for responses on standards complaints, their email issues, why they left full council after less than an hour and their automated responses.
Neither has responded.
Green group convenor councillor Steve Davis said: “The suggestion they are not even responding to emails due to purported ‘technical difficulties’ leaves a distinctly bad taste in the mouth.
“We repeat our call that these councillors must stand down, their allowances handed back and for Labour to answer how these councillors were selected in the first place, given the scale of misconduct that is being suggested in the press.”
Labour said: “We reiterate our calls for Councillors Mistry and Gajjar to stand down so that by-elections can take place and the communities in Queen’s Park and Kemptown can be fully represented by new councillors.”
The council said: ““Residents who wish to make a formal complaint about the conduct of individual councillors can do so here.
“Our case management system for casework is just one of a number of ways in which councillors go about their work.
“It is intended as a tool to assist councillors to raise resident inquiries and is not used to monitor councillor activity.
“We are not aware of any current difficulties with the inboxes referred to.”
My councillor ; Kemptown ) took weeks to reply to me … said he’d been unwell
Labour are so sure of winning they don’t care or bother
A reminder that being a councillor isn’t a full time role. They aren’t on call 24 hours a day 365 days of the year.
They are still people and get ill and have work issues and family problems to deal with just like many of their constituents. They don’t have office staff to answer emails for them.
Important to note, the message was an auto reply, those words were written by the councillor herself. The big giveaway was the typos within the message, and “bounced” emails don’t return in that way. I have a screenshot of those, because to me, that is evidence of lying.
That’s odd, David+Roger. Perhaps he really was unwell. I emailed Cllr Wilkinson (Kemptown) via the council website yesterday and he replied today.
Was any other councillor experiencing such technical difficulties at the times Gajjar and Mistry claimed they were having problems? It would be interesting to know., but we can probably draw our own conclusions on that.
I emailed my ward councillor (Coldean & Stanmer) recently and she replied the next day , no problems with her email.
Certainly no issues with councillor emails, my inbox has been working perfectly well over in Westdene & Hove Park Ward.
Why are these two councillors behaving like this & are they really going to continue as so until elections in 2027?
For what purpose?
Absolutely, claiming there are issues in emails with an out of office message is, quite frankly, and extremely bizarre lie.
I would be very interested to hear their comments about why they are doing this. I think no matter what side of the political spectrum you are on, fillibusting in this way is morally abhorrent, wouldn’t you say, Councillor?
Thank you for that, Ivan. Seems to me that if there had been a technical problem with councillor emails, then it would have affected most, if not all, councillors and the council most likely would have mentioned that there were difficulties and that they were working to resolve them.
I suppose they will continue exactly as before on the ‘money for nothing principle’ unless the police investigation uncovers evidence of malpractice/irregularities or whatever, to disqualify them. Seems to be taking the police a long time as well.
I expect B&H News will get another solicitor’s letter for the first word of the headline.
The word “Rogue” appears only in the headline and nowhere else: it spiced up an otherwise mundane story about internecine strife within Labour party
The “technical problem” was an out of office reply, set by the councillors themselves. The series of typos and poor grammar and even bigger giveaway.
I’m afraid the only problem here is that councillors Mistry and Gajjar lied in the most obvious and disrespectful way.
Here’s an idea- have an election for co-opted councillors in each ward and they can represent us as the elected ones do not reply to messages, attend council meetings or interact in any way.
The co-opted councillors can be accorded a vote by agreement with the rest of the council.
Well whichever idiot put these two in, blatantly quotering, glad that’s come back and slapped them in the face. Next time maybe select people who actually live in the city
Agreed.
Think twice before voting for a labour candidate in future
Think twice about any candidate that has been parachuted in. This could have certainly happened to any ward.
If you were going to hire two enemy agents to bring down a Labour council administration, you could do worse than hire these two. I’ve changed my mind about them. Long may they stay and continue to rot the barrel and show Labour up for what it is, whatever they call themselves now. Did LRM even report them to the Police?
He did apparently. If the police and CPS don’t want to prosecute perhaps the council can effect a private prosecution. Or maybe a civil case to recover monies paid.
This isn’t a matter for the council to prosecute as it doesn’t have the powers.
It’s down to the CPS.
You know full well he did Barry,
Stop trying to stir the pot.
Oh Barry, I thought you were getting past making disingenuous nonsense. Real step back for you fella. With these two fillibusting, no-one gets represented. Doesn’t matter where your political tendancies lie. Everyone loses.
Only another three years and three months of these freeloading cuckoo councillors. What fun.
Go on LRM. Escalate.
Sarah, I think your autocorrect has fixed Cllr. Gajjar’s auto response message in the article!
A self written auto response means the email is working fine. Hardly Bill Gates these two are they. Laughable they are still entitled to expenses…paid for by us of course.
What does it take for these two time wasters to be thrown out?
It would require them to be found guilty of fraudulent behaviour. That would disqualify them as being councillors and can be removed instantly.
If they become AWOL for six months they can be removed and a by-election can be triggered. That’s August.
Should be charged with fraud and pay back every penny they’ve conned.
when i emailed cllr Mistry and cllr Burden (about offensive graffittii), i got appropriately timeous replies : they both were waiting for council officers to reply….