Crime - Organised - Institutionalised - Corruption - Fraud - Exposing Violations WorldWide
localscam.htm KEY PageChanges 16 Jun. 2003 |
Local Scams * Revised: October 21, 2003 * | |
 JOIN the Community On Line and publish your Statement of Facts and the Evidence you
have. Use your rights in law (link)
and ACT with others against the offenders. Join for and in the
creation of the evidence against the abusers of public office. Act for and in your
own interest with and for every other victim who is similarly acting. Beware of alleged
victims who interfere with your rights to report and expose criminal activities; they are
either planted mischief makers or persons who elected to join the fraudster's
club. Affiliated Sites For The Above Promotion: lbduk.org (group) The CAMILA Project affiliates for DATA collection
KEY to Page
& Site SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4
The Times Law Report. The Article in the Hornsey Journal (below) makes very clear
that a 2 bedroom flat in Haringey, in accordance with the council's reliable &
official sources/records was worth £190 per week. Read paragraph 'J' (link) in the appeal and consider: "WHY was A HOUSE worth
a lot less at the time? What the managing agents of the property engaged in will be
covered in detail because the police were made aware of the criminal activities all
indulged in. However, the police whose salaries are paid by Local Authorities were
benefiting from the thefts and misapprpriation of the stolen rents. The police, instead,
exhibited no interest in the criminal activities and the profound contempt for the law and
the evidence as one would expect of some backward third world corrupt state. Below, an article in another weekly, nearly two months later, on 22 January 1999. The
local press acting only after a local councillor came out of the woods to admit that which
he had ignored for months when we reported the very frauds to him. Page 1 (Link to text) of the explicit Appeal) page 2 (Link to
text) page 3 (Link to
text) Page 4 (Link to
text) Page 5 (Link to text) Page 6 (Link to text) Page
7 (Link to text) Page 8 (Link to text) Page 9 (Link to text) Page 10 (Link to
text) Hijacking and script for theatrical productions challenged (paragraph 26) FRAUD on the DSS ignored by District Judge ..... (paragraph 26a) Challenging inexcusable failure to enter judgement (paragraph 26f) Denial of rights to property PRACTISED by court (paragraph 26i) Page 15
(Link to text) Page 16 (Link to text) Page 17
(Link to text) Page 18
(Link to text) Page
19 (Link to text) Page 20
(Link to text) Page 21
(Link to text) Page 22
(Link to text) Page 23
(Link to text) Page 24
(Link to text) Page 25
(Link to text)
|
 Site under
reconstruction for better navigation.VISITORS ARE URGED to acces and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. You will find it at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you will share with us our concerns and most profound disappontment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but criminal in intent. We refer to the exclusive Confidentiality between fraudsters page. Local Authority staff - VIOLATIONS - in law The days when public servants relied on the BLIND DEAF AND DUMB MEDIA ARE OVER. The days when ALL relied on BLIND DEAF AND DUMB officers within the law enforcement agencies are also over. This is the age of FREE exchange of information and THE UNADULTERATED FACTS OF LIFE within all states, so long as their citizens are free to exercise, AS WE DO, their basic human-rights that ARE GUARANTEED under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECoHR). Article 9. "EVERYONE has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..." Article 10. "EVERYONE has the right to FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION....to HOLD OPINIONS...TO RECEIVE AND IMPART INFORMATION AND IDEAS without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers..... (with provisions attached to) maintaining the authority AND IMPARTIALITY of the judiciary". (NOTE: Impartiality does not imply or mean independent of the restrains of law). Article 11. "EVERYONE has the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of ASSOCIATION with others.... rights to form and join ... for the protection of HIS INTERESTS". Article 13. "EVERYONE whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated SHALL have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation HAS BEEN committed by persons acting in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY." Article 13 is VERY CLEAR. WHERE IS THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY THAT LOOKS INTO THE VIOLATIONS judges in the United Kingdom endorse, entertain AND INSTIGATE of their own? The question is simple and the Lord Chancellor with the Home Secretary should co-operate and produce the formula under which the citizens CAN challenge activities that blatantly breach national law and VIOLATE Human Rights. NOTE PLEASE: We have on record a high court case where the Judge made an issue of the serious ERROR of judgements (practices in our view) by the Local Government Ombudsman. All is not as the public is told; the multitude of documented facts we publish PROVE SO BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT to the average citizen. The citizens demand that they be treated no more as illiterate serfs of the middle ages and or as subjects to the whims and or the abusive dishonesty of so called 'public servants'; the 'alleged servants of the public' who serve other ulterior motives*, which they fail to declare. In the column on the left a 'Times' Law Report. It covers aspects attached to Shorthold Tenancy Agreements. No sooner had the judgement been pronounced by the Court of Appeal and a member of staff from Haringey Council, was writing to the landlady and her agent to promote assertions contrary to the true facts in the case he was alluding to and irrespective of the true legal position. The author of the letter, which we publish on this page, was reported subsequently as no longer employed at Haringey Council. The Law Report is succinct and clear: "NO DAMAGES FOR WRONGFUL EVICTION" in a matter of Shorthold Tenancy Agreements, even in the case the Court of Appeal was called upon to determine, on appeal from a county court. In that instance the tenants actually were evicted without any court proceedings and or court rulings in the matter; the fact was that the property owner had sold it as an empty property and the tenancy was but a Shorthold. We have on record, however, other issues and documented evidence that we will publish in these pages. We have been left with no choice because public servants carried on ignoring the victims, went on to act in additional contempt of Parliament's Law and they indulged in the creation of their own false instruments. Through such convenient defaults, omissions and downright criminal activities, they set about to cause damages to the person who reported the rampant fraud and corruption their employers (Haringey Council and its staff and officers) engaged in, as endorsed, aided and abetted by officers and staff at the Local (relevant) County Court. The questionable activities of Public Servants, operating within Local Authorities such as Haringey Council in North London, have been the subject of well documented presentations and complaints by us. We have been waiting for over three years for a dreamer within its confines, to set down one complaint for presentation to the council's own review panel. He has persistently defaulted to do so with intent, simply because he knows that in another case the fraudulent demands the Council was seeking to impose on targeted victims, private landlords, ended at that stage without the need for theatrical productions outside the council's confines because the LAW is the LAW, and facts are facts. We publish the letter that the Chief Executive was caused, eventually, to write on 26th January 1999 to which you can link now). He was making issue of the fact that Haringey Council staff and officers, en masse, were dependant and relied on their partners in deceptions and fraud. He alluded to the persons who were acting as managing agents for the targeted owners and the targeted property. We have been left with no option but to publish other documented evidence that covers the part the police played and play in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises, not to mention the break-ip of families, an even worse offence in an allegedly civilised state. We demand proper actions and prosecutions of the criminals who treat Social Security Funds (including Legal Aid funding facilities) as easy pickings as our founder clarified in his letter of 18th December 1998, to the Home Secretary and as qualified in the Appeal published below. Council staff acting in contempt of 'The Law'* and the principles of law, asserting that they act on directives from above and in accordance with 'the regulations' to which allegedly they 'adhere' in presumed ignorance of 'The LAW'. Such practices irrespective of the dictum "Ignorance of The LAW is no defence". The Law report we publish above, immaterial to public servants, Court Officers and staff. Two firms of solicitors indulging themselves and looking forward to use the court's facilities through which to convert RENTS DUE AND PAYABLE (to a targeted landlord) to alleged legal costs. Attempts to defraud through the usual theatrical scenarios and presentations by 'legal boffins' irrespective of the facts, the evidence and the law applicable in that instance. Everything had been arranged by and care of the Housing Benefit Fund manipulative administrators. Public servants who work with and for dishonest tenants, for and with the 'legal parasites', for and with amenable letting agents, as the council's own legal experts arrange through directives to the blind and the illiterate in law Council staff; such arrangements as other public servants endorse and entertain. The facts covered in the Appeal below were and ARE fully documented. The criminal activities indictable offences in breach of Parliament's Laws; as in another case all was reported to the police. 'The LAW' compilation published in our pages, for the benefit of all UK citizens and residents, covers it all. Nonetheless, the criminals, in both instances, used, encouraged and relied upon the used tenants to act outside 'The Law'. In one of the cases 'the tenants were used' to institute alleged legitimate court proceedings against the landlady and her agent; the legal boffins in the instance dared allege wrongful eviction, within five months of the Court of Appeal ruling, the Law Report we publish above. The legal boffins, as parasites, indulged themselves, irrespective of the fact that the dishonest and thieving debtors had been assisted, IMPROPERLY, (by the participating in constructive frauds council staff) to disappear. The disappearance and flight from the CREATED LIABILITIES AND DEBTS just three days after the offenders were served with a Default Summons. Thousands of pounds of unpaid rents arising out of alleged failures by Council staff to process and to remit Housing Benefit to the used tenants. The tenants failing for months to remit rent because, allegedly, their Housing Benefit claim had not been processed; and the dishonest within the confines of Haringey Council, confirming the allegations by the used, for constructive frauds, tenants. All care of public servants administering the CIUKU enterprises. Council staff and officers parties to the disappearing acts of the dishonest tenants, to an undeclared destination, in breach of Scetions of the Theft Acts. Council staff moving the dishonest tenants to a council property, as soon as the tenants were served with the warranted Default Summons. Over £4000 in unpaid rents BECAUSE THEIR HOUSING BENEFIT, ALLEGEDLY, HAD NOT BEEN PROCESSED, BY THE COUNCIL STAFF, FOR OVER FOUR MONTHS. And the Council staff and officers simply confirming the alleged failures and defaults. The tenants assaulted the managing agent of the property because he took he took legitimate steps to protect the rights, in law, of his principal. The tenants causing, also, criminal damages to properties; they inflicted serious life threatening injuries, and they caused permanent physical damage and disability to the assaulted agent. The parasitic legal boffins looking forward to their field days in court, care of constructively engineered fraudulent activities and the police party to fraudulent misrepresentations INCLUDING ATTEMPTS TO PASS FALSE INSTRUMENTS AS legitimate, sound and acceptable evidence in support of the misrepresentations; professional criminals at work in CIUKU enterprises. An affidavit settled by the victim of the assaults was lodged at court. It was served on both solicitors who were looking forward to the usual theatrical scripts. One solicitor was acting for the intended victim, the landlady; the other was acting for the 'used' dishonest tenants. The 'victim of crimes', the assaulted agent, needed no parasite to represent him. His affidavit and his actions put an end to the dreams of all, including the attempts to abuse the Legal Aid Facilities. The Lord Chancellor will be challenged in due course to look up and investigate, at least FOUR, case files all of which were issued out of 'the relevant county court' to which the author of the intimidating letter from Haringey Council alluded, without realising that he was spilling the beans as to the expectations of all. The agent kept the CoA ruling up his sleeve in the event the solicitors and the relevant county court officers should proceed with the abuse of legal AID FACILITIES through which to convert the unpaid rents to alleged legal fees. ALL was instigated by and care of the dishonest who systematically organise(d) the constructive frauds through abuse of the Housing Benefit Funds and Council facilities at the disposal of the corrupt and the corrupted. DISHONESTY and LIES; deceptions promoted and resting on alleged regulations and non process of the Housing Benefit Applications because of any one of a myriad of excuses that council staff and used tenants concoct(ed) as they went / go along. Their activities in contravention of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. We publish below a letter received from a member of staff / officer operating out of Haringey Council. The author's area of operations was 'tenant relations'. No doubt, COUNCIL TENANTS, not private landlord and tenant business. The author took it upon himself to use his office in order to promote and offer 'invisible services to third parties' through use of council paper and facilities. He was leaving telephone messages for the agent of the private landlord to contact him. He was asked to write of his personal interest and or concerns in private rented accommodation, because he was NOT dealing with council tenancy business, such as his public duties and office covered! He obliged and wrote assertively and naively, as he did: "... without the sanction of the court..." thereby exhibiting reliance on the abusers of public office, such as we were caused to challenge umpteed times. A typical example covered in the affidavit we publish below; another covered in the Appeal, we also publish below. Institutionalised, rampant fraud on Mr and Mrs Average who are and remain none the wiser care of the condescending media barons. NOTE: Consider the above facts; a council 'employee getting involved in matters that had nothing to do with him, except, the possible offer and use of his office, for other purposes than his appointment/retainer 'covered'. Cross relate that situation to the introduction of the Environmental Health Service in the attempts to convert misappropriated and diverted Housing Benefit Funds in the case covered in the Appeal published below. Court cases and Appeals following failures to remit rents due to the owners of properties; in the Appeal case the property occupied by imported tenants; such tenants systematically used and in use in Haringey, as in other areas in the land of milk and honey; the milk and honey provided by fraudsters and abusers of public office in CORRUPT BRITAIN as covered in the Daily Mail investigation and report. Upon receipt of the letter the agent simply telephoned and ADVISED the abuser of public office to go to the nearest public library; to look up 'The Times' Law Report, and to cease interfering in the affairs and the rights of private landlords. The author was specifically told to cease dreaming up concocted evictions 'without the sanction of the relevant county court'. He was informed that the young lady he was alluding to: (a) had given notice to her landlady, (b) SHE HAD IN FACT MOVED OUT TAKING WITH HER MOST OF HER PRIVATE belongings, (c) she in fact handed over the property and (d) the young lady was indebted well in excess of £1000 to her landlady. He was further told that the fact the landlady had not issued a Default Summons rested on the hard luck story of the young lady; it appeared to be a re-run of the circumstances under which the niece of our founder committed suicide; a grossly indifferent and selfish father whose priorities were his personal grandiose plans and life-style at the expense of many others. We point out our guidelines and principle: "In a true Democracy no one has the right to indulge in whatever rights he assumes for personal gratification / gain / whatever at the expense of and or the violations of the rights of MANY OTHERS". Sadly in the United Kingdom any individual is encouraged to act as he or she feels like; individuals acting in breach of Parliament's Laws, and the violations of the rights of others, generate work for theatrical production opportunities for the Law Enforcement Agencies, the members of which thus have their cat and mouse field days as in 'The Police Summons the Victim'* case is qualified and in 'The Breeding Grounds'* case was contemplated and attempted by the young policeman who asserted, as an SS officer in Nazi occupied Europe, "You want his address? Get your solicitor to write to me at the police station". (Note: copy of the Appeal set down in The Breeding Grounds case can be secured from <camila@human-rights.demon.co.uk> include 'request copy' in the subject line specifying the case for a response). In the left column one of the NEWSPAPER REPORTS covering the facts of life in Haringey, North London. OUR FOUNDER HAD CAUSED the Daily Mail to commission its own investigation in 1997 in the matter of publicly funded bodies wasting through fraud* and criminal activities, Social Security funds. The scams EXPOSED in the local papers followed years of frustrating contempt by public servants, including the police, and volumes of paper work that was imposed by the corrupt and the corrupted. Many had been closing their ears and their eyes; they had nothing to say on the serious issues presented to them. ALL ignored the evidence and the facts of life within Haringey Council. Certain actions taken were only pre-emptive activities because of the expressed intention to publish material facts and documented evidence on the Internet. We informed all that our citizens should get to know of the abuse of public office and the world can also marvel at the capabilities of the 'used and tutored dishonest' who subsequently get protected by the corrupt and the corrupt and the corrupted in the mother of modern Democracy. The documented evidence, masses of letters etc., can never be erased and or ignored by any decent citizen. The evidence and attempts predate the exposure by Councillor Peter Forrest who came out of the wood to speak of the facts of life in Haringey after the FORGERIES relied upon, used and promoted by Haringey Council staff were referred to the police, as we cover in our pages. Our founder first became aware of the facts of life in March/April 1996. For months lies and fabrications (recorded, audio tapes) attached to inexcusable falsehoods were advanced, promoted and relied upon by the deceivers and the dishonest within the confines of Haringey Council. The activities are fully covered by 'The LAW'* document published on our web-site. In the words of Conservative councillor Peter Forrest: - "...Councils like Haringey are clearly a soft touch for employees who know how to.....". The councillor failed to add ".. do ALSO FOR THEMSELVES that which they do for their employers and for the imported new citizens that are used to defraud the ordinary hardworking and creative citizens. Thieving and stealing from those who operated within the law for decades. Stealing from the creative and frugal WHO HAVE THEIR ASSETS CONVERTED by and through public servants via INSTITUTIONALISED FRAUD AND CORRUPTION. Converting the assets of targeted sections of our communities to others and in particular to the new Masters and LORDS in our neo-feudal DICTATORSHIP. A state operated under the guise of democracy. An alleged democracy resting and founded on Corrupted Law, and not on Law and Order and or on the Laws Parliament enacted over the centuries". The addenda, of course, are nothing but our views resting and founded on the facts we shall be exposing in full as we go along. It is for THE TWO MINISTERS in charge of law and order, investigative and administrative, the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor to act swiftly and efficiently. It is for the police who were instructed to investigate the activities within our legal system and the courts to GET ON WITH THEIR PUBLIC DUTIES. Crime IS CRIME; the Law, IS THE LAW. Cease treating citizens with contempt as you treat 'The LAW'. The extensive and succinct Appeal we publish below qualifies much and clarifies the abuse of the courts' facilities by public servants. Public servants acting as 'asset stripping authorities' with self appointed rights to operate outside the restraints of Parliament's Laws at the expense of Mr and Mrs Average. Misconduct in public office for the benefit of 'selected circles'; fraud and pecuniary advantage through promotion of undeclared policies from non elected partners in a puppet state with no government proper. If we are to carry on benefiting from the use of and allusions to DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments the government must be seen to be acting as promised to our founder in 1995. The explicit and succinct Appeal, published below, covers material that 'members of the self perpetuating cancerous growth industry', in control of OUR Justice System, habitually and systematically indulge in. Their circles never challenging the obvious. We did and do. Read first the last paragraph (J) on page 18; then recognise why our founder's conclusions in 1972/75 and why the references to CIUKU! All the while we, the citizens, meet the costs of the theatrical productions through taxes, as contemplated and indulged into and evinced through the content of the Appeal. NOTE the fact that copy of the Appeal was submitted to the Lord Chancellor's office and to the administrators of the loan facilities recoverable through theatrical productions as directed by second rate directors and as enacted by third rate actors. The 'administrators' none other than the Legal Aid Board, the managers of Public funds and 'the facilities' at the beck and call of the dishonest, the deceitful and THE CORRUPTERS OF OUR SOCIETY; in a nutshell, the promoters of "The Cancerous Growth Industry" (words in quotes copyright). CONSIDER, also, the affidavit lodged at the very court in the matter of the other Housing Benefits 'abuse of the court's (pardon, relevant 'county court's) facilities by another Local Authority and the picture becomes clearer. We could of course publish ALL documented evidence at our disposal and it may well be that we may be forced to do so before the offenders recognise that their attempts to take us down the paths they set in motion many years ago, with and through 'their mischief making partners' in constructive frauds and crimes are not our chosen avenues. The organised misappropriation and the distribution of Housing Benefit funds, 'conveniently through Local Authorities and their well trained in deceptions, dishonesty and Fraudulent activities staff and officers is the main issue. Public servants retained to serve the public doing their damnedest best to defraud their masters (the public). Such persons relying on our bankrupted and corrupted legal system and the operatives from within it, to endorse their kind of society. A society founded and resting on deceptions and fraudulent misrepresentations in the promotion of the "Let Barrabas Live And Crucify Christ", policies by the politically correct destroyers of countries and societies (Link)! Thus they create and generate the need for the services of the corrupt and the corrupted in charge of our legal system, one of the finest in the world, sadly in the hands of the most contemptible of THE LAW practitioners as can be adduced through diligent perusal of the Appeal we copy in this page. We add and point out that the staff and officers of 'the relevant county court' DID strike out the COUNTERCLAIM in the other case we refer to in our pages. Another Local Authority, in that instance, was to benefit from 'suppression and attempted burial of 'the rights in law' of the targeted and intended victim'. Those liberties gave grounds to another Appeal, which we could publish along with all other warranted communications AND THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE, attached to that case. It is partially covered through one of the submitted affidavits, that we publish in our pages.
OVER TO THE MINISTERS responsible for the safeguarding of the rights in law of our citizens. We demand and look forward to justifications and responsible answers for the criminal in intent activities of public servants indulged and indulge in, in pursuance of undeclared Robin (robbing) Hood (under-cover) activities. Over to the Media Barons and their editors; the mammary gland promoters; the suppressors of material facts from the electorate, who are persistently called upon to be more productive and more competitive in order to meet the GREED of the parasites allegedly serving Parliament's Laws and the long suffering, from such corrupt practices, in the public services sector. CEASE TREATING CITIZENS WITH CONTEMPT and or as illiterate serfs of the Middle Ages. You are NOT our elected Masters. Nor are you our Lords, by any stretch of your, or 'the partners' in Institutionalised Crimes, imagination. The citizens, demand the protection of 'The LAW', from the crimes we cover in our pages. NOTE:
NOTICE OF APPEAL TAKE NOTICE
that the Court will be moved on ..............day
the ........... day of ............................. 1998 at
..................... to hear an APPEAL on
behalf of the PLAINTIFF in this action against the ORDER of District Judge Silverman,
allegedly made 20 July 1998 and drawn on 27 July 1998 whereby the said District Judge or
some anonymous person is alleged to have heard a fictitious application by and on behalf of
an unnamed party on 20 July 1998 and the aforesaid District Judge electing on 27 July to
act in contravention of every principle of law, National and International and in breach
of procedure and practice rules failed and refused to deal with the arbitration hearing
set down for the day electing instead to highjack and railroad the case as herein-below
appealed on substantive grounds. AND THE GROUNDS
FOR THE APPEAL are that:- 1. The Order allegedly
issued on 20 July 1998 is but a forgery of the most offensive kind, in that there was no
hearing and no application set down for the Court to deal with any aspect in the case on
the alleged date safe the arbitration hearing set for 27 July 1998 which the Plaintiff
attended Court fully prepared after complying with the directions issued by the Court on
13 May 1998. And that any reference to an alleged hearing of the
parties is fictitious and a non event in law and a figment of the imagination of the
author and or publisher of the Order Appealed against. District Judge Silverman is
called to strict proof of any notes made by him and to refer to the affidavits and the
attached exhibits filed at Court on behalf of the Plaintiff and in particular the
affidavit dated 27 July 1998; the Defendants knew full well what they were Summonsed to
Court for; so did the District Judge and the solicitors purportedly acting for the
Defendants as of 9 June 1998. The monologue and directions indulged into by District Judge
Silverman simply represents the latest of the obstructions to Justice from within the
Court as in other instances when applications to the Court arose and were warranted in the
prosecution of the claim by the Plaintiff; summarily dismissed through utter disregard for
the need of the applications and the evidence submitted to the Court, giving rise to a
demand of the Court to explain away and or justify the failings and the attempt by
District Judge Silverman to change the direction of the case, safe unjustified and
inexcusable attempts to generate income for the legal professions
through abuses of the Courts processes as are now to be investigated in higher places on
substantive grounds; refer to the headlines Daily Mail Thursday 30th July 1998. 2. The hearing listed for
3. The Plaintiff DID
COMPLY with the directions of the Court, inclusive of filing and service of two affidavits
dated 29th June 1998 and 27th July 1998; both affidavits supported with documented
evidence in the context of the Exhibits ‘A.Y.1’ and ‘A.Y.2” attached
thereto respectively qualify and quantify the
Claim against the Defendants; the claim rests and is founded on unpaid rents. 5. The Defendants
failed to act in accordance with the directions of the Court, even though represented by a
firm of solicitors as of 6. Counsel for the
Defendant was ‘put right’ as to the purposes of the hearing set down for the day
on 12. District Judge Silverman was wrong and erred to
partake in practices and or policies, as above stated; obstructing (under any
pretext) property owners and denying to property owners unadulterated and unbiased
rights at Court, especially to owners who rent their properties to Housing Benefit
claimants and in particular Asylum Seekers (simply because Local Authorities are faced
with too much demand for Council accommodation but have not enough accommodation at their
disposal) . Participation
in such practices is but a conscious if not deliberate violation of rights to property as
provided for under Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human
Rights; reducing pressures on Local Authorities resources ought not to override the
rights of the individual citizen, especially
when Local Authority policies and the practices of their staff lead to situations and
Court cases as in this instance; furthermore in attempts to reduce Central
Government funding (because of the needs of Asylum Seekers) the individual and
small private landlords and property owners are targeted as easy prey because of the
prohibitive costs attached to the corrupt and bankrupt legal services operating
within the United Kingdom and District Judge Silverman and the Court ought to
reconsider such policies at the expense of the vulnerable individual particularly in the light of the investigation that was announced on Thursday 30 July 1998 in the Daily
Mail; the article succinct, explicit and to the point; bribes and corruption in high places; police,
lawyers and even Judges. 19. District Judge Silverman was wrong
to introduce elements alien, foreign and neither raised nor pleaded by either party;
through his actions District Judge Silverman simply established HIS PERSONAL attempt to
highjack the case of his own and he must be called to account for himself and to produce
any documents filed at Court other than those pleaded and filed at Court already that
could give rise to the extensive misdirections (in his
concocted scenario) as were indulged in and attempted by him through the FORGERY arising
out of an alleged hearing on 20 July 1998. 23. District Judge Silverman in evading to deal with and
or refer to the documented evidence filed at Court, simply evinced and exhibited
predetermined ‘obstructions’ to the rights of the Plaintiff and the highjacking (by him and the anonymous person(s) partaking and or
willing to lend their names to the alleged Hearing of 20 July 1998) of the case before
the Court; the directions he instigated, promoted and stipulated are nothing but
blatant obstructions to the Plaintiff through breaches of Public Office; just as Deputy
District Judge Smith with blatant intent did, when he summarily dismissed the
Plaintiff’s application on 23rd July 1998; also just as Deputy District Judge Kolbe
with blatant intent did when he, also Summarily, dismissed an Application by the Plaitniff on 1st July 1998 when the Plaintiff applied to Court for
an Order, Ordering the Defendants to cease obstructing the agents of the Plaintiff and
their contractors from attending the property and to the needs of the property as provided
for and in accordance with the terms of the Tenancy Agreements. Blatant obstructions to unbiased and unadulterated
Justice and violations of fundamental Human Rights imposed through Gross breaches and
Dereliction of Public Office, UNLAWFULLY to impose undeclared policies and TO CAUSE
CUMULATIVE AND CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WITH INTENT through blatant violations of rights in
national and international Law. Peace of mind, wasted funds and time ARE PROPERTIES
infringed upon through breaches of Public Office leading to violations of Article 1 of the
First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights, just as denials to access
and use of (property and contracted rights
thereof) moneys due and payable under the terms of the Tenancy
Agreements which Local Authority staff and the COURT know were and are the basis
and the foundation upon which Housing Benefit is remitted by the Department of Social
Security, through the Local Authority, to claimants such as the Defendants are. 24. District Judge Silverman while seeking to
introduce his own ‘scenario’ in the case at hand, or with intent overlooked
the Defendants' liabilities he ought to have entered judgement for the Plaintiff, who is
owed the sum of £4,808.00 which any person with common sense, let alone a judicious
person recognises, IF in any breach of contract could and can be used for the needs of the
property. Every one from the Defendants to the staff at Haringey Council, and even persons
purpotedluy acting in a judicial manner have so far treated the property as theoir own and
to determine and impose their own conditions irrespective of the damages they have caused,
sought to and through the 'proposed script and scenario' (Appealed against) are seeking to
impose through breaches of contract, breaches of public office and through violations of
fundamental human rights. District Judge Silverman, through his
attempted script and scenario 'proposed' made it clear that he obviously did not wish and
or desire to enter Judgement for the Plaintiff through breaches of public office and
deriliction of same. The unpaid rents could and can be used to IMPROVE the
property , not attempt to divert and or convert such funds through abuse of office, to
alleged legitimate and or justifiable legal costs, through abuse of the Legal Aid
facilities. Any judicious prerson with common sense ought not to have overlooked that
issue, let alone a person who to all intents and purposes was to preside in the case as an
arbitrator in the case before the Court (no
automatic right of Appeal). The claimed
and adjusted sum covered only the
period 17 February 1997 to 12 July 1998. The
submitted and filed at Court Schedule did not cover the period 25 September 1995 (the
date from whence the Defendants begun to receive the Housing Benefit themselves) up to 16 February 1997 from which date onwards the
Plaintiff submitted full accounts through the bank statements pertaining to the only
account in which the Defendants were remitting rents by themselves BUT without due
consideration to their contractual liabilities to the Plaintiff. (a) seek to suppress and or
ignored the pleaded facts and the documented evidence in support thereof already filed at Court and served on the defendants. (b)
elect to ignore the fact that the defendants failed to submit any
evidence in support of any other remittances which they ought to have stated and indeed
had every opportunity to plead and or advance as of service of the Default Summons and in
the first instance; further and or in the
alternative the Defendants could and should have pleaded any OTHER remittances by them,
other than those the Plaintiff acknowledged as received (banked by the Defendants in the
Plaintiff’s account) and credited in the Schedule of the rent account duly submitted
to the Defendants and filed at Court, fully substantiated and evinced through the
submitted and filed copies of the relevant bank account statements; the Plaintiff’s
submissions also resting and founded out of THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE COVERING HOUSING
BENEFIT RECEIVED by the Defendants which documented evidence wsa
received by the Plaintiff at the very last minute, through the managing agents of the
Plaintiff who received same from the Local Authority. The aforesaid evidence covers all Housing Benefit remittances to and for the Benefit
of the Defendants due and arising out of and because of the Defendants occupation of the
property owned by the Plaintiff and none other; the very evidence sought and
applied for through the Court was secured otherwise despite the fact that Deputy District
Judge Smith did with intent deny rights to, to the Plaintiff, and or deliberately and
selectively with intent OBSTRUCTING the Plaintiff from securing same in accordance with
the application before the Court on 23rd July 1998. The application that Deputy District
Judge Smith summarily dismissed, on 23rd July 1998, without any consideration of the
rights of the Plaintiff, in national and international law; also in accordance with
acceptable practice and procedure rules which District Judge Silverman subsequently
endorsed (evincing duplicity of purpose by persons purportedly acting in a judicial but not judicious capacity) through the Order purportedly and allegedly made by
the Court on 20th July 1998 but issued on 27th July 1998 whereby the Defendants should
serve “a fully particularised amended
defence and Counterclaim” as if
the facts before the Court were not sufficient and or had not established the
Plaintiff’s case that the Defendants had failed to meet rents due and payable under
the explicit terms of Tenancy Agreements filed at Court as part of the exhibits attached
to the affidavits of the Attorney acting for and as the Plaintiff in person. (c)
promote through the forgery of an alleged Court Order proper, nothing but the
usual manifestations in pursuance of ulterior motives, in the interest of the
income generating practices from within the Courts for and in respect of a claim that rests and is
founded on UNPAID RENTS as per Default Summons, issued and served on the defendants who through their
pleadings and submissions to the Court established themselves to have done nothing else
but that which the Plaintiff claimed in his particular of Claim ‘failure to pay
rents’. District Judge Silverman
erred and was wrong to ignore and or consider the Headlines in the Daily Mail of January
13 1997 “£ 60 Million
Scandal of legal-aid cheats”; he erred and
was wrong also to ignore the fact that the case rests on Shorthold
Tenancy Agreements extended and or re-negotiated as in the instance at hand when
the Benefits Agency declined to accept the original Tenancy Agreement endorsed with the
agreed rent set at £220 per week
which lead to the parties hereto renegotiating and entering into a new agreement which the
Defendants subsequently submitted to the Benefits Agency in order to re-instate the
Defendants claim to and for Housing Benefit, FACTS District Judge Silverman can neither
evade nor ignore. 26. District Judge Silverman in failing to deal with and or consider the documented evidence filed at Court on 29th June 1998 and on 27th July 1998, grossly erred and or was wrong to ignore and or seek the suppression of same and or reliance on any alleged ignorance of the facts arising out of breach of office and as a result of and consequential to HIS highjacking and railroading of the Arbitration hearing which he attempted to shelve (through the Oprder Appealed against) for and in respect of other interests and or ulterior motives other than the service of unadulterated and unbiased Justice. Evading to deal with the documented evidence filed at Court in no way justifies use of and reliance on other issues arising out of the pleadings as grounds through which to seek theatrical productions and or to generate income for the legal professions through blatant and reckless indifferen |
Appeal warranted.. violations
by officers at 'the relevant county court'. (Back to,
Haringey: 
Challenges
for non events (false assertions by the court - paragraph 7
More
false assertions by the criminals in control of our courts -paragraph 9.
Rights to property, Artucle 1 of First
Protocol violated by
the court (Read paragraph 12).
Monologue by a hijacker alleging 'hearing before him' challenged:
account for it (paragraph 16
Undeclared policies and blunt invisible
services to legal circles- paragraph 18
District Judge acting recklessly, in
contempt of the law.... (paragraph 21)
District Judge in contelpt of evidence, issues
false instrument (paragraph 23) 
Obstructions
by court to rights in law and procedure challenged (paragraph 25)
Order sought to declare directions/script error
based on a false instrument / FORGERY (paragraph A). Also orders
sought in respect of attempts to seek and abuse Legal Aid facilities in respect of
ESTABLISHED LIABILITIES founded on contract and failures to challenge the documented
evidence that the abusers of public office, as alleged judicious persons, elected to
ignore in pursuance of other ulterior motives and practice (paragraph B). Demand for security of costs against solicitors should they wish to
proceed with any theatrical scenarios and scripts as 'planned by the abuser of office at
that late hour (paragraph C). 
Duty of care 'for claimants by state and Local
Authorities' (paragraph D). Demands also for explanations and justifications from
the author of the script and scenario FOR FAILING TO DEAL with the
absence of any substance and or evidence upon which to found the proposed
theatrical production in pursuance of undeclared by the state and the courts policies
(paragraph G).
Failure to defend established liability gave rise
to challenge COURT and freedoms to indulge by persons in judicial chairs;
challenged as violations of Article 13 (paragraph I). Also CONSCIOUS knowledge and
endorsement of FRAUD ON THE Department of Social Security by LOCAL
AUTHORITY STAFF AND OFFICERS leading to challenges of the
court to refer the matters to the Fraud Office of the DSS in Leeds (paragraph J). (Back to 
Challenging court to justify
to Lord Chancellor attempt to abuse Legal Aid 'facilities'.
NOTE: copies of the Appeal sent to Lord Chancellor's office and the Legal Aid Board, who also received copies of the 
Back-sheet address. Members of the
Landlords Action Group, ensuring the managing agents of 'their properties' receive all
mail relevant to their properties and to their rights in law. 
The extensive script concocted in contempt of
every principle of procedure. An instrument indulged into in order to create
theatrical productions in pursuance of undeclared policies and the 'usual income
generation facilities' for the actors in the legal circles. The author and the Lord
Chancellor's Department are called to account while the Home Secretary is called to
justify the failures of the police in Haringey to attend to the blatant crimes instigated
and indulged into by the staff and officers at Haringey Council THROUGH THE USE AND
PROMOTION OF 
The police were handed a Section 9 Statement, copies
of the FORGERIES we publish and copy of an alleged legitimate order purporting to
be a 'justifiable' instrument in law arising out of diligent references to the file in the
case at hand. IN ITSELF that instrument resting and founded on a
non-event with the additional offence of the fact that
the court also arranged to post that false, in law, instrument weeks late. The
property agents who were co-operating in the scams and the extensive constructive frauds,
for obvious reasons (to any one who knows of court procedures and rules) suppressed the
delivery of that false instrument. They had been forewarned of the tricks the court staff
indulge in and they could recognise why the need for the most common
tool by the courts in the best interests of the directors and that actors who are
in control of 'The Legal And Court Productions Entertainment Industry'. The perversion of and the corrupt abuse of the courts' facilities are
criminal offences; we have other instances on record, and the evidence, when Court
Orders were posted late and without hearings proper or the need for one in much the same
way as when the 
The Arbitration arrangements BY THE COURT in view
of the amount claimed. Reference to the Appeal we publish qualifies much. The Lord
Chancellor and his department have a lot to answer for, after they prepare the LIST OF
DOCUMENTS IN THE COURT FILE as we demanded and insist upon. The letter can be
published and our reasons can be made public along with much more documented and damning
evidence against the offenders who are of opinion that the needs of the citizens for
'justice' are their ticket to dishonest and fraudulent gains through abuse of the courts'
facilities. NOTE: The order is backdated by the
offender in an attempt to justify the introduction of the FALSE and fraudulent in intent
instrument. Removal of the records from court file of the 'hearing of 23 July 1998
constitutes another INDICTABLE OFFENCE as qualified by 'The LAW' compilation we publish.
The request of the court staff to ensure that they
were to forward the completed, in date and time, application
to the amenable in the scams' letting / managing agents of 'the targeted property and its
owners'.
Receipt issued when the Appeal was lodged. (Back
to: National Scandal