LinkedIn Account Recovery Appeal
Video clip from the London Freedom Rally 24 April 2021
Thousands of people, estimated by some to be as many as 500,000, filled central London and went on a peaceful walk starting at Hyde Park and ending in Westminster. This video demonstrates the large volume of demonstrators, from all walks of life (not shown here, but one I met was a 100 year old gentleman called Ron), filling just one small section of Oxford Street that day. There were hardly any police present and the event was not reported on any BBC news media.
Jonathan Lea LinkedIn Account Appeal
Response (02/08/2021 10:56 CST)
Hi Jonathan,
Your appeal has been received and is currently under review. Please allow up to 14 days for us to contact you regarding the status of the account.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Regards,
Camille
LinkedIn Safety Operations Support Specialist
Member (02/06/2021 14:20 CST)
Dear Camille
Thank you for your email and for helpfully setting out the alleged false content that has led to my account being restricted due to a violation of LinkedIn’s User Agreement.
I believe the restriction may have been made in error and write to appeal your decision, as set out in this email.
Irrespective of the arguments below as to why I believe the restriction may be incorrect, if you don’t feel these are strong enough then I nevertheless write to politely ask that you may hopefully reinstate the account on the basis that given this warning I will no longer post anything on LinkedIn that could in any way be deemed false content. LinkedIn has become very important to our business and I have worked hard over the last few years to build my profile. If I can no longer use my personal account and our company page (linked to my personal account) then our business is
significantly at risk and by implication our employees’ livelihoods will also be endangered.
I hope these important factors can be taken into consideration and will also give you the impression that if my LinkedIn account becomes operational again I will be extremely cautious on what I share and only limit myself to non-political content and to non-controversial mainstream sources. After having now studied the LinkedIn User Agreement and Professional Community Policies in detail I am now much more aware of what type of content could be deemed false content by LinkedIn and will ensure that all these terms and policies are from now on carefully adhered to.
For your reference, please note that I have not, and do not want to, create another LinkedIn account.
In respect of the five posts you selected that are said to include false content I set out my reasons below (in *bold*) why the restriction decision
could be interpreted as incorrect, or at least unfair and maybe unnecessarily harsh (in *bold*):
1) 16 Apr 2020
In his recent nonstop media appearances, WHO leader Bill Gates appears gleeful that the Covid-19 crisis will give him the opportunity to force his third-world vaccine programs on Western populations. Bear in mind that Indian doctors blame Gates for a devastating vaccine-strain polio epidemic that paralyzed 496,000 children between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian Government dialled back Gates’ vaccine regimen and evicted Gates. Polio paralysis rates dropped precipitously. See further here…
Link: From Robert F Kennedy Jr’s Instagram post today
*This was shared from Robert Kennedy Junior’s instagram post. As a leading US public and political figure with a very large social media following (and who also holds himself out as an expert and long time researcher on vaccines) I thought that it was safe to share this information. I have now learned that this instagram post is no longer showing on Robert Kennedy Junior’s account, while several fact check websites like this one have picked up on the aforementioned quote used in my LinkedIn post, albeit they still show publicly the claim above.*
2) 20 Jan 2021
From a former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury
Link: Covid Is an Orchestration for Serving an Agenda—The Destruction of
Freedom – PaulCraigRoberts.org
*This was a mostly opinion piece that linked to a talk by the World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab talking about the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Again, the author is another high profile US politician who is a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury. This article still remains widely available on the internet, easily found through Google and other search engines and doesn’t seem to have been subject to being corrected in any way by any fact checking website (yet).*
3) 19 Nov 2020
Denmark proves masks are NOT effective.
“There was no significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19.”
And yet the anti-mask community here in the UK got castigated for this belief…
All masks do is perpetuate fear and make the public more amenable to the government’s ludicrous restrictions. Anything that causes people to enter into un-Godly fear and compliance to tyranny is demonic.
If there really was a dangerous virus out there, a mask would be largely ineffective in halting any viral respiratory illness from spreading throughout the population. Giving life to a lie is the devil’s work.
It should be clear by now that what the mask mandate is really about is training people in mindless compliance and group think so that the same propaganda is used to apply social pressure and force to make people take unsafe and life debilitating vaccines.
Link: Landmark Danish study finds no significant effect for facemask wearers | The Spectator
*The article I shared on the Danish mask study still remains available on the website of the leading UK news publication The Spectator. This article includes the quote above that “there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19”, as can be found here.*
*Other leading publications like this article in Reuters have reported on this same Danish mask study with the Reuters headline saying “Danish study finds masks provide limited protection to the wearer’. *
*My comment on the LinkedIn post about the Spectator article was my opinion based on the findings of the Danish study.*
4) 18 Dec 2020
You couldn’t make it up, or maybe you could …
“Meanwhile, the number of patients who usually die from heart attacks in hospitals dropped considerably this year when compared to the same time period last year”
Link: CDC Reveals Hospitals Counted 130,000 Heart Attacks, Flu and Bacterial Pneumonia As COVID-19 Deaths | Sandra Rose
*This website article links to the source of this claim which is this report on One America News cable channel. As you can see the report details primary data from the main US public health authority the CDC to support its claims. Again, the report remains accessible on the One America News youtube channel. The report links to the CDC itself at minute 2.40 of the report where it states that “For 6% of the deaths, Covid-19 was the only cause mentioned”. I am not aware that this article and claim that “CDC Reveals Hospitals Counted 130,000 Heart
Attacks, Flu and Bacterial Pneumonia As COVID-19 Deaths” has been fact checked anywhere.*
28 Sep 2020
“Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive
welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste of what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.”
*This is a direct quote by Dr Antony P. Mueller, a German professor of economics, in his article published on the Mises Institute website. Again, this article still remains freely accessible on the internet and as far as I can see has not been subject to any fact checking exercise. The Mises Institute is a long-established non profit think tank in the US that was founded in 1982. Regardless of source, this is an opinion based on the Covid-19 pandemic, the effect of which on any objective basis (rightly or wrongly) has indeed been to increase fear in populations, hugely increase behavioral controls to previously unimaginable levels, lead to many job losses across the economy and also lead to a big increase in dependance on the state.*
Finally, it is my own belief that in a healthy democracy measures should only be taken for the benefit of the population in the knowledge that all possible facts, opinions and arguments have been debated and scrutinised. Without such debate and scrutiny, I don’t think there can be sufficient objectivity and confidence that the best outcome has been determined. I am fully prepared to have whatever view, belief or opinion I hold to be fully debated and challenged and if necessary to change my position as a result. Indeed, my posts on LinkedIn have often generated many interesting different views which I always enjoy reading and which I believe have added to the vibrancy and attractiveness of LinkedIn as a platform. Whether I remain restricted or if I’m let back in, I feel it’s a shame that such a breadth of information and opinions will be lost from LinkedIn.
Thank you for taking the time to review this submission. I very much hope that you will be able to un-restrict my account as a result of these pleadings. To reiterate, if you are so kind as to make the decision to grant me access again I will follow a very different content strategy from now on and my account will no longer like or share any information that could in any way be deemed controversial or a challenge to mainstream positions and the authorities.
Yours sincerely
Jonathan
Jonathan Lea | Managing Director
The Jonathan Lea Network | Business Solicitors
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 at 18:27, LinkedIn Customer Support <linkedin_support@cs.linkedin.com> wrote:
Reference # 210201-003292
Status: Closed
View your case(s) on our Help Center
You may reply to this case for up to 14 days
Response (02/02/2021 12:27 CST)
Hi Jonathan,
Your account has been restricted due to a violation to the LinkedIn’s User Agreement relating to the following false content:
16 Apr 2020
In his recent nonstop media appearances, WHO leader Bill Gates appears gleeful that the Covid-19 crisis will give him the opportunity to force his third-world vaccine programs on Western populations. Bear in mind that Indian doctors blame Gates for a devastating vaccine-strain polio epidemic that paralyzed 496,000 children between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian Government dialled back Gates’ vaccine regimen and evicted Gates. Polio paralysis rates dropped precipitously. See further here…> Link: From Robert F Kennedy Jr’s Instagram post today
20 Jan 2021
From a former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury
Link: Covid Is an Orchestration for Serving an Agenda—The Destruction of
Freedom – PaulCraigRoberts.org
19 Nov 2020
Denmark proves masks are NOT effective.
“There was no significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19.”
And yet the anti-mask community here in the UK got castigated for this belief…
All masks do is perpetuate fear and make the public more amenable to the government’s ludicrous restrictions. Anything that causes people to enter into un-Godly fear and compliance to tyranny is demonic. If there really was a dangerous virus out there, a mask would be largely ineffective in halting any viral respiratory illness from spreading throughout the population. Giving life to a lie is the devil’s work.
It should be clear by now that what the mask mandate is really about is training people in mindless compliance and group think so that the same propaganda is used to apply social pressure and force to make people take unsafe and life debilitating vaccines.
Link: Landmark Danish study finds no significant effect for facemask wearers | The Spectator
18 Dec 2020
You couldn’t make it up, or maybe you could …
“Meanwhile, the number of patients who usually die from heart attacks in hospitals dropped considerably this year when compared to the same time period last year”
Link: CDC Reveals Hospitals Counted 130,000 Heart Attacks, Flu and Bacterial Pneumonia As COVID-19 Deaths | Sandra Rose
28 Sep 2020
“Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste of what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.”
#thegreatreset
If you believe the restriction was made in error, you may appeal our decision by responding to this email with the information requested below:
1. State why you believe the restriction was incorrect.
2. Provide sources or materials that support your position.
After you’ve submitted the information, we’ll re-review the matter and inform you of our decision. Please review the LinkedIn User Agreement for additional
details: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
Thank you for your patience as we work through this process.
Regards,
Camille
LinkedIn Safety Operations Support Specialist
Response (02/02/2021 12:27 CST)
Hi Jonathan,
Your account has been restricted due to a violation to the LinkedIn’s User Agreement relating to the following false content:
16 Apr 2020
In his recent nonstop media appearances, WHO leader Bill Gates appears gleeful that the Covid-19 crisis will give him the opportunity to force his third-world vaccine programs on Western populations. Bear in mind that Indian doctors blame Gates for a devastating vaccine-strain polio epidemic that paralyzed 496,000 children between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian Government dialled back Gates’ vaccine regimen and evicted Gates. Polio paralysis rates dropped precipitously. See further here…
Link: From Robert F Kennedy Jr’s Instagram post today
20 Jan 2021
From a former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury
Link: Covid Is an Orchestration for Serving an Agenda—The Destruction of Freedom – PaulCraigRoberts.org
19 Nov 2020
Denmark proves masks are NOT effective.
“There was no significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19.”
And yet the anti-mask community here in the UK got castigated for this belief…
All masks do is perpetuate fear and make the public more amenable to the government’s ludicrous restrictions. Anything that causes people to enter into un-Godly fear and compliance to tyranny is demonic.
If there really was a dangerous virus out there, a mask would be largely ineffective in halting any viral respiratory illness from spreading throughout the population. Giving life to a lie is the devil’s work.
It should be clear by now that what the mask mandate is really about is training people in mindless compliance and group think so that the same propaganda is used to apply social pressure and force to make people take unsafe and life debilitating vaccines.
Link: Landmark Danish study finds no significant effect for facemask wearers | The Spectator
18 Dec 2020
You couldn’t make it up, or maybe you could …
“Meanwhile, the number of patients who usually die from heart attacks in hospitals dropped considerably this year when compared to the same time period last year”
Link: CDC Reveals Hospitals Counted 130,000 Heart Attacks, Flu and Bacterial Pneumonia As COVID-19 Deaths | Sandra Rose
28 Sep 2020
“Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste of what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.”
#thegreatreset
If you believe the restriction was made in error, you may appeal our decision by responding to this email with the information requested below:
1. State why you believe the restriction was incorrect.
2. Provide sources or materials that support your position.
After you’ve submitted the information, we’ll re-review the matter and inform you of our decision. Please review the LinkedIn User Agreement for additional
details: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
Thank you for your patience as we work through this process.
Regards,
Camille
LinkedIn Safety Operations Support Specialist
Second and final LinkedIn account restriction
Dear Raphael
*Reference # 210730-002859*
*Re: LinkedIn Account Restriction Appeal (Jonathan Lea Personal Account)*
I write to finally appeal the restriction of my LinkedIn account that was imposed in April 2021. It has been over a year now since I was last able to use my personal LinkedIn account and I hope this long length of time is seen as a sufficient discipline to allow me to now access and use my LinkedIn account again. As the owner of a law firm LinkedIn is a very important business tool and if I am allowed back I will be a lot more cautious in posting content, both my own posts and commenting underneath other posts, to ensure there is no way anything I say could cause offence or breach LinkedIn’s user agreement and professional community policies in any way.
Therefore, if this appeal is accepted I agree to use my best endeavours to comply with both your User Agreement and our Professional Community Policies, as follows:
• User Agreement: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
• Professional Community Policies:
https://www.linkedin.com/legal/professional-community-policies
For your reference I include below (in *bold*) the two comments that LinkedIn confirmed were the reasons for my account restriction, while underneath I include my own reasoning for why LinkedIn may have been mistaken for believing these comments were in breach of LinkedIn’s user agreement and policies. Nevertheless, regardless of whether or not LinkedIn accept these reasons I will be a lot more careful if I can use my account again and will be far more stringent in following LinkedIn’s agreement and policies.
1. EVERYONE NEEDS TO IGNORE THESE CORRUPT CRIMINAL FOOLS. DO NOT LET THE TAIL WAG THE DOG, GET OUT AND LIVE YOUR LIVES. THE MORE WE COMPLY WITH THIS
INSANITY THE WORSE OUR LIVES WILL GET
Content Creation Time: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 11:45:35 GMT
This comment was a result of my frustration with certain governments, like the UK, New Zealand and Australia following policies of imposing ongoing onerous ‘lockdown’ restrictions on the economy and our general civil liberties, seemingly in contravention of the WHO’s own policies and guidance. As stated by Dr David Nabarro, Special Envoy for Covid 19 at the World Health Organisation: “We at the WHO do not advocate the use of lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus. We need to appeal to all world leaders, stop using lockdowns as your primary control method.”
Furthermore a lot of the ‘lockdown’ restrictions were as a result of unenforceable UK government guidance, not laws
.
These restrictions and government guidance were backed up by the use of behavioural psychologies at the government SAGE advisory body which led to a high degree of compliance in the UK population. Without such compliance the guidance wouldn’t have been so widely followed which led to a devastating effect on the UK economy and society, disproportionate to any public health threat.
Such damaging restrictions were not imposed to such an extent and for so long in other places. These include some states in the USA such as Texas and Florida and other countries such as Denmark and Sweden where their populations could continue to live far more freely while not suffering any worse level of Covid-19 illnesses or fatalities compared to the UK.
2. It is “well documented that one can be completely asymptotic but still be infected” but is there any actual evidence of this at all? The practical reality remains that UK hospitals have for over the last year been underwhelmed. Here’s the ONS page which proves that there was no pandemic in the UK last year https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsintheukfrom1990to2020fbclid=IwAR1fa8irST2SLlwv3CaoQSWwq
B6HQTkCUKYMRZ5Et7gi7gi1zffoEXjkOnc
Yes, total deaths in 2020 were the highest in number. However, that’s because the UK population was higher than ever. Divide total deaths by population and 2020 was the 20th worst year since 1991 – and the actual percentage population that died hasn’t changed all that much since then. Couple this with hospital admission data and you then have all the media and government lies laid bare, if you ask me. But hey, I am not a doctor, epidemiologist or anything, so I can’t have got it right, can I? Also a mass screening programme of more than 10 million residents of Wuhan, China, performed after SARS-CoV-2 was brought under control, identified 300 asymptomatic cases of covid-19, none of which were infectious https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4695
Content Creation Time: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 08:55:27 GMT
Comment two relates to the general lack of evidence supporting the view that asymptomatic persons can spread Covid-19. This view is supported by leading health authorities, such as Dr. Anthony Fauci who has said that “[i]n all the history of respiratory borne viruses at any time, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks, the driver of outbreaks has always been
a symptomatic person.” Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, Technical Lead Covid-19 WHO World Health Emergencies Program, also stated that “[f]rom the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual…”. In addition, in May of 2020, a study of an asymptomatic woman in hospital showed that she didn’t pass the virus on to any of her 455 close contacts, thereby demonstrating the infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-COV-2 carriers.
According to LinkedIn’s PCP, (see also LinkedIn’s PPG ) under ‘Be Trustworthy’, you must not “*share content that directly contradicts guidance from leading global health organizations and public health authorities.*” This policy has not been infringed because, in relation to comment one, evidence suggests that repeated, excessive lockdowns do more harm than good for both the health of individuals and the economic well-being of the country. In relation to comment two, at the time, it was still unclear as to whether asymptomatic spread of Sars-Cov-2 existed, and
public health authorities were also unsure as to whether such spread could occur.
Also, the content of the comments is not “*irrelevant, inappropriate, disrespectful, or otherwise inflammatory.*” Comment one refers to the damaging nature of repeated and excessive lockdowns; in February 2021 England was still subjected to severe lockdown restrictions that were damaging the economic health of small businesses and the mental health of people in England. Therefore, the comment reflects an expression of frustration that was relevant at the time and should not be deemed to breach LinkedIn’s policy. Although no evidence was used to sustain the comment at the time, it is now very clear that the lockdown was significantly damaging as highlighted above.
Comment two expresses a valued opinion of the author which is relevant to a current global event (the coronavirus pandemic) and underlines the fact that we need debate in medical fields. It is extremely easy for medical malpractice to prevail if debate is tightly controlled and relevant data is obfuscated or destroyed. In essence, this is a reasonable opinion of the author who has the right to freedom of expression per Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the opinion is also backed up by many learned medical professionals.
As mentioned, irrespective of LinkedIn accepting the arguments above in respect of the two offending comments, if LinkedIn can now remove the restriction on my account I undertake to be a lot more careful in posting content on LinkedIn so that there can be no doubt that I remain within the bounds of LinkedIn’s user agreement and policies.
I hope the above is helpful and that LinkedIn is now able to let me access
my account again.
Yours sincerely
Jonathan
Jonathan Lea | Managing Director
The Jonathan Lea Network | Business Solicitors
On Sun, 1 Aug 2021 at 10:06, LinkedIn Customer Support <
linkedin_support@cs.linkedin.com> wrote:
Reference # 210730-002859
Status: Closed
View your case(s) on our Help Center
You may reply to this case for up to 14 days
Response (08/01/2021 04:06 CST)
Hi Jonathan,
Your account was restricted due to multiple violations of LinkedIn’s User Agreement and Professional Community Policies against sharing content that contains misleading or inaccurate information:
1. EVERYONE NEEDS TO IGNORE THESE CORRUPT CRIMINAL FOOLS. DO NOT LET THE TAIL WAG THE DOG, GET OUT AND LIVE YOUR LIVES. THE MORE WE COMPLY WITH THIS
INSANITY THE WORSE OUR LIVES WILL GET
Content Creation Time: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 11:45:35 GMT
2. It is “well documented that one can be completely asymptotic but still be infected” but is there any actual evidence of this at all? The practical reality remains that UK hospitals have for over the last year been underwhelmed. Here’s the ONS page which proves that there was no pandemic in the UK last year
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsintheukfrom1990to2020?
fbclid=IwAR1fa8irST2SLlwv3CaoQSWwqB6HQTkCUKYMRZ5Et7gi7gi1zffoEXjkOnc
Yes, total deaths in 2020 were the highest in number. However, that’s because the UK population was higher than ever. Divide total deaths by population and 2020 was the 20th worst year since 1991 – and the actual percentage population that died hasn’t changed all that much since then.
Couple this with hospital admission data and you then have all the media and government lies laid bare, if you ask me. But hey, I am not a doctor, epidemiologist or anything, so I can’t have got it right, can I? Also a mass screening programme of more than 10 million residents of Wuhan, China, performed after SARS-CoV-2 was brought under control, identified 300 asymptomatic cases of covid-19, none of which were infectious https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4695
Content Creation Time: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 08:55:27 GMT
Any additional violation of our terms can result in the permanent restriction of your account. We have these policies in place to help keep LinkedIn a safe, trusted and professional network for everyone.
You may appeal the restriction by responding to this email with your agreement and intent to comply with our User Agreement and our Professional Community Policies.
• User Agreement: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
• Professional Community Policies:
https://www.linkedin.com/legal/professional-community-policies
If you have any questions regarding your appeal you can reply to this email. Thank you for being part of the LinkedIn community.
Regards,
Raphael
Member Safety and Recovery Consultant.
Response (07/31/2021 06:33 CST)
Hi Jonathan,
I’m so sorry that I don’t have a quick answer to your inquiry. Due to the sensitive nature of your request, I’ve forwarded this message to our Safety team.
Please understand that your issue may require some additional research, which may delay their response. Someone from that team will get back to you as quickly as possible.
If you’re able to access your account, you can check the status of your case at any time from the Your cases tab on LinkedIn Help. Learn more here: https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/43378.
Thanks for your patience as we look into this for you.
Eudis
Member Support Consultant
Auto-Response (07/30/2021 06:18 CST)
Thanks for contacting us. Someone from our support team will get back to you as soon as possible.
Regards,
Your LinkedIn Customer Experience Team
Member (07/30/2021 06:18 CST)
*Email*: jonathan.lea@jonathanlea.net
* Your Question*: Please see below that I was trying to send to Camille following up from my first account restriction (with reference #210201-003292) following which my appeal was accepted.
However my email has since changed from jonathan@jonathanlea.net to jonathan.lea@jonathanlea.net so LinkedIn were unable to accept another email to Camille from a new email address unrelated to my first submission.
Dear Camille
I hope you are well.
Please see the email trail below relating to the first time my LinkedIn account was restricted. Following my submissions (also below), you subsequently let me use my account again.
Then towards the end of April this year my account was again restricted by LinkedIn a second time and I have been unable to access and use it since then.
A couple of times I have logged into my account and verified it with my ID (driving licence, like last time). However, I have heard nothing from LinkedIn since, including the reasons for this second account restriction.
My account became inoperable in late April after I posted a video of me in London where I was completely silent and there were thousands of people walking past me. This generated a lot of comments and views in a very short space of time and when I logged on to LinkedIn to check the latest number of views on this post I noticed that my account had been disabled.
I would very much appreciate an email detailing the reasons behind this second account restriction and information on how I can appeal again. I do feel a significant mistake has been made by the LinkedIn algorithm/system in determining that my account should be restricted a second time.
Further, if for whatever reason LinkedIn decides that they really can’t let me back in to use my personal account, then my team would like our LinkedIn company page to be changed to another email address and LinkedIn account controlled by one of the other employees of my firm. At present the company LinkedIn page is linked to my email address that was used to set up my personal LinkedIn account and remains inoperable because of my personal account restriction. Please can you confirm whether this would be possible?
Thank you for taking the time to consider the points in this email and we very much look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards
Jonathan