Mr Oliver Heald MP has allowed two of his adult children to use a tax-payer-funded flat in London that he appears to only partially own yet claims for in full.

Most of my questions that remain unanswered were first put to Mr Heald MP back in December 2009. I have waited a further 4 weeks for answers since my last email/letter. I feel this is a more than adequate time-scale within which to expect a reply.

Mr Oliver Heald's inexplicable evasiveness serves to underline concerns here, rather than allay them, and to invite speculation and conjecture where facts and clarification would have obviously been preferable.

You can read the letters by following my blog posts tagged "Oliver Heald MP".

I believe I now have no other option, under these circumstances, but to make a formal complaint to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Mr R Lyon. That complaint is copied below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr Lyon

I have grounds to suspect that my MP, Oliver Heald, may have breached the code of conduct for MPs in his use of his expenses allowances. My concerns here centre on three main issues:

a) It appears that Mr Heald only partially owns a London flat and, yet, he has claimed for it in full through his Parliamentary allowances, as his second home. Either Mr Heald or the joint owner/s (Mr Heald refuses to clarify who/what entity the joint owner/s are) would appear to have benefited improperly from the tax payer here.

b) Two of Mr Heald's adult children have used the flat for a period, and to an extent, that Mr Heald refuses to clarify. Mr Heald's two bedroom, tax-payer funded flat should be used "wholly", "exclusively" and "necessarily" for him to fulfil his Parliamentary duties.

c) Mr Oliver Heald MP has failed in his duty as an MP to be "open" here and to ensure that his claims are "beyond reproach". He has evaded reasonable, if unwelcome, questions put to him by myself on three occasions prior to me writing to you.

The detail of my concerns are contained in my emails/letters to Mr Heald and these are included for your reference as "evidence". Also included as "evidence" is the newspaper article that revealed that Mr Heald only "partially" owns the flat and the relevant documents from Mr Heald's expenses claims indicating that his adult children may well have been using the flat before April 2009.

I have also included a copy of the hand written note included in his published expenses claims that, worryingly, at Mr Heald's own instigation, was removed from the public record almost immediately after I first wrote to Mr Heald on 10/12/2009. This note helped to explain the division of some utility bills three ways. Mr Heald knows this note is still missing as I have informed him of this. The note is still available on-line too, at The Guardian website.

I do show clearly how I feel Mr Heald has breached the code of conduct in my letters to him (enclosed) and reference the code accordingly.

As for Mr Heald's evasiveness here, this is unacceptable and I (like any other citizen here) have you, as my last resort. It cannot be right for an MP to treat a constituent with such apparent contempt, by simply ignoring reasonable (if unwelcome) questions on a such a serious matter.

I look forward to hearing from you after your consideration of this matter.

Yours sincerely etc...