We have reviewed your most recent letter dated November 19, 2015. This is plainly one
of those matters where we will cordially have to agree to disagree.
Respectfully, your response was predictable – it is your job to defend the actions of the
City, regardless of whether they are ultimately well-founded in law or not. Coining a
British colloquialism, I would have been utterly gob smacked had you responded by
acknowledging that my client’s rights were violated, or even hinted at the possibility of