Immediately after arriving home I emailed Liz Dux, I was fuming, once again she had not attended to support me, I felt I had been tricked into attending an adversarial interview during which I had been primed to fail before the recorded section started, that my story had been called into doubt and I had not been believed, and once again, not listened to.

I received a curt, unsympathetic reply from Liz, she claimed that she would not have been able to provide support during my meeting with the speaking out inquiry even had she attended, that the inquiry team had the right to question my statement and test the evidence as would a court of law, that had she attended it would have only been in the capacity of a witness, with no powers to advise or intervene.

I was fuming that I had been conned into attending the meeting, I now wished I had never come forward.

Later she apologised for seeming harsh in her letter, she then asked me if there was anything, I could provide by way of evidence that supported my claims, witnesses, times, and dates etc.

I replied that I may be able to get my sister to provide a statement and advised that the NHS/DOH may wish to look at her medical records for times and dates when she had been admitted to hospital, however my sister was dying from a degenerative disease and whilst she said, when asked, that she could recall the meeting in hospital with Savile and the chicken, she was not fit to be interviewed and has subsequently died.

A few months later I received more information from Liz Dux, a compensation package for victims was to be set up using the funds remaining in Savile’s estate for victims not connected with the NHS or the BBC, who would be awarded compensation by one or the other of these organisations.

Eventually months later and following appeals by Savile’s estate a scale of tariffs was made available, the letter was provided only to the victims who were all advised it must not be disclosed. The lowest tariff was for sexual assault over clothes, £1500, rising to rape. An uplift of 50% would be applied to victims who had suffered more than once.

In my case, it stated that the appropriate tariff would be for sexual assault under clothes, £9250 including an uplift, because it had occurred more than once. There was no agreed tariff for trauma from witnessing sexual assault of a dead woman, and no tariff agreed for physical assault. At that moment I knew that I had not been believed and that my claim would ultimately be rejected.

A year after the meeting with the inquiry team, I received emails from Claire Jones and Ray Galloway and the NHS/DOH solicitors’ team on the same day via Liz Dux, the Speaking Out team wanted more information from me as they were finalising their reports, the DOH legal team wanted the same, but to ensure I was not about to pull a cat out of the bag after they rejected my claim.

They were asking if I had tracked down the girl I had met in Savile’s car and if so, would she be providing a statement in support of my claim.

They asked if I had obtained my sister’s medical records to prove she had been in hospital when I claimed we met Savile.

They asked if I could provide dates and times for the meetings with Savile.

They also asked for medical records for myself covering the period immediately after Savile crushed my testicle.

Quite how they thought I would be able to recall such details over forty years after the events when I was around twelve years old at the time, I am unsure.

In addition, how could I obtain my sister’s medical records, these are confidential. However, I was sure that the NHS/DOH had the means to obtain them.

How could they expect records, when I had stated in my witness testimony and in the inquiry Speaking Out meeting that I had not disclosed the injury to avoid difficult questions I dd not wish to answer.