| Date:
12 Aug 2009 |
From: samdhakal@hotmail.com |
To: sujanlal_jessica@yahoo.com |
Date:
Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:38:06 +0530
From: samdhakal@hotmail.com
To: sujanlal_jessica@yahoo.com
Subject: Hello
Dear Mr. Shrestha
Thank you for your kind efforts to telephone me yesterday. Unfortunately
a heavy meeting schedule prevented me from taking your call. May
I suggest we arrange a telephone appointment in advance by e-mail
should you wish to call me in future. In that way we can be sure
of a successful connection.
Regarding the two central issues of my earlier mail, I am not
certain that these matters may be successfully dealt with by phone.
Plainly the contract is not a matter for discussion. The IOC regulations
are quite clear that all three parties must hold a fully signed
copy of the document. This is necessary to prevent any confusion
or improper use of Solidarity funding. Please note that I have
now been waiting nearly 7 months for the NOC to return my signed
copy.
Moreover without such document it is impossible for me to send
any proper receipts as all expenditure must be limited to the
budgeted distribution detailed on the contract. Your earlier request
that I send you receipts for unauthorized expenditure is a matter
of some concern to me as I need to ensure that I act properly
at all times.
Regarding the delay in scholarship commencement, for the sake
of clarity I feel this issue better suited to written discussion.
As a direct result of this delay I am now $9,000 in personal debt
which was entirely incurred upon the reasonable expectation that
the NOC would fulfil its statutory obligation to process the paperwork
in a timely and proper fashion. This is in addition to my loss
of earnings during the period ($18,000) and the loss of my considerable
financial and practical support from the sponsors (c$20,000) which
was a condition imposed by the NOC for their support of my scholarship.
Please note that if the NOC had not informed me in November that
I would be awarded a Solidarity Scholarship from 1 November 2008
until 28 February 2010, I would have made entirely different financial
arrangements for the period and would not therefore have incurred
the significant losses I have suffered.
I also contend that had I been in timely receipt of the funding
my race performances would have been that tiny margin faster to
have qualified for Vancouver in March.
In consequence the issue of responsibility for this delay is a
serious matter and I feel it important that we deal with it properly.
Some justification of your assertion that Mr. Morley was responsible
would greatly assist my understanding of these unfortunate events
from the NOC perspective.
But whoever is responsible, perhaps a formal appeal by the NOC
to Solidarity against the delay on the grounds that the athlete
is certainly not responsible for it (and should not therefore
be unfairly penalised) may be a suitable path ahead in this matter.
If successful the issue will then be at an end.
Looking forwards to your speedy despatch of the completed contract
so that we can progress the scholarship, I remain
Sincerely yours
Shyam Kumar Dhakal
|
|
IOC Malpractice