Read of CORRUPT Detectives, Judges, Lawyers, Ministers - article in the London Evening Standard [*Link to image & text]

This page & all material pointed to, with our compliments to all of the Fraudsters Club Recruits & Maintenance Engineers - ORGANISED USERS OF THE SYSTEM AS IS. One and all came along or were sent (by known organisers of such fraudsters) to Mr Andrew Yiannides in order to abuse his time as lovers, promoters and operators of the system. Enacting the scenarios they engaged in, as lousy actors of the lowest denominator, was their only interest. Everyone behaved as foretold in the works of the creators of the evil ways that caused and cause man's inhumanity to man. All simply behaved and are behaving as conditioned, amoral, ill-educated non-thinkers and as programmed robots:- non-humans. ALL SPEAK OF RIGHTS and conveniently IGNORE THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO SOCIETY, to the TAXPAYERS who are called upon to meet the cost of the constructive frauds they engage in AS CONSCIOUS PARTICIPANTS to theft of the plundered taxpayers contributions to the national budget* [*Link from here to proof that amounts to blunt conspiracy to defraud]. All wilfully and with malice aforethought simply content to participate in the constructive frauds and happy to suppress the plundering of the national budget, funds stolen from the taxes imposed on 'the serfs' through abuse of the courts 'facilities'. Suppressing it all & relying on those they set out to complain about, to carry on ignoring the law THEIR CASTLES & SECURITY!* (*NOTE: We will release material that clarifies & qualifies the simple fact that all was planned over 2300 years ago; mankind ought to have recognised 'the advance warning from the evil creators of it all over the span of 23 centuries plus, by now). DEMOCRACY? (*F1). We point the persons we dedicate this page to, to the House of Lords deliberations below* [*Link from here to the Precedent case] when their Lordships addressed the issues of CONSPIRACY & RECOGNISE WHY WE REITERATE & EMPHASISE : "... when TWO OR MORE AGREE TO INJURE THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER.... (the hundreds, the thousands, the millions of whom the persons we name and expose are in a position to know of, uppermost in our minds) & further on.... "ACTION OR FAILURE.... constitutes..."  WAKE UP VICTIMS & APATHETIC, INDOCTRINATED, ILL-INFORMED, TAXPAYERS, SERFS ; recognise the simple fact that YOU CREATE & THEY TAKE through abuse of the courts' facilities & arrogant contempt of the law.

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE OF AFFAIRS, successive irresponsible Lord Chancellors and Home Secretaries who ignored all complaints and submissions irrespective of the evidence and the law pointed to, by the victims of it all, the citizens who are called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of arrogant criminals in public office.

*

*

*

*

4suckers.htm   Page KEY 

JOIN others On Line and publish your Statement of Facts and the Evidence you have. ( Member's case at the European Court on Human Rights - paves the way TO PLEAD VIOLATIONS caused through abusive use of the courts in allegedly civilised Democratic States. Victims do not know that IT IS ALL ORGANISED BY the very circles who have been arranging all of humanity's TRIBULATIONS  FOR THOUSANDS of years) Use your rights in law (*Link) and ACT, with others, against the offenders. Join with others and chip in for the creation of the mass of evidence against abusers of public office : the abductors and rapists of Justice. You can then benefit from THE FACTS & THE EVIDENCE that you will help establish. It can all be used in any action, severally or jointly with others, as the case may be. Crimes against humanity are not ruled out when a large number of citizens can come up with evidence and as victims concur and or expand upon on the FACTS STATED & The VIOLATIONS PLEADED as LODGED at the ECoHR, already

The image of the order below EVINCES THE FACT  that as soon as a victim used his rights to PUBLISH & EXPOSE the offending Public Servants who abused the facilities of the courts for Constructive Frauds and CONVERSION OF ASSETS & PROPERTIES TO THE LEGAL CIRCLES, they acted.

Visitors / researchers NOTE: The victim after setting up a home page, as a member of the Community on Line simply sent out a press release about his *crookjudges* Web Site. Without any application, by the victim (so he informed Mr Yiannides) A MIRACLE : he received  the above Court Order. It was rushed out to him, granting him permission for LEAVE TO APPEAL. DO NOTE, please, the date at the right hand corner, bottom of the document. LOOK also at the date when date stamped. It is obvious that the hand written order WAS RUSHED OUT first thing in the morning before changing the date in the rubber stamp. A Miracle 20th century style, we are sure all will agree, and there exist plenty of charlatans & stooges who are running around 'selling and promoting the practices as maintenance engineers who INFLUENCE SHYSTERS and or INVITE lovers of fraud to indulge with them in the very same practices we cover in the exclusive page that NONE OF THE ALLEGED VICTIMS who contacted us over the last 13 years addressed, for obvious reasons to us. (*Link to the exclusive page where we expose the blunt & arrogant CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES) 

IN THIS PANEL WE PROPOSE TO ADD LINKS POINTING TO OTHER SITES  THAT LINK TO THIS WEB-SITE

Facebookers can connect with the creator of this website IF victims of the abused court & police facilities from within any pseudodemocracy Access the creator at .com/yiandrew
IF proactive OR wishing to expose & challenge the offenders

As part of the reconstruction process our new pages and pages where changes and additions have been implemented, the improved / amended pages are endorsed with the link 'Page Changes and the date of the last changes. The link takes visitors to a List of the changes implemented in the page. These include new material and links from relevant paragraphs to other or new relevant material in other pages and websites. For further clarification email: webmaster@

VISITORS ARE URGED to access and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. We had no choice but to REPORT THE CRIME OF ORGANISED FRAUD TO THE TREASURY. Our observations and knowledge of the constructive frauds made us accessories if we kept quiet, like the alleged victims who work towards the implementation of the schemes by the abductors and rapists of Justice, the Goddess. You will find the addenda statement at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you will share with us our concerns and most profound disappointment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but downright crimes. We refer and point you to our exclusive page where we expose (as conscientious law abiding citizens) the Confidentiality that exists Between Fraudsters, care of the BEST OPEN SECRET that binds them together. 

*

As a matter of priority VISITORS, especially victims of the constructive frauds through abuse of the legal system, in the United Kingdom, MUST ACCESS & READ all material at the paragraphs we provide links to from this page, to this & to other pages.

*

Most, if not all, sooner or later, get to know / recognise that the need to engage solicitors because of some need to recover properties and rights that are assured in law (warranting applications to any court) lead to many acts of fraud that are instigated by the legal circles and judicial chair occupants, too.

*Link from here [*L] to a typical example when judges simply created a situation intended, by them, to lead to other scenarios and scripts before another court while acting in contempt of applicable law to the facts before them. Read and recognise why the contempt for the rights ignored and why the suggested and imposed alternative scenarios for THAT WHICH WAS SOUGHT FROM THE COURT of APPEAL at the time.

*

One first link in this page can be reached from the paragraph linked to from here [*L]; there we refer to known lovers, promoters and users of the facilities in place for arrogant constructive frauds through abuse of the courts' facilities; most of all we point to long-existing plans by the organisers and managers of conditioned morons / programmed robots / non-thinkers / non-humans.

*

We cover the arrangements for ORGANISED FRAUD in an exclusive page, to which visitors, readers and researchers can link from here [*L]; we assure all visitors & taxpayers, who are pointed to this page & website that NOT ONE OF THE LOVERS of the rampant fraud through the courts EVER BOTHERED to address the issues covered in the page.

*

As ORGANISED LOVERS OF THE CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS, one and all relied and rely on abusers of public office - the police & the judiciary in the main - to endorse the organised crimes such persons engage in, as Mr Andrew Yiannides, the creator of this website, got to know of and experienced as of 1969 to the present days, November 2007. Needless to say all rely on the media barons and the Intellectual Prostitutes retained and maintained by the barons for dissemination of falsehoods and arrogant suppression of truths.

*Link from here [*L] to the words of an insider and from there scroll up in the page to read also of the long-existing conspiratorial plans of the creators / instigators of crimes against humanity. We refer to the misinformation industry Barons who agreed with the planners and organisers of pseudodemocratic states to keep the tax-paying serfs in the dark. Scroll to the bottom of any page and access the list of pages where we expose and address the issues attached to and born of the activities of recognised operatives of the constructive frauds imposed on the national budget / the taxpaying suckers through abuse of the courts facilities.

The Jurisdiction of the Court to order a solicitor to pay the costs of proceedings is not limited to cases where he personally has been guilty of misconduct, but extends to a case where his managing clerk, to whom he has entrusted the necessary work, is guilty of misconduct, as for example, in the preparation of and filing of inadequate affidavits of documents. The jurisdiction is not limited to deal with cases of misconduct or default, but extends to the case where costs have been improperly incurred or without reasonable cause or have proved fruitless by reason of undue delay in proceeding under a judgement or order.

An order for discovery requires the client to give information in writing and on oath of all documents which are or have been in his possession or power, whether he is bound to produce them or not, but as a client cannot be expected to realise the whole scope of that obligation without the aid and advice of his solicitor, the latter has a peculiar duty as an officer of the Court carefully to investigate the position, and, as far as possible, see that the order is complied with. The solicitor cannot simply allow the client to make whatever affidavit of documents he thinks fit, nor can he escape the responsibility of careful investigation or supervision. If the client will not give him the information which he is entitled to require, or if the client insists on swearing an affidavit which the solicitor knows to be imperfect, the solicitor's duty is to withdraw from the case. A solicitor who has innocently put upon the file an affidavit by his client which he subsequently discovers to be false, owes a duty to the Court to put the matter right at the earliest moment if he continues to act as solicitor on the record.     

Decision of the Court of Appeal ( reported sub nom Myers v Rothfield [1939] IK B 109 ) reversed. Lord Russell of Killowen dissenting on the ground that the evidence submitted to the House failed in his opinion to establish any of the charges against the managing clerk, and, therefore, the order against the respondent could not stand.   

****************************************

Conspiracy - The crime of conspiracy to defraud takes place when two or more individuals agree to injure the rights of another. No further action is required. In practice, however, it is difficult to prove conspiracy unless the agreement to do something dishonest is put into effect.  

Dishonesty - acting dishonestly is an essential ingredient in the crime. In legal terms the knowledge of doing something wrong in relation to another person (whether overtly or covertly) constitutes dishonesty. Where covert action is concerned it may not be necessary to tell a lie or misrepresent the truth; a decision by someone who is aware of the true position to remain silent and in this way deprive an individual of his entitlement may constitute an implied lie or misrepresentation; and deliberate failure to correct a previous wrong interpretation of an individual's entitlement which he took on trust almost certainly amounts to an implied lie. It is important to note that such action - or failure to act - constitutes dishonesty even if the person concerned believes in good faith that some valid public purpose is being served by it.       

To defraud - this is to deprive someone of something to which he is properly entitled; either directly or by implied lie or misrepresentation  [*Link from here to the page where we expose ORGANISED CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES]

Through the above deliberations and ruling / judgement their Lordships made it abundantly clear that solicitors owe a duty to the Court (to Justice in essence) to ensure that NO FALSEHOODS ARE ADVANCED, AIDED OR SUPPORTED by Officers of the Supreme Court. However, there exist the issues of power over others, greed and temptation, such as invitations to entertain criminally motivated and secured impositions on targeted parties. WE HAVE SUCH EVIDENCE; a barrister inviting through a deposition, an AFFIDAVIT SERVED & LODGED AT COURT, a Judge of the Supreme Court (RCJ - London) to ignore the law, and to 'deny rights assured in law' to a targeted serf, one, who, in accordance with the teachings by examples stated in the work of the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything, does NOT QUALIFY FOR JUSTICE, BECAUSE OF HIS BACKGROUND & BELIEFS. Such elements, years before the late Stephen Knight published his well-researched work on 'The Brotherhood', the Freemasons and activities by members who, apparently, merit no consideration by the hierarchy of 'The Brotherhood', as an offended 'dissident' spoke of to the researcher. [Use the link below to access the extract]

Chapter 16 [*Link from here [*L] to the extract] from 'The Brotherhood', relates to elements attached to arrogant contempt for the law and blunt abuse of trust / position by fraudsters who operate out of Banking Institutions, mainline public services (state & private) as organised by networks of the brethren; an absolute must of a read for all taxpayers who ever concerned themselves with any questionable public act. (*F)

• On the right image of the book cover from the work of the late Stephen Knight.
• Victims, readers and researchers are urged to read Chapter 16, we reproduce below [*Link]
• Serious and concerned visitors must point ALL friends and relatives, TAXPAYERS OR NOT, to this web-site. All taxpayers should get to know WHAT GOES ON in the courts.
• All should consider the simple fact that a few years before the author of 'The Brotherhood' engaged in his research, Mr Andrew Yiannides, the creator of this website had been the victim of every criminal activity and much more than covered in the extract from the book we reproduce below.
• Many engaged in the arrogant constructive frauds we cover in our pages; some directly & others indirectly; the latter state resting on contempt for the law and arrogant misconduct in public office from and by police officers right through to judicial chair occupants.
• All simply were, as they still are, relying on the media barons and fraudsters club recruits to suppress such activities and the organised fraud & corruption through the courts.
• Readers / visitors should access the page where we publish evidence relevant to the issue of Masonic involvement in the criminal activities Mr Andrew Yiannides was subjected to by his solicitor, Mr Kypros Nicholas, a trusted old school friend and fellow Greek Cypriot. 

An absolute must, for victims and researchers to access the page where we publish evidence as reported in a Greek weekly UK newspaper, that Mr Kypros Nicholas, an alleged friend of Mr Andrew Yiannides, an ex English School Old Boy and school chum of Andrew, as a solicitor [*Link from here [*L] to definition] and an alleged Honourable Officer of the Supreme Court, was, is and has been a Freemason of some standing. In the very page we point also to the foundations of the Brotherhood and what forces behind it. Diligent reference to and study of the material we publish, and point to, SHOULD CLARIFY why a High Court judge and a former Grand Inspector Inquisitor Commander of the Thirty-First Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Rite withdrew from the Brotherhood; the reasons given in Chapter 16 of the above book: "NO ACTIVE CHRISTIAN COULD IN ALL CONSCIENCE REMAIN A MASON".

Below, the element of COMMON FACTORS POINT TO THE ORIGINS of the practices
&
By association to the Brotherhood's part in such practices [*Link from here [*L] to the root of it all]

    ' Solicitors are very good at it,' said Christopher. 'Get your man involved in something legal - it need not be serious - and you have him.' Solicitors, I was told, are 'past masters at causing endless delays, generating useless paperwork, ignoring instructions, running up immense bills, misleading clients into taking decisions damaging to themselves.
    Masonic police can harass, arrest on false charges and plant evidence. 'A businessman in a small community or a person in public office arrested for dealing in child pornography, for indecent exposure, or for trafficking in drugs is at the end of the line,' said Christopher. 'He will never work again. Some people have committed suicide after experiences of that kind.'
    Masons can bring about the situation where credit companies and banks withdraw credit facilities from individual clients and tradesmen, said my informant. Banks can foreclose. People who rely on the telephone for their work can be cut off for long periods. Masonic employees of Local Authorities can arrange for a person's drains to be inspected and extensive damage to be reported, thus burdening the person with huge repair bills; workmen carrying out the job can 'find' - in reality cause - further damage. Again with regard to legal matters, a fair hearing is hard to get when a man in ordinary circumstances is in financial difficulties. If he is trying to fight a group of unprincipled Freemasons skilled in using the 'network' it will be impossible because Masonic Department of Health and Social Security and Law Society officials (see pp 189-90) can delay applications for Legal Aid endlessly.
     Employers, if they are Freemasons or not, can be given private information about a man who has made himself an enemy of Masonry. At worst he will be dismissed (if the information is true) or consistently passed over for promotion.'
     Christopher added, 'Masonic doctors can also be used. But for some reason doctors seem to be the least corruptible men. There are only two occurrences of false medical certificates issued by company doctors to ruin the chances of an individual getting a particular job, which I know about. It's not a problem that need greatly worry us like the rest.'
     He continued for about half an hour to list examples of the ways in which corrupt members of the Brotherhood could defeat opposition, repeating every few minutes that these kind of circumstances involved a minority of the brethren and that most would be utterly appalled at even the suggestion that such things were happening, let alone countenance them. That they were happening at all reflected the deterioration of the Craft inasmuch as its entry requirements were no longer stringent enough. Those in power in Freemason Hall knew something of what went on, but they felt defeated by it and preferred to look the other way rather than take steps to eradicate it. If Christopher and his group failed to force the issue into the open, he said, the organisation would become so morally polluted that it would simply cease to exist. But he was not solely concerned with the Brotherhood. It was the victims of those who used Masonry as a source of personal power who had to be helped as well.
    'Only the fighters have any hope of beating the system once it's at work against them,' he told me. 'Most people, fighters or not, are beaten in the end, though. It's …. You see, I …. you finish up not knowing who you can trust. You can get no help because your story sounds so paranoid that you are thought a crank, one of those nuts who think the whole world is a conspiracy against them. It is a strange phenomenon. By setting up a situation that most people will think of as fantasy, these people can poison every part of a person's life. If they give in they go under. If they don't give in it's only putting off the day because if they fight, so much unhappiness will be brought to people around them that there will likely come a time when even their families turn against them out of desperation. When that happens and they are without friends wherever they look, they become easy meat. The newspapers will not touch them.
     There is no defence against an evil which only the victims and the perpetrators know exists. [*Link to the whole of Chapter 16 covering solicitors & the Law Society]

The elements and issues of concern, covered in the above extract, BY AN INSIDER. The doubtful and non-believers should access the page where we point to the root and origins of the 'divide & conquer' ploy as disseminated and used by followers of the teachings and practices by examples stated in the Old Testament. In the meantime the leaders / heads of three religions carry on promoting the same old misrepresentations upon which the foundations of the three religions and all of their clones. [*Link from here [*L] to the root of the divide and conquer / rule ploy as distributed through the Old Testament to the sons of men; *Link also from here to another page where we publish the *disputed* plans of the most ardent of followers / distributors of the teachings by examples stated and alleged to be 'Holy Scriptures']

*

Read below of activities, defaults, blunt omissions and of an arrogant and direct hijacking of a Default Summons, a Court case issued out of Court by the Claimant. A solicitor took it upon himself to issue instructions to the Court of issue, thereby interfering with an Application for Judgement* (*F ) and through such instructions interference in the rights of 'the targeted serf', the deponent of the affidavit below.

*

The arrogance of the solicitor was supplemented with blunt abuse of public office! Apparently such activities, by solicitors, are simply endorsed, acquiesced and 'promoted as of right, care of 'God given Authority' to solicitors; also to all public servants, to act as they please.

*

The solicitor, in the instance at hand, was neither instrumental in the institution of the case he interfered with, NOR WAS HE EVER INSTRUCTED BY THE CLAIMANT / PLAINTIFF. Yet of his own THE SOLICITOR WENT ON THE RECORD, FOR THE CASE and thereafter the arrogant abusers of public office, operating out of the County Court just ignored the rights of the Plaintiff, 'the targeted serf'.

*

The facts of the case are clearly stated in the Affidavit published, below, and all readers, researchers and victims of 'the established practices and routines within the system and the courts', AFTER READING the affidavit below, MUST READ ALSO, the Affidavit that was settled and sprung on the solicitors and the Court, by the brother of Mrs. Englezakis, who, by then, had been the targeted victim of many invisible services providers; services to persons who engage in oiling the cog-wheels of the corrupted legal, judicial and policing services.

*

Read of another solicitor who instituted Court Proceedings without due process for and in respect of a fraudulent claim WITHOUT ANY GROUNDS WHATSOEVER, with the only exception that in the instance at hand all were acting as true followers of the one who came down with his affiliates and associates to 'cause the sons of men to cease co-operating and achieving great things'. [*Link from here [*L] to the foundations] Part of the invisible services, founded and rested on false instruments created and issued by public servants who operated out of the confines of the Local Authority. Such issues and facilities to / for persons who oil the cog wheels of CIUKU Enterprises (and clones in other lands too), part of the evidence attached to the affidavit below.

*

*

*

THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT

Affidavit of Despina Englezakis

I Despina Englezakis of 27 Bawdsey Avenue, Newbury Park, Ilford 1G2 7TW, in the county of Essex, presently residing with my mother and looking after her at 16a Woodside Road London N22 5HU MAKE OATH and say as follows:

Save where otherwise expressed I depose to the facts set out in this my affidavit from my own knowledge and from documents that I had and or have in my possession and from conversations I had with any other party referred to herein, who in the past confirmed the factuality of what I repeat, and I firmly believe to be true because conversations or matters herein deposed of by me were not at all relevant times denied and or challenged by such others as I refer to.

I am a member of the Landlords Action Group and one of the first to join the Group after it was founded by my brother and agent Andrew Yiannides. Like other Landlords and members of the L.A.G I did encounter problems with Social Security assisted tenants. My husband had been managing two properties we own jointly in Hornsey, in the London Borough of Haringey; he was for ever complaining that agencies through which he had been letting our flats had been letting him down and that more often than not each time a Housing Benefit assisted person was taken on as a tenant there were nothing but problems, especially in securing payments. After our daughter Rita took her own life in December 1993 and our son Neofytos attempted to do likewise in March 1994, my husband attempted to subjugate and control me improperly and I separated from him, at which time he passed over to me the aforesaid two properties, that were in a bad state of disrepair and I set myself the task of renovating and improving the properties, with assistance and guidance from my elder brother Andrew Yiannides.
Page 1 of 12.  

One of the first tenancy agreements I entered into was with a young couple; Mr Nihal Wijemuni and his wife Christina P Congalves who secured from me a Shorthold tenancy agreement after references were taken up by my brother and agent Andrew Yiannides; this was in November 1994. At the time of the signing of the agreement the couple were both in employment; in fact Mr Nihal Wijemuni besides his normal employment as a barman with British Rail he was also engaged in part time work for a wine bar. My agent and I were satisfied that the tenants we were taking on would be in a position to meet their contractual obligations. We were made aware of the fact that Ms Christina P Congalves was pregnant at the time of the signing of the Shorthold tenancy agreement but we were assured that the tenants would be making arrangements for some family member to come to London and stay with them after the arrival of the baby in order for Ms Congalves to return to work as soon as possible after the birth of their child.

The aforesaid tenants maintained their rent payments until after the birth of their baby girl; they went to Portugal for a couple of weeks and returned to London with two brothers of Ms Congalves and a sister-in-law as their guests. It was intended for Ms Congalves to return to work and her sister in law, who was also pregnant at the time, to look after the baby girl; however, the arrangements we were told of, did not materialise and the tenants begun to fall behind in their rent payments; although the tenants had ‘guests’ staying with them for some months they alleged and stated that they were relying only on the wages of Mr Nihal Wijemuni to meet their everyday costs and, naturally, their rents. At the same time the tenants complained about the high level of the Council Tax that was demanded of them by Haringey Council; my agent advised them to contact the council where they should make their representations and state their financial situation. My agent told Mr Wijemuni that if he needed any assistance he would be glad to assist him and in fact my agent wrote to the Council on my behalf about the issue of the high rates; the Council did not inform us of any changes and or adjustments but as the issue of the Council Tax is a matter for the occupiers of the property my agent did not follow up the matter, especially since the tenants did not invite him and or let him know of their ‘efforts’.
Page 3 of 12

In February 1996 with arrears mounting up Mr Wijemuni told my agent and I that he was to be made redundant; he stated that he would be able to catch up with the couple’s rent arrears when he received his redundancy payment. There followed weeks of inexcusable failures to produce evidence in support of the steps taken by the tenants (as my agent had advised them) which included their right to apply for assistance at the Social Services of Haringey Council for Housing Benefit. My agent had no option but to initiate enquiries of  (/continued of page 3 of 12)

the Housing Benefit section at Haringey Council as soon as the tenants stated that they had lodged their claim with the authority. In the course of telephone calls, the staff at Haringey Council would invariably come up with excuses such as they misplaced the file for the relevant tenant I application, and on a number of occasions they went as far as to state that there was no evidence the tenants had actually applied; the tenants received appropriate letters and, eventually, following notice and warnings Mr Wijemuni delivered to my agent copies of documents establishing that the tenant had actually delivered relevant information and documents had been lodged with Haringey Council.

The staff at Haringey Council, obviously, were failing to act within the rules and after explicit telephone calls my agent took action; he contacted the office of the Chief Executive and following final notices to the tenants and to the Chief Executive I attended with my agent Edmonton County Court and issued the relevant County Court Summons; as the claim was founded and rested on unpaid rents a Default Summons was applied for. The office of the Chief Executive was informed of the steps taken and my agent advised the tenant Mr Wijemuni (who had been asserting for months that his solicitor (Antons, Green Lanes, Haringey was dealing with his redundancy claim) to instruct his solicitors to issue and serve Third Party Notice on Haringey Council* and to tell his solicitors that Haringey Council had failed for well over four months to process his application for Housing Benefit. (*F3)

My agent informed the secretary of the Chief Executive at Haringey Council that a Default Summons had been applied for and his secretary telephoned back later to state that a giro cheque had been sent to me; it was alleged that the giro cheque had been sent to me some weeks earlier and my agent pointed out that nothing had been received; in the ensuing conversation my agent was told that the giro payment had been sent to my matrimonial home and address; my agent pointed out that all correspondence by for and on my behalf is sent to and received care of my mother’s residence because of my own and my mother’s circumstances; my agent asked of the secretary of the Chief Executive to ensure the giro cheque was cancelled and the Council’s bankers were instructed to put a stop to the misdirected giro cheque: letters were exchanged thereafter to that effect. My agent later told me that because of the manner with which the husband I had divorced had behaved over the previous couple of years and as he had experienced of him personally in the previous five years he had taken the precaution to ensure the Tenancy Agreement he issued to the tenants was endorsed with his own address as my agent; it was therefore inexcusable and questionable why payments were sent to my matrimonial home address.
Page 3 of 12

The tenant Ms Congalves telephoned me when the Default Summons was served; she stated that she had gone to the Council at the Social Services where the staff told her their Housing Benefit had been paid to their landlord; she asked me to telephone her husband on Saturday late afternoon, when he was to be in so as for us to arrange for a meeting on Sunday when her husband was to be off work at which time between us and my agent we should be able to resolve the issue; she stated they would produce evidence of the remittances by Haringey Council and her husband would then remit to me the outstanding balance to settle their indebtedness to me.

In the mid afternoon of Saturday I received a telephone call from the old lady living below the rooms the tenants were occupying; she informed me the tenants had been busy moving out the previous night and, at the time. I telephoned my agent who collected me from mother’s and we proceeded to the property; indeed the tenants were busy moving out; we found the young brother of Ms C P Congalves packing cutlery and crockery in boxes in the kitchen; the tenants were not there. It was evident the tenants were aiming to disappear to destinations unknown and my agent acted accordingly; we removed luxuries such as a television, a hi-fi stack, a video, speakers and even a satellite receiver the tenants had bought while failing to meet their rents; my agent listed the items on paper and wrote in large characters the reason and purpose of the removal of and taking possession of the articles to be held on lien by my agent and I, until payment of the outstanding rents; the list and terms, two A4 sheets, were handed to the young man by my agent in my presence; the young man was told that the items would be returned to the defaulting tenants on settlement of their rent account and all other liabilities under the terms of the tenancy agreement. Full and better particulars were later deposed of on affidavit by my agent Andrew Yiannides as I depose of herein below under paragraph 13.

The tenants departed to their undisclosed destination proceeded to instruct solicitors who instituted proceedings against me and my agent without even bothering to write a single letter to me or to my agent as to their clients ‘grievances’ and or assumed justified cause of action against us. We got to know of the proceedings when a process server called at my mother’s address and served on us papers that included an attempt to secure an injunction from the Court on an ex parte application; the application was dismissed by the District Judge, who even Ordered the solicitors to meet the costs of Counsel they had instructed for the purpose of their injunction application to the Court, under the provisions and rules governing Legal Aid facilities.
Page 4 of 12

Upon receipt of the documents served on myself and my agent I contacted my solicitor who, at the time, was acting for me in matters pertaining to the ancillary relief proceedings of my divorce; he was not in and for over ten days I was unable to speak to him personally; he never telephoned me back even though I left many messages with his secretary; he was for ever out, out of town, on an important case, etc.; the usual excuses when a solicitor is evading to deal with specific issues for and or on behalf of a client. The tenant, Mr Nihal Wijemuni instructed his solicitors to claim damages against my agent and me personally for allegedly evicting them illegally; the solicitors acting for the tenants had instituted proceedings without ever communicating with us their client’s allegations, and because my agent was party to the proceedings (second named Defendant in that action) my agent proceeded to Court where he entered and filed a Defence and Counterclaim in order to set the record straight since my solicitor was unavailable to deal with the case against my person; thereafter my agent faxed to my solicitors copies of the pleadings he filed at Court; my solicitor then came out of the wood and invited us to deliver the papers we were served with at his home address as a matter of urgency; he informed us he had contacted the tenant’s solicitor and told them he was to act for me; in the course of a meeting at my solicitor’s office my agent informed my solicitor that he would be acting for himself in the matter and was not seeking legal representation. Myself, of course, I relied on my solicitors; my solicitor received all relevant information and copies of the papers my agent had prepared for him; because of my circumstances (abandoned by my husband to live on £42 a week in the matrimonial home and because of the extensive renovations warranted by the two properties in Hornsey) and my personal financial situation my solicitor advised me to apply for Legal Aid; he gave the forms to my agent to complete (as the person who knew of all my circumstances) while I explained to my solicitor of the facts as of the service of the papers by the process server acting on instructions from the solicitors retained by the tenants. My solicitor was well versed with the background to the case because he was already purportedly dealing with my divorce and what had transpired. Since the day he attended the local police station with my agent because of the criminal injuries my agent suffered and the criminal damages caused by the defaulting tenants to my agent’s car. My solicitor was also fully aware that the defaulting tenant arrived at the police station with a computer print-out CONVENIENTLY FURNISHED BY THE STAFF of Haringey Council purportedly constituting evidence of giro cheques issued to me which printout he was presenting as evidence of alleged payments made to and received and banked by me. My solicitor was also aware that it was some two weeks later that a Housing Benefit giro cheque was issued to me by Haringey Council.
Page 5 of 12

The Defendants were caused to enter a Defence and Counterclaim to the Default Summons (case ED603046); thereafter my agent settled for me a Reply to the Defence, true copy of which appears on pages 15, 16 and 17 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit; TWO COPIES were served by Recorded Delivery post on the Court; the extra copy for postal service by the Court on the Defendants; my agent also took the precaution to serve directly on the Defendants with another copy in case the court failed to serve the document on the Defendants (dishonest tenants). Solicitors for the tenants were also served with a copy and challenged (as of the moment they served their papers in respect of case number ED604970) in order for them to recognise and deal with the facts of their client’s true position in law; I emphasise that it was only through service of the papers )case ED604970) that my agent and I got to know of the allegations made and relied upon by the tenant, who for the purposes of his action relied upon and applied also for LEGAL AID as was apparently endorsed by his solicitors. Subsequent to being challenged by my agent and I, did the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenant bother to check the validity of the computer print-outs the staff at Haringey Council conveniently furnished to the dishonest tenants; reliance by the tenants on the computer print-outs could be excused as naive but it was another matter for solicitors to advance and rely on questionable and unsubstantiated pieces of paper as alleged conclusive payments of rents due by the tenants. The solicitors for the tenant drafted, filed and served affidavits duly sworn by their client and placed RELIANCE on unchecked and unsubstantiated pieces of paper notwithstanding the demand and challenge for strict proof of and for all alleged remittances relied upon by the tenants and their solicitors.

Following service of the papers in the case instituted by the tenants (ED604970) the Court set a hearing date for Directions in the matter, for 1 October 1997. My agent, as the Second named Defendant in that matter proceeded to prepare an affidavit; therein he pleaded and deposed of all facts and the documented evidence upon which we relied to defend that case against us and to establish the case against the dishonest tenants. True copy of my agent’s affidavit appears on pages 1 through to 14 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit.

My agent and I attended Court on 1st October 1996 for the purposes of the Directions in the case number ED604970; my agent went to the Court office in order to swear his affidavit of the date and he went to make two sets of copies the solicitors. My agent gave both sets of the copies he made to my solicitors, inclusive of the exhibits attached thereto. My agent pointed out to my solicitor that it was of utmost importance to  (/continues of page 7 of 12)
Page 6 of 12

point out to the tenants solicitors, when handing over the copy of the deposition and the exhibits attached thereto, to the inexcusable and unjustified attempts to rely upon the alleged remittances from Haringey Council to myself as evidence of funds received and banked by me. My agent pointed out to a schedule he had prepared and served on the Court as of 10th September 1996, or soon thereafter because service of same had been affected by Recorded Delivery post. My agent also pointed out to my solicitor that the alleged remittances relied upon by the tenants were nothing but computer listings of purportedly paid sums and could not be used and or relied upon as allegedly received and banked sums in full satisfaction of the rents outstanding and claimed; my agent further pointed out that the only giro cheque remittance received from Haringey Council, weeks after the issue of the Default Summons was credited to the dishonest tenants and, in the circumstances, the amount claimed as due and outstanding was as the balance shown in the rent Schedule served on the Court, on the tenants and as was attached to the affidavit by way of exhibit under pages 4, 5 and 6 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" that was attached to my agent’s affidavit of the day, dated 1St October 1996.

On 1st October 1996 my agent and I were ourselves served with an affidavit sworn by the tenant Nihal Wijemuni and the attached exhibits through which instruments the dishonest tenant was seeking to establish a case against my agent and my person. The affidavit ‘.vas duly sworn before an officer of the Court on the day BUT it was not endorsed with a date; the exhibits, however, were dated 1st October 1996. True copy of the last page (numbered 4 at the top) of the affidavit, the front cover of the exhibit marked "NW3" and a computer printout conveniently issued by and received as true Payment History (for the Claimants Nihal Wijemuni and or Ms Christina P Congalves) appear on pages 18, 19 and 20 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. It is indeed remarkable that the staff and officers for the purposes of the matters before the Court went as far as to provide a printout purporting to be a factual history of allegedly issued, received and banked funds by my person.

There was an attempt by the legal representatives of both parties to join the two cases and treat them as one; the bench, Recorder Knott, declined their invitation. Recorder Knott, presiding on the matter, heard also of the causes, reasons and the foundation of the case brought before the Court by the tenants and the parties legal representatives gave an undertaking to the Court to look into the mater of the unpaid rents, the subject matter and cause for the Default Summons in the first instance. Recorder Knott enquired of my agent what his position was on the matter and my agent ( /continues on page 8 of 12 )
Page 7 of 12

stated that so long as the issue of the unpaid rents was to be resolved between the legal representatives of the other parties, and his commission was paid by me, there would be no issue as to the issue of the Default Summons. Recorder Knott determined that in the event the legal representatives were unable to resolve the issue of the unpaid rents and the matters were to be referred to Court for a hearing the Court would deal first with the issue of the Default Summons (case number ED603846). The application by the tenants solicitors was adjourned with liberty to apply for further directions in the matter (ED604970). A week later I received an Order, drawn on 3 October 1996, whereby His Honour Judge Tibber had given directions (automatic) in respect of the Default Summons (case number ED603846) the Pleadings of which had closed after service of the Reply to Defence with the attached Schedule showing rents due and outstanding.

There followed activity and correspondence between my solicitor and the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants; no offer to settle the unpaid rents was made by the tenants who, by then my agent and I discovered, had moved to Council accommodation on the very Saturday they were caught in the act of disappearing to destinations undeclared. CONVENIENT ACTION BY HARINGEY COUNCIL OFFICERS WITHIN THREE DAYS OF SERVICE OF THE DEFAULT SUMMONS on the dishonest and defaulting tenants; in the circumstances my agent prepared for me an application to Court for Judgement, stating and enumerating the substantive grounds upon which Judgement should be entered by the Court in respect of the unpaid rents; my agent considered the issues worthy of reference to the Lord Chancellor’s department and to the Legal Aid Board because of the abuse of Legal Aid facilities arising out of UNPAID RENTS leading to the issue of the Default Summons. In submitting my application to the Court my agent and I requested that it be placed before the Court on 24th October 1996, the date which the Court itself had set down for a pre-trial review (ED603846). Notice was given through the copies served on the defaulting tenants, their solicitors and my solicitor because I was not happy at the fact that neither solicitor came up with any evidence in support of the alleged remittances from Haringey Council as were relied upon by the tenants using such pieces of paper, by all unchallenged; it was evident that both solicitors were simply anticipating and relying on nothing else but theatrical presentations at court through defaults to challenge and or readiness to substantiate the alleged remittances; in the process intending to cause damages through alleged legitimate ‘legal costs’. True copy of my application to Court dated 13th October 1996 appears on pages 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit.
Page 8 of 12

My agent and I attended Court in the morning of 24 October 1996 and noted the absence of the defaulting tenants and or their solicitors. While waiting for our turn to be called in, the usher of the Court approached us and instructed us to proceed to the Court office because the case had been adjourned; we did as we were told and we were informed that my solicitors had written to the Court on the day (FAX transmission) and requested that the application be vacated; my brother and I recorded the conversation we had with the office staff and we demanded that we be handed copy of any document I had signed whereby I had authorised my solicitor to act in the matter of the Default Summons; none existed or record as I knew there ought not to be; however we were told that there the matter rested because the Judge had apparently so determined too; a ruling/decision by a Judge apparently had been entered into, without a hearing of the application by the party who instituted the proceedings and applied to the Court in accordance with the rules and evidently without any evidence whatsoever that I had authorised and or appointed my solicitor to act in that specific matter before the Court.
XXXX

(*Fs)

We took the matter up with my solicitor who took the liberty to intervene in the Default Summons while he was fully aware of the fact that the dishonest tenants had not furnished any evidence in support of their allegations that Haringey Council had remitted to me any other funds over and above the amount credited by my agent to the rent account of the dishonest tenants. My solicitors failed to justify their activity in collusion with the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenant and the failure of both firms of solicitors to seek conformation as to the factuality of my agents submissions to Court resting ON THE ONLY TRUE AND UNADULTERATED giro cheque remittances by Haringey Council. On Saturday, 26th October 1996, I received a letter from the solicitors acting for and on behalf of the dishonest tenants. attached to the letter was copy of a letter they had written to the Chief Clerk of the Court whereby they submitted copy of the Order made by Recorder Knott on 1st October 1996, clearly qualifying the fact that the issue before the Court was intended to be the subject of theatrical presentations without any notion of the fact that one was dealing with:

And on page 2 of their letter to the Chief Clerk of the Court the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenant were asserting :- "Negotiations are currently underway between the parties' respective solicitors to settle these proceedings in any event".  Legal Aid had been applied for and a Certificate presumably had been secured on the representations made
/continues on page 10 of 12

The facts and realities stated, above and below, in respect of the ABUSED LEGAL AID FACILITIES with compliments to Mr Colin Peters. His assertions that tens of thousands of pounds, in his opinion public money, had been spent on the case that ruined him, prompted Andrew Yiannides to invite Mr Peters to join the Community on Line and to publish any and all relevant evidence he was able to adduce in order to establish the validity of his opinions and assertions. He did join the human-rights organisation Community on Line, soon after Andrew set about STATING ON LINE the facts in Mr. Norman Scarth's case.* (*F4 - important)

to the Legal Aid Board on behalf of the dishonest tenants. At no time did the solicitors make any attempts to deal with the balance of the rents due and payable by the dishonest tenants. The fact that both solicitors were seeking to and relying upon the use of Legal Aid facilities in respect of the ill founded, unjustified and inexcusable case and action instigated by the dishonest tenants and their solicitors in blatant attempts to convert rents due and payable to me arising out of the Default Summons caused my agent to take matters further at the Lord Chancellors office. True copy of the letter from the solicitor (acting for the dishonest tenant) to the Chief Clerk of the Court appears on pages 26, 27 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. On 29th October I received a letter from the Court Service informing me that the District Judge (not named in the letter) had, determined my solicitor had the right to impose himself in the matter of the Default Summons without reference to my person and or my consent; the information imparted implied that the solicitor had the right to hijack the Default Summons as part of and or to enjoin that action as part of the proceedings instigated by the dishonest tenants, clearly intending to rely upon and use the funds to be recovered later for and in respect of alleged legitimate legal costs and or for work towards the unjustified and inexcusable proceedings instigated by the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants.

Following receipt of the letter from the Court Service it was clear that even the unnamed District Judge was acquiescing the attempts by the solicitors. On 17 January 1997 my agent and I decided to take matters further and we wrote to:

and with the latter submitted copies of relevant documents as were listed at the bottom of the letter. True copies of the letters respectively appear on pages 28 and 29 of the exhibit marked D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. Following the pressures I put on everybody. including the two firms of solicitors involved in the attempts to convert rents due to alleged legitimate Legal costs, I received a letter dated 9th June 1997 from the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants; they informed me that their client’s Legal Aid Certificate had been discharged and that they were no longer acting for their client, Mr Nihal Wijemuni. I had written also to my solicitors as of 7th October 1996 when they were given explicit instructions (as I had been advised by the Landlords Action Group; my solicitors failed to act as instructed and eventually I wrote to them on 29th May 1997 and demanded that they (/continues on page 11 of 12)
Page 10 of 12

remove themselves from the records at Edmonton County Court in the matter of the Default Summons resting and founded on UNPAID RENTS. In so far as I am aware they failed to act as demanded of them at the time and or subsequently, the firm no longer in existence as I was given to understand last month. I had previously been informed that the solicitor who was in charge of my affairs (from whom I removed instructions because of attempts to suppress material facts and evidence in the ancillary relief proceedings attached to my divorce) had left the firm not long after I removed instructions from him. True copy of the letter I received from Antons, the solicitors who ‘acted’ for(?) the dishonest tenant and my explicit letter to my solicitors appear on pages 30 and 31 and 31A respectively of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1 attached to his my affidavit.
/continues on page 11 of 12

With my letter of 29 May 1997 I submitted to my solicitors copies of documents, inclusive of a newspaper article and most importantly a Law Report qualifying the tenants in a Shorthold Tenancy do not qualify for damages arising out of wrongful eviction; and in the case before the Court IT WAS A CASE OF A DISAPPEARANCE ACT by a dishonest tenant; my agent and I determined it was time the solicitors were jolted back to reality. True copy of the succinct Law Report appears on page 32 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit; the Court of Appeal Law Report was also submitted to the District Judge who purportedly heard my application on 24 October 1996, as in my letter of 17th January 1997 I qualify to the chief clerk of the Court.

As a member of the Landlords Action Group I have had access to other relevant newspaper articles and Law Reports; I recognise that in the present case there exist similarities because of the involvement of the staff of Haringey Council, as in my case, which I relate to above, it appears that the circumstances leading to the creation of a Court case are nothing but the usual income generating practices for the solicitors instigated aided and abetted by public servants who were exposed in the course of an investigation by the Daily Mail reported on 30th June 1997, wherein public servants were encouraging deceptions and promising ability to secure Legal Aid IF YOU ARE True copy of the Daily Mail article appears on page 33 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. While settling this my affidavit Mr Yiannides of the Landlords Action referred to me a very interesting article in the Times of Friday 28 August 1998 that qualifies and clarifies MY RIGHTS IN LAW (goods taken possession of and held on lien until such time as the defaulting and dishonest tenants were to meet their contractual liabilities to my person) AND NOT AS THE SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO DO WITH ASSISTANCE from and or with and through the acquiescence of public servants. True copy of the article and (/continues on page 12 of 12)
Page 11 of 12

I am aware of the fact that Mr Yiannides of the Landlords Action Group made a number of telephone calls from our mother’s to Mr and Mrs Hadjoudj; also to a Central Heating plumbers and engineers which calls I witnessed and was aware of the fact that these were recorded by Mr Yiannides. I am in a position also to state that letters were sent out to another two members of the Landlords Action Group who did experience problems and difficulties while pursuing their legal rights at Edmonton County Court. I often received from other members and passed on messages to Mr Yiannides at our mother’s where I am staying and he comes visiting us every evening. Also I have often received and passed on papers from members of the L.A.G who call at our mother’s and I am ware that efforts have been made to contact two other members, a Mr Celal Sen and a Mr Peter Nicolaou in order to secure their own affidavits in respect of the problems and difficulties they experienced at Edmonton County Court, both appear to be away because of the holiday period.

To the Court
To the Defendants
To the Lord Chancellor’s Department

Page 12 of 12

=======================================

AFFIDAVIT OF DESPINA ENGLEZAKIS

=======================================

Below the Affidavit of Mrs. D. Englezakis with images of the submitted evidence, included as referred to, paragraph by paragraph. The content of each paragraph has been amended & INCLUDE RELEVANT NOTES / EXTENSIONS by way of application of law to the truth of the matters covered and stated by the deponent. The numbers in the left margin for each paragraph are hyper-linked to the relevant paragraphs of the affidavit as served and submitted to court & published above.       

==============================================

==============================================

I Despina Englezakis of 27 Bawdsey Avenue, Newbury Park, Ilford 1G2 7TW, in the county of Essex, presently residing with my mother and looking after her at 16a Woodside Road London N22 5HU MAKE OATH and say as follows:

Save where otherwise expressed I depose to the facts set out in this my affidavit from my own knowledge, etc., etc.
NOTE: An element in this paragraph was introduced and used for the first time in an affidavit / pleading at court, by Mr Andrew Yiannides - the founder of human-rights.org and the proponent / creator of the human-rights.org Community on Line. The element, referred to, was not to the liking of the Master at the Royal Courts of Justice who was called upon to issue a Court Order for Mr Kypros Nicholas of Nicholas & Co. to deliver up to Mr Yiannides and his partners all documents pertaining to a High Court Action resting and founded on 'goods sold, delivered and capitalised upon by a bunch of aided and assisted, through the legal circles and the courts, fraudsters'. Needless to say the allegedly Honourable Officer of the Supreme Court, as a licensed abuser of trust and practitioner of corrupted court 'services' had done nothing for his clients' case. He simply engaged in similar defaults and arrogant abuse of position (trust) as he was seen to engage, in other cases for which his old school friend retained his 'services'. On the occasion for the hearing of Mr Yiannides' application, the applicant's POSITION IN LAW was pointed out, to the Master, specifically why the element was essential for the deposition as presented to the court on that and for any other occasion when foul play and arrogant abuse of trust was (and as usual) is seen to be at play.The Master thereafter instructed the solicitor to have a chat with his old school friend outside the court room and to return with anything he could agree with the client, his friend; in other words tell the Master what he (the Master) should / could do on the day. No need to state that the client's old school friend as solicitor & Officer of the Supreme Court AGREED (with the client) TO DELIVER ALL OF THE PAPERS PERTAINING TO THE CLIENT'S (and the client's partners) CASE; the very papers incidentally, which other Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court could do nothing about securing release (of the papers) from the fraud of a friend, fraud of an honourable solicitor and a person parading himself as a Christian before the people he and others treat as serfs / slaves / 'captivated morons' whose ancestors were sold the rubbish contained in the most vile of works ever to have been presented to mankind : 'The Old Testament'. [*NOTE:- Persons who are not familiar with Andrew Yiannides' work and research from a young age, should link from here to the most revealing of ploys / advance warnings the sons of men failed to recognise from the work that was delivered to and promoted to them, by followers/ agents of the followers of the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything, through their creation 'The Old Testament']

I am a member of the Landlords Action Group and one of the first to join the Group after it was founded by my brother and agent Andrew Yiannides. Like other Landlords, and members of the L.A.G, I did encounter problems with Social Security assisted tenants....
NOTE: We point readers, researchers and victim-visitors to 'The Appeal' lodged at Edmonton County Court, in the case of 'the targeted funds' for theft and misappropriation by the London Borough of Enfield in North London. Why the planned-for theft and intended misappropriation? Because of the need for funds to finance the needs of the imported (by design created scenarios in other lands) asylum seekers, refugees and 'economic migrants through whom 'the new serfs' & the means to downgrade the standard of living of the indigenous population, the sons and daughters of persons who fought bravely and sacrificed their lives in order to secure a decent future within a free and not enslaved area (the British Isles and Europe as a whole) to the masters behind Hitler's war machine, the war machine that was financed from outside Germany as eventually 'the sacrificial lambs' were informed' decades later. Needless to say, as a result of the challenges in the case before the judicial chair occupants at Edmonton County Court, THE APPEAL, in terms of assured rights through the European Convention on Human Rights, because of the attempts to steal and defraud through reliance on the abused courts facilities. All is covered in our pages and clarified in the pleaded realities in the Appeal published in our pages. The fact is and remains, that the attempts were abandoned by Enfield Council as directed by D.J Silverman. No one should overlook; or ignore the fact that our challenges, as pleaded / recorded in the Appeal were submitted to the Government, the government that was caused to OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCE* (*the asterisk emphasising the stated reality to Mr. Norman Scarth, the ego tripping great hero to note, and for his associates and affiliates to take on board as with the House of Lords ruling and deliberations we point to in this page, above) THE INTRODUCTION of the Bill of Rights. Yet we have had lovers and users of (for fraud aplenty through machinations in the courts) the existing system of operations (abuse of the courts facilities) boasting all manner of false declarations about changes in the policy of the Government; a typical example:- Mr Norman Scarth who agreed with others to obstruct the work of Mr Andrew Yiannides and to simply carry on abusing Andrew's readiness to assist VICTIMS of the system as operated by fraudsters with assistance from 'pseudo-challengers and conniving shysters who fell in love with the arrangements in place for blunt constructive fraud through abuse of the courts' facilities and REWARDS TO MORONS who agree to 'silence' and to suppression of the realities and the practices they are conditioned fall in love with. [*Link from here to the page where we address the element of the abused trust that Norman Scarth engaged in, in collaboration with others of like-minded approach to 'the serfs' : 'the taxpayers'. *Link also from here to the page where we publish recorded telephone exchanges between Mr. Norman Scarth & Mr. Johan Michael Richard Foenander : both of them converts to and lovers, serfs of the facilities in place FOR FRAUD APLENTY THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS PROCESSES. *Link also from here to the page where we deal with and address the arrangement in place FOR REWARDS TO FRAUDSTERS who agree to remain silent; hence their arrogant contempt TO RELATE (through their personal experiences in and through the courts) THE TRUTH TO THE TAXPAYERS who are called upon to meet the cost for the fat salaries of abusers of judicial chair occupation and THE COST FOR THE REWARDS TO THE SILENT FRAUDSTERS who misrepresent themselves as challengers of the criminal activities ongoing in and through the courts / legal circles for millennia. *Link also from here to one of the pages where we cover the parts, the activities and the reckless defaults by a convert to and lover of the system of operations for rampant fraud on the taxpayers through abuse of the courts facilities]

One of the first tenancy agreements I entered into was with a young couple; Mr Nihal Wijemuni and his wife Christina P Congalves who secured from me a Shorthold tenancy agreement after references were taken up by my brother and agent Andrew Yiannides; this was in November 1994........
NOTE: The elements of who, what and when, the foundations upon which breaches and violations the County Court was called upon to adjudicate as covered in the 'duties of a judge' under the adversarial system in use throughout the Courts in the United Kingdom. [*Link from here to the duties of a judge under the adversarial system]

The aforesaid tenants maintained their rent payments until after the birth of their baby girl; they went to Portugal for a couple of weeks and returned to London with two brothers of Ms Congalves and a sister-in-law as their guests
NOTE: The elements of 'the grounds upon which the need to apply to court, BECAUSE OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, leading to the reasons why a Default Summons was the avenue used.

In February 1996 with arrears mounting up Mr Wijemuni told my agent and I that he was to be made redundant; he stated that he would be able to catch up with the couple’s rent arrears when he received his redundancy payment, etc., etc.
NOTE: Introduction of third parties by way of excuses AND RELIANCE PLACED ON SUCH OTHERS TO AID & ABET in furtherance of the dishonesty and the deceptions in which the defaulters got embroiled. And in the background activities by a person who engaged in oiling the cog wheels of Crimes Incorporated United Kingdom Unlimited - Enterprises, as documented evidence can establish when it is released, in the public domain for indictment against the masters of ceremonies, the legal circles and alleged officers of the law (the police & judges) in a pseudo-democracy.

The staff at Haringey Council obviously were failing to act within the rules and after explicit telephone calls my agent took action; he contacted the office of the Chief Executive and following final notices to the tenants and to the Chief Executive I attended with my agent Edmonton County Court and issued the relevant County Court Summons, etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of 'invisible services afforded to the used defaulting stooges (tenants) WHILE targeting the intended victims of the abused legal system / services / court facilities, very much in the picture. In the frame many persons upon whom the abusers of the courts facilities relied to support the dishonest and deceptive ways in use and at play as planned by allegedly Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court and as alleged Servants of the Public, including court officers & staff conscious parties to the FRAUDULENT IN INTENT USE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES & the police party to it all.

My agent informed the secretary of the Chief Executive at Haringey Council that a Default Summons had been applied for and his secretary telephoned back later to state that a giro cheque had been sent to me; it was alleged that the giro cheque had been sent to me some weeks earlier, etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of referral to court because of the continued failures to act WITHIN THE NORMAL PROCEDURES, the defaulters who contracted and the abusers of public office who engaged in supporting the promotion of falsehoods the dishonest engaged in as used for and encouraged by third parties in the deceptions all adopted as their chosen ways. And Public(!) Servants(?) introducing more falsehoods and inexcusable promotions. 

The tenant Ms Congalves telephoned me when the Default Summons was served; she stated that she had gone to the Council at the Social Services where the staff told her their Housing Benefit had been paid to their landlord; she asked me to telephone her husband on Saturday, etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of promotion of the same falsehoods as the Public(!) Servants(?) introduced; the servants(?) of the public(!) upon whom the defaulters had been relying, for months to present themselves as innocent of 'the promoted wrongs / contempt of the law and procedure by the parties they placed in the front line; and thus the used / participating in the conspiracy for constructive frauds* (*note the plural) while appearing to have been acting and operating as the rules provide for Servants(?) of the Public(!) yet offering the new falsehoods they, the public(!) servants(?) were collaborating in and for, as intended BY ALL and others who were to enjoin with the organising fraudsters. And the persons who contracted and had been acting in breach of their contractual obligations, because others, the alleged Public(?) Servants(?), allegedly failing - for months- to act as their terms of employment by the Local Authority and the rules provided. There was ALSO THE ELEMENT of the INTENDED DISAPPEARANCE ACT and the sum total of the idiotic promotions consequential to the issue and Service of the Default Summons, when the first act of all was to arrange for the 'used / participating defaulters' to be moved immediately to another residential address THEREBY CREATING the usual 'Service was not affected because the Defendants could not be reached / were not available at the address given to the court'.

In the mid afternoon of Saturday I received a telephone call from the old lady living below the rooms the tenants were occupying; she informed me the tenants had been busy moving out the previous night and at the time. I telephoned my agent who collected me from mother’s and we proceeded to the property; etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of the disappearing act on Saturday, the day BEFORE THE INVITATION TO THE MEETING WAS TO MATERIALISE, at which time (on Sunday) the defaulting, dishonest and used / embroiled in attempted constructive frauds, on the targeted person they contracted with, through the disappearance act, the 'facility created intended to to provide the excuse and reasons WHY no judgement could be entered by the court.... but the organisers of fraud THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES had more in store, as later transpired..... However, at the juncture, the creation of all false assertions and the alleged proof of payments, the computer printouts that WERE TO BE PROVIDED by the criminals operating out of the Social Services Department Haringey Council was & has been maintaining for decades, CONSTITUTED MORE THAN ENOUGH FOR INDICTMENTS under the provisions of the Theft Acts, as pointed to, through the compilation the Chief Executive Mr Gurbux Singh Esq., Mr Isidoros Diakides Councillor, Mr. David Graaf, Mrs. Mary Richardson, Mr Ian Biggadike, Mrs, Marilyn Owen and other HAD received from Mr. Andrew Yiannides before the institution of proceedings*. (*The underlined - asterisked, the stated realities with Andrew Yiannides's compliments to ALL MALIGNED & IN THE BACKGROUND EVIL MONGERING FRAUDSTERS & DEFAULTERS we name and expose in our pages; also to all of their affiliates and associates world-wide).

The tenants departed to their undisclosed destination, they proceeded to instruct solicitors who instituted proceedings against me and my agent without even bothering to write a single letter to me or to my agent as to their clients ‘grievances’ and or assumed justified cause of action against us, etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of arrogant institution of proceedings in contempt of rules of procedure by an allegedly Honourable Officer of the Supreme Court, one who, incidentally, could not / would not / was not familiar with ISSUE & SERVICE OF THIRD PARTY NOTICE on parties who, through failures and defaults, cause damages to some other party who is innocent of the wrong that caused damages to the wronged, third parties. More revelations as to the elements behind the institution of the inexcusable and wrongful proceedings and HOW, through an appropriate Court Order, the user of the oilcan HAD TO BE VISITED by the process server who was used to deliver the intimidatory (as intended) yet arrogant and inexcusable abuse of the courts facilities on the targeted..... whom the abusers of the Court's facilities were expecting to 'shit in their pants' and seek assistance from some other allegedly Honourable Officer of the Supreme Court : 'some solicitor'. [*Link from here to the extract from the well researched work of the late Stephen Knight 'The Brotherhood', and note what a 'Brotherhood insider' had to say to the author of the work].

Upon receipt of the documents served on myself and my agent I contacted my solicitor who, at the time, was acting for me in matters pertaining to the ancillary relief proceedings of my divorce; he was not in and for over ten days I was unable to speak to him personally; he never telephoned me back even though I left many messages with his secretary; he was for ever out, out of town, on an important case, etc.; the usual excuses when a solicitor is evading to deal with specific issues for and or on behalf of a client. The tenant, Mr Nihal Wijemuni instructed his solicitors to claim damages against my agent and me personally for allegedly...etc., etc.
NOTE: The element of the usual non-availability of solicitors to deal with their clients affairs when THEY ENGAGE IN INVISIBLE SERVICES TO THE OPPOSITION or they are operating as party to the gangs of criminals who abuse the courts facilities in tandem with the organisers and managers of blunt and arrogant denials of rights to 'the serfs', as typified by the blunt and arrogant 'inherent jurisdiction which abusers of judicial chair occupation granted to themselves' which element led Mr Andrew Yiannides to conclude as he concluded decades ago earlier.   

The Defendants were caused to enter a Defence and Counterclaim to the Default Summons (case ED603046); thereafter my agent settled for me a Reply to the Defence, true copy of which appears on pages 15, 16 and 17 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit; TWO COPIES were served by Recorded Delivery post on the Court; the extra copy for postal service by the Court on the Defendants; my agent also took the precaution to serve directly on the Defendants with another copy in case the court failed to serve the document on the Defendants (dishonest tenants). Solicitors for the tenants were also served with a copy and challenged (as of the moment they served their papers in respect of case number ED604970) .....
NOTE: The obvious hint, pointing to the long existing House of Lords ruling, above, relative to the duties of solicitors, :- Honourable(?) Officers of the Supreme Court, should have put on notice the solicitors. Both firms of solicitors were noted to have been offering invisible services to the instigator of all contempt for the law, as of the moment when the solicitor, who purportedly was acting for and in respect of the targeted Plaintiff, Mrs. D. Englezakis' rights in matrimonial proceedings. AND HOLDING THE FORT for all deceptions and intended theft of rights and properties through contempt of the law reckless and blunt invisible services provided from within Haringey Police; from the lowest of the low to the highest up to Chief Inspectors and the Commander. It should be noted that the staff of Haringey Council did assert that Mr. Sotirios N. Englezakis had proclaimed himself to have been the sole owner of the properties he abandoned and handed over to Mrs. D. Englezakis, in deplorable states, which properties, with assistance from her elder brother, Andrew Yiannides, she spent months on renovation.

Following service of the papers in the case instituted by the tenants (ED604970) the Court set a hearing date for Directions in the matter, for 1 October 1997. My agent, as the Second named Defendant in that matter proceeded to prepare an affidavit; therein he pleaded and deposed of all facts and the documented evidence upon which we relied to defend that case against us and to establish the case against the dishonest tenants. True copy of my agent’s affidavit appears on pages 1 through to 14 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit.

The above, thumbnail images can be accessed as full pages (by clicking on each, in turn) for printing same. The printed pages / document can be used when making representations to Members of Parliaments and or when challenging improprieties by the legal circles, as the solicitors engaged in the instance at hand, with County Court staff and officers endorsing and acquiescing their criminal activities. The deponent, Mr Andrew Yiannides will gladly attend Court in support of the stated facts and stand up for cross-examination, if need be, PROVIDED the person seeking such assistance is already engaged in exposing such practices and activities - from within our courts & public services, by publishing, as we do, FULL PARTICULARS IN RESPECT OF ONGOING PROCEEDINGS & CHALLENGES HAVE BEEN AND ARE PUBLISHED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN : on the Internet. [*Link from here to the text in HTML format for copy >>> paste and print 'the pleaded facts covering the realities from within an allegedly civilised pseudodemocracy', and include the essential endorsement as to origins and copyright of the document; refer please to the copyright proviso at the bottom of all pages at this website]

My agent and I attended Court on 1st October 1996 for the purposes of the Directions in the case number ED604970; my agent went to the Court office in order to swear his affidavit of the date and he went to make two sets of copies for the solicitors. My agent gave both sets of the copies he made to my solicitors, inclusive of the exhibits attached thereto..... was attached to the affidavit by way of exhibit under pages 4, 5 and 6 of the exhibit marked "A.Y.1" that was attached to my agent’s affidavit of the day, dated 1St October 1996.

On 1st October 1996 my agent and I were ourselves served with an affidavit sworn by the tenant Nihal Wijemuni and the attached exhibits through which instruments the dishonest tenant was seeking to establish a case against my agent and my person. The affidavit ‘was duly sworn before an officer of the Court on the day BUT it vies not endorsed with a date; the exhibits, however, were dated 1st October 1996. True copy of the last page (numbered 4 at the top) of the affidavit, the front cover of the exhibit marked "NW3" and a computer printout conveniently issued by and received as true Payment History (for the Claimants Nihal Wijemuni and or Ms Christina P Congalves) appear on pages 18, 19 and 20 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. It is indeed remarkable that the staff and officers for the purposes of the matters before the Court went as far as to provide a printout purporting to be a factual history of allegedly issued, received and banked funds by my person.

There was an attempt by the legal representatives of both parties to join the two cases and treat them as one; the bench, Recorder Knott, declined their invitation. Recorder Knott, presiding on the matter, heard also of the causes, reasons and the foundation of the case brought before the Court by the tenants and the parties legal representatives gave an undertaking to the Court to look into the mater of the unpaid rents, the subject matter and cause for the Default Summons in the first instance. Recorder Knott enquired of my agent what his position was on the matter and my agent stated that so long as the issue of the unpaid rents was to be resolved between the legal representatives of the other parties, and his commission was paid by me, there would be no issue as to the issue of the Default Summons. Recorder Knott determined that in the event the legal representatives were unable to resolve the issue of the unpaid rents and the matters were to be referred to Court for a hearing the Court would deal first with the issue of the Default Summons (case number ED603846). The application by the tenants solicitors was adjourned with liberty to apply for further directions in the matter (ED604970). A week later I received an Order, drawn on 3 October 1996, whereby His Honour Judge Tibber had given directions (automatic) in respect of the Default Summons (case number ED603846) the Pleadings of which had closed after service of the Reply to Defence with the attached Schedule showing rents due and outstanding.

There followed activity and correspondence between my solicitor and the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants; no offer to settle the unpaid rents was made by the tenants who, by then my agent and I discovered, had moved to Council accommodation on the very Saturday they were caught in the act of disappearing to destinations undeclared. CONVENIENT ACTION BY HARINGEY COUNCIL OFFICERS WITHIN THREE DAYS OF SERVICE OF THE DEFAULT SUMMONS on the dishonest and defaulting tenants; in the circumstances my agent prepared for me an application to Court for Judgement, stating and enumerating the substantive grounds upon which Judgement should be entered by the Court in respect of the unpaid rents; my agent considered the issues worthy of reference to the Lord Chancellor’s department and to the Legal Aid Board because of the abuse of Legal Aid facilities arising out of UNPAID RENTS leading to the issue of the Default Summons. In submitting my application to the Court my agent and I requested that it be placed before the Court on 24th October 1996, the date which the Court itself had set down for a pre-trial review (ED603846). Notice was given through the copies served on the defaulting tenants, their solicitors and my solicitor because I was not happy at the fact that neither solicitor came up with any evidence in support of the alleged remittances from Haringey Council as were relied upon by the tenants using such pieces of paper, by all unchallenged; it was evident that both solicitors were simply anticipating and relying on nothing else but theatrical presentations at court through defaults to challenge and or readiness to substantiate the alleged remittances; in the process intending to cause damages through alleged legitimate ‘legal costs’. True copy of my application to Court dated 13th October 1996 appears on pages 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit.

The content of the Application is published below in HTML format, in order to create links from it and bookmarks / anchor points to specific elements stated by the Deponent, whose experiences run parallel to those of thousands of victims of the arrogantly ORGANISED CRIME her brother was subjected to over 24 years earlier & driven to research 'the practices in the courts.

My agent and I attended Court in the morning of 24 October 1996 and noted the absence of the defaulting tenants and or their solicitors. While waiting for our turn to be called in, the usher of the Court approached us and instructed us to proceed to the Court office because the case had been adjourned; we did as we were told and we were informed that my solicitors had written to the Court on the day (FAX transmission) and requested that the application be vacated; my brother and I recorded the conversation we had with the office staff and we demanded that we be handed copy of any document I had signed whereby I had authorised my solicitor to act in the matter of the Default Summons; none existed on record as I knew there ought not to be; however we were told that there the matter rested because the Judge had apparently so determined too; a ruling/decision by a Judge apparently had been entered into, without a hearing of the application by the party who instituted the proceedings and applied to the Court in accordance with the rules and evidently without any evidence whatsoever that I had authorised and or appointed my solicitor to act in that specific matter before the Court.
NOTE the above paragraph is retained, as submitted and lodged at court. THE STATED REALITIES COVER MORE THAN ENOUGH & LINKS FROM & TO THE REALITIES to this copy / version of the representations to the world jury and to other victims of such practices and arrogance by the criminals who abducted and are raping Justice daily MUST BE ADDRESSED BY THE GOVERNMENT, THE LAW SOCIETY, THE JUSTICE MINISTER (now) AND THE HOME SECRETARY BECAUSE OF THE CRIMINAL INTENT BY BOTH SOLICITORS AND THE COURT STAFF & OFFICERS. In the meantime we point to the House of Lords ruling and deliberations in the case we point to above and reproduce the most important elements that clarify the position as to the legal position in respect of the parts played by persons who indulge in arrogant suppression of the truth and bluntly work with or use others for the blunt CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS ON THE TAXPAYERS that we cover in the exclusive page which all offenders failed to consider as of relevance TO THEM, therefore to the taxpayers too, thereby exhibiting their contempt for the law and THE RIGHTS OF THE TAXPAYERS TO KNOW OF THE DAMAGES IMPOSED ON THE NATIONAL BUDGET through the scheme, those we name below, adopted as their path to nirvana.   

The above paragraph, THE STATED FACTS & REALITIES, THE PRACTICES FROM WITHIN THE COURTS & THE ARROGANT INTERFERENCE WITH THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS, BY ALLEGEDLY HONOURABLE OFFICERS OF THE SUPREME COURT >>>SOLICITORS >>> PERSONS WHO ARE LICENSED to practice so, (by the Law Society, care of Practice Certificates), the Legal Aid fund managers, the condescending Police Commanders within the area and precinct of the relevant County Court for the arrogantly dishonest to reconsider their attitude towards us and the mentality towards the law and society at large. WITH OUR COMPLIMENTS therefore to such persons, to all named already in our pages and to persons who are to be asked for the last time to address the issues covered in the exclusive page which they elected to treat as non existent, as if the law applicable to the facts stated in the page are non-existent too. We refer to persons who made it their business to suppress such realities and activities from the taxpayers, from the jury at large, namely: Mr. Peter Hayward, Mrs. Philomena Cullen, Mr. Nicholas Stamoulakatos (also known as Nistam), Mr. Peter Prankerd, Mr. Nick Haralabidis, Mr. Norman Scarth, Mrs. Marisa Sarda, Mr. Colin Peters, Mr. Andy Constanti, Mr. Johan Michael Richard Foenander, Mrs. Eva. Adshed, Mr. Bryan Hudson, Mrs. Veronica Beryl Foden, Mr. Simon Muller, Mr. Shaun O'Connell, , (*FXX).

We took the matter up with my solicitor who took the liberty to intervene in the Default Summons while he was fully aware of the fact that the dishonest tenants had not furnished any evidence in support of their allegations that Haringey Council had remitted to me any other funds over and above the amount credited by my agent to the rent account of the dishonest tenants. My solicitors failed to justify their activity in collusion with the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenant and the failure of both firms of solicitors to seek confirmation as to the factuality of my agent's submissions to Court resting ON THE ONLY TRUE AND UNADULTERATED giro cheque remittances by Haringey Council. On Saturday, 26th October 1996, I received a letter from the solicitors acting for and on behalf of the dishonest tenants. attached to the letter was copy of a letter they had written to the Chief Clerk of the Court whereby they submitted copy of the Order made by Recorder Knott on 1st October 1996, clearly qualifying the fact that the issue before the Court was intended to be the subject of theatrical presentations without any notion of the fact that one was dealing with:

And on page 2 of their letter to the Chief Clerk of the Court the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenant were asserting:- Negotiations are currently underway between the parties’ respective solicitors to settle these proceedings in any event". It was noted that the solicitor was also informing the Chief Clerk of the fact that Legal Aid had been applied for and a Certificate presumably had been secured on the representations made. (*F5 most important footnote)

the Legal Aid Board on behalf of the dishonest tenants. At no time did the solicitors make any attempts to deal with the balance of the rents due and payable by the dishonest tenants. The fact that both solicitors were seeking to and relying upon the use of Legal Aid facilities in respect of the ill founded, unjustified and inexcusable case and action instigated by the dishonest tenants and their solicitors in blatant attempts to convert rents due and payable to me arising out of the Default Summons caused my agent to take matters further at the Lord Chancellors office. True copy of the letter from the solicitor (acting for the dishonest tenant) to the Chief Clerk of the Court appears on pages 26, 27 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. On 29th October I received a letter from the Court Service informing me that the District Judge (not named in the letter) had, determined my solicitor had the right to impose himself in the matter of the Default Summons without reference to my person and or my consent; the information imparted implied that the solicitor had the right to hijack the Default Summons as part of and or to enjoin that action as part of the proceedings instigated by the dishonest tenants, clearly intending to rely upon and use the funds to be recovered later for and in respect of alleged legitimate legal costs and or for work towards the unjustified and inexcusable proceedings instigated by the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants.
NOTE: Reference is made to a letter from the solicitors, purportedly acting (for the debtors, the defendants) within the law and the rules of procedure as solicitors for the tenants, the tenants who had been served with the Default Summons. NO ONE SHOULD OVERLOOK THE FACT that the solicitors wrote directly to the Plaintiffs, even though they had allegedly been negotiating with the solicitors representing the person(s) they were representing and acting for in the concocted and inexcusable / unfounded claim the very solicitors instigated without contacting 'the targeted serf' in the first instance as the rules of procedure provided. NO ONE should ignore the fact that IF THE DEFAULTING TENANTS - those who were being used and encouraged to act as they had been acting in tandem with Haringey Council staff and officers. All of the aforesaid organised between the man who caused his daughter to commit suicide and the invisible services providers from within the confines of Haringey Council, also other alleged servants of the citizens and the law & all of whom being guided and trained or used by followers of the teachings by examples stated in the most vile of works ever to have been presented to mankind, a work misrepresented as 'Holy Scriptures'. We refer victims, visitors, readers and researchers to the most obvious of give-aways & hints to mankind - for grey matter users, naturally - persons who could / can recognise the element of *divide and conquer* through the 'different tongues scenario' as Mr Andrew Yiannides (the creator of this web-site) has been pointing for decades, to which readers and researchers can *link from here. The URL (link) takes one to part of the content of a page where a comparison with an earlier lesson, by examples stated, had made its mark on the character of young Andrew.  

Following receipt of the letter from the Court Service it was clear that even the unnamed District Judge was acquiescing the attempts by the solicitors. On 17 January 1997 my agent and I decided to take matters further and we wrote to:

and with the latter submitted copies of relevant documents as were listed at the bottom of the letter. True copies of the letters respectively appear on pages 28 and 29 of the exhibit marked D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. Following the pressures I put on everybody. including the two firms of solicitors involved in the attempts to convert rents due to alleged legitimate Legal costs, I received a letter dated 9th June 1997 from the solicitors acting for the dishonest tenants; they informed me that their client’s Legal Aid Certificate had been discharged and that they were no longer acting for their client, Mr Nihal Wijemuni. I had written also to my solicitors as of 7th October 1996 when they were given explicit instructions (as I had been advised by the Landlords Action Group; my solicitors failed to act as instructed and eventually I wrote to them on 29th May 1997 and demanded that they remove themselves from the records at Edmonton County Court in the matter of the Default Summons resting and founded on UNPAID RENTS. In so far as I am aware they failed to act as demanded of them at the time and or subsequently, the firm no longer in existence as I was given to understand last month. I had previously been informed that the solicitor who was in charge of my affairs (from whom I removed instructions because of attempts to suppress material facts and evidence in the ancillary relief proceedings attached to my divorce) had left the firm not long after I removed instructions from him. True copy of the letter I received from Antons, the solicitors who ‘acted’ for(?) the dishonest tenant and my explicit letter to my solicitors appear on pages 30 and 31 and 31A respectively of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1 attached to his my affidavit.

With my letter of 29 May 1997 I submitted to my solicitors copies of documents, inclusive of a newspaper article and most importantly a Law Report qualifying the tenants in a Shorthold Tenancy do not qualify for damages arising out of wrongful eviction; and in the case before the Court IT WAS A CASE OF A DISAPPEARANCE ACT by a dishonest tenant (*F); my agent and I determined it was time the solicitors were jolted back to reality. True copy of the succinct Law Report appears on page 32 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit; the Court of Appeal Law Report was also submitted to the District Judge who purportedly heard my application on 24 October 1996, as in my letter of 17th January 1997 I qualify to the chief clerk of the Court.

As a member of the Landlords Action Group I have had access to other relevant newspaper articles and Law Reports; I recognise that in the present case there exist similarities because of the involvement of the staff of Haringey Council, as in my case, which I relate to above, it appears that the circumstances leading to the creation of a Court case are nothing but the usual income generating practices for the solicitors instigated aided and abetted by public servants who were exposed in the course of an investigation by the Daily Mail reported on 30th June 1997, wherein public servants were encouraging deceptions and promising ability to secure Legal Aid IF YOU ARE True copy of the Daily Mail article appears on page 33 of the exhibit marked ‘D.S.1’ attached to this my affidavit. While settling this my affidavit Mr Yiannides of the Landlords Action referred to me a very interesting article in the Times of Friday 28 August 1998 that qualifies and clarifies MY RIGHTS IN LAW (goods taken possession of and held on lien until such time as the defaulting and dishonest tenants were to meet their contractual liabilities to my person) AND NOT AS THE SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO DO WITH ASSISTANCE from and or with and through the acquiescence of public servants. True copy of the article and the case at Leeds County Court appears on page 34 of the exhibit attached to this my affidavit.

I am aware of the fact that Mr Yiannides of the Landlords Action Group made a number of telephone calls from our mother’s to Mr and Mrs Hadjoudj; also to a Central Heating plumbers and engineers which calls I witnessed and was aware of the fact that these were recorded by Mr Yiannides. I am in a position also to state that letters were sent out to another two members of the Landlords Action Group who did experience problems and difficulties while pursuing their legal rights at Edmonton County Court. I often received from other members and passed on messages to Mr Yiannides at our mother’s where I am staying and he comes visiting us every evening. Also I have often received and passed on papers from members of the L.A.G who call at our mother’s and I am ware that efforts have been made to contact two other members, a Mr Celal Sen and a Mr Peter Nicolaou in order to secure their own affidavits in respect of the problems and difficulties they experienced at Edmonton County Court, both appear to be away because of the holiday period.

Sworn at …………………………………….. by ……………………………

IN THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT

Mrs. D Englezakis

Mr Nihal Wijemuni and

Ms P C Congalves also known as Mrs P C Wijemuni

*****************

APPLICATION

*****************

TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff in this action will apply to Court for Judgement in respect of the outstanding rents due and payable to the Plaintiff under the terms of the tenancy agreement as per Summons, ON THE GROUNDS that :-

The Defendants were aware when the Default Summons was issued and served on them that they were indebted to the Plaintiff in excess of the amount claimed.

The Defendants qualified for Housing Benefit following their application in February 1996; they were receiving, keeping and or using the said Benefit for other purposes than as intended, arid qualified for, while falsely declaring their application had not been processed by Haringey Council

The said Housing Benefit was stopped following demands of Haringey Council by the agent of the Plaintiff in late June; the Defendants in order to gain time did with intent issue to Haringey Borough Council a wrong address where Haringey Borough Council were directed to sent, as of July 1996, the re-instated remittances for Housing Benefit.

The Defendants were fully aware that by the date they were served with the Default Summons no Housing Benefit had been received by the Plaintiff; they were also made aware on 8th August 1996 the situation had not changed because of the fact the Defendants had issued a wrong address to Haringey Council; on the said day the First Defendant relied on and grossly misrepresented Computer printouts which were furnished to the Defendants on 6th August 1996 by staff and employees at the Benefits Section of Haringey Council; the said printouts were issued to the Defendants by the very persons who were defaulting to furnish information to the Plaintiff and lien agent for months, while time Defendants were in receipt of the Housing Benefit which fact both the Defendants and Council staff were defaulting to state as of the date of first remittance.

A three page Schedule, attached to the Reply to Defence, was served on the Defendants via Recorded Delivery by Royal Mail, on 26th September 1996. The same documents were also served on, and filed at Court as of 16th September 1996. Through the Reply to Defence the Defendants were challenged to strict proof as to alleged remittances to the Plaintiff by Haringey Council upon which the Defendants were seeking to found and rest their alleged Defence. The attached Schedule as served evinced that the Plaintiff had received and banked only one remittance in the sum of £2150.33 on 19th August 1996; three weeks after the Default Summons was issued and had been served on the Defendants.

The Defendants arid or their Legal Representatives Defaulted to deal with the said documents; even though challenged to strict proof as to alleged remittances purportedly constituting received and banked funds by the Plaintiff, as relied upon by the Defendants to justify their false assertions and an inexcusable Defence, the Defendants arid their Legal Representatives failed to take any steps to substantiate arid or establish that any element of fact arid or justification for the alleged Defence (as Pleaded served arid filed at Court) subsisted on the evidence they recklessly relied upon. Furthermore, the Defendants arid their Legal Representatives have been aware as of 1st October 1996 that Haringey Council through letters sent to the Plaintiff arid her agent they offered information qualifying the fact that the Defendants were in receipt of the aforementioned Housing Benefit, that it was stopped to be re-instated, only to he posted to a wrong address that was issued to Haringey Council by the Defendants.

The Defendants were challenged to query any entry they might care so to do, as endorsed in the aforementioned Schedule, which was served and is filed at Court. THEY HAVE FAILED TO DO SO. The Defendants solicitors were similarly challenged to strict proof as to the reliance they placed upon the assertions arid the allegations by the Defendants in respect of alleged remittances by Haringey Council to the Plaintiff purportedly received arid banked by the Plaintiff. Similarly they Defaulted to establish that any validity and or grounds existed upon which to maintain the allegations advanced arid relied upon by the Defendants arid their Legal Representatives.

The Defendants arid their Legal representatives failed to secure any evidence in support of their allegations and assertions to Court in support of their alleged Defence; they have also failed to challenge any entry in the Schedule of remittances arid charges as they had been charged arid challenged to do through letters serving the aforesaid document whilst drawing their attention to the balance shown as due arid outstanding following the only remittance from Haringey Council, received and banked on 19th August 1996, accounted for through the relevant entry in the sum of £2150.33 (two thousand one hundred arid fifty pounds sterling and thirty-three pence) on sheet 3 of the said Schedule.

Tire Plaintiff HAS NOW secured further arid conclusive evidence as to the validity of the Plaintiff’s Claim and the Plaintiff’s statements to Court in respect of the Default Summons founded and resting on THE unpaid rents arising out of Tenancy Agreements (pleaded also by the Defendants) and charges arising out of the said Tenancy Agreement.

The Senior case worker Mrs Rupinrder Shergill at the Benefits Services learn 3 of Haringey Council through her letter dated 7th October 1996 (attached hereto), categorically and clearly qualifies and states that Housing Benefit paid for and in respect of the qualifying periods as awarded for and in respect of the Defendants’ Housing Benefit claim is in the amount of £2150.33, the very amount as has been declared by the Plaintiff through her agent following the issue and service of the Default Summons on the Defendants. The said amount was credited and is clearly endorsed in the Schedule served and filed at Court which was also served on the Defendants and on the Defendants’ Legal representatives as of 1st October 1996 as part of the exhibit marked "A.Y.l" (pages 4, 5 and 6 of same) sworn cur the day at the Court by the Plaintiff’s agent, Andrew Yiannides.

There never was any Defence to the action in the first instance; the Defendants and their Legal Representatives consciously and or through defaults arid deceptions sought to and have abused the Court’s processes; also Legal Aid facilities through failures and defaults to establish the validity and the grounds upon which the Defendants and they themselves asserted arid advanced an alleged Defence as they relied upon; namely that Haringey Council remitted to the Plaintiff such Housing Benefit sums as advanced and used by the Defendants and their Legal Representatives. The claimed sums were and are far in excess of what the Defendants full well knew they had actually qualified for and their Legal Representatives would have established such facts, if riot disclosed to them by the Defendants in the first instance, had they themselves bothered to communicate with the relevant Department at Haringey Council.

Failures by the Defendants arid their Legal Representatives to establish the Defendants could arid or were in a position to rely on the alleged remittances from Haringey Council establishes recklessness beyond comprehension. Failure to seek and or establish there existed any actionable matter for arid on behalf of the Defendants has also been exposed through failure to communicate with the Plaintiff and or the agent following the moonlight flight of the Defendants arid or as soon as the Defendants contacted their Legal representatives who are fast finding out that their clients’ false assertions cannot be relied upon to establish either a Defence to the Default Summon and or any other actionable matter by and or on behalf of tire Defendants following the actions taken by the Plaintiff and her agent when the Defendants were caught in the act of disappearing and moving on to new pastures prior to and after failing to enter an appearance and or any Defence to the Default Summons founded arid resting on a claim for unpaid rents and other charges pursuant to the Tenancy Agreements pleaded by both parties

The Defendants had no right to hold or to retain and or use funds remitted to them by Haringey Council for and in respect of Housing Benefit arising out of the Tenancy Agreements they had entered into with the Plaintiff. The Defendants failures to remit the sums as received from Haringey Council were in breach of their agreement with the Plaintiff; by retaining and keeping for their own use the Housing Benefit as received from Haringey Council they were violating the Plaintiffs rights to receive what was and belonged to the Plaintiff in the First instance. Further and above the aforesaid breaches of the terms of the Tenancy Agreement, the aforesaid holding onto, keeping of and or using for other purposes funds remitted for and in respect of the Plaintiff’s provision of the accommodation as agreed between the parties thereto the Defendants were violating the Plaintiffs rights under the European Convention for Human Rights whereby citizens should not be deprived of their possessions without due process of Law. The Defendants did violate in the case at hand the Plaintiff’s rights to her properties (which includes moneys) to be used as and how the Plaintiff determines and none other.

Further TAKE NOTICE that unless the Defendants and or their Legal representatives fail to communicate with the Plaintiff and or her agent and or solicitors with a view to dealing with the FACTS AS EVINCED AND CONFIRMED THROUGH THE LETTER DATED 7 October 1996 from Haringey Council as attached to this application EITHER to submit the Defendants’ offer as to how they propose to meet the balance of £3607.67 as arrived at and shown on sheet 3 of the Schedule served on the Court, the Defendants and their Legal Representatives, OR to challenge any entry, which matter they have already failed to do since receiving same (subject to security for costs arising thereafter) and NOW within seven days of Service of this Notice and Application, the Plaintiff will apply for Judgement in accordance with THIS APPLICATION AND NOTICE.

FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that in the event the Defendants arid or their Legal Representatives come forward with a genuine offer to (deal with, and MEET the outstanding balance as shown in the attached Schedule the Plaintiff and her agent will return to the Defendants the luxuries held on lien by the Plaintiff and her agent, in accordance with the undertaking given in writing to the Defendants’ representative and agent on 3rd August 1996 and repeated thereafter. The said luxuries the Defendants could afford while failing to meet their rent liabilities even though their rent was partly paid for through the Housing Benefit they received from Haringey Council which they held onto through false declarations and assertions to the Plaintiff and her agent.

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that failure by tire Defendants and or their Legal Representatives to deal with the claim and the evidence ii respect of the outstanding rents, as undertaking in Court on 1sf October 1996, arid or to settle the Defendants’ or outstanding liability as arrived at in the Schedule served on thorn, will be deemed to be further breaches and violations by the Defendants and their Legal representatives. Confirmation by and for the qualified Housing Benefit from Haringey Council in respect of the Defendants claim for such, IS ESTABLISHED through the submitted documented evidence, from Haringey Council. THE DEFENDANTS AND THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES ARE HEREBY MADE AWARE THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER RELY ON AND OR ADVANCE AND PROMOTE THE INCOMPETENT AND INEXCUSABLE ASSERTIONS AND ALLEGATIONS PURPORTING TO CONSTITUTE AN ALLEGED DEFENCE TO THE DEFAULT SUMMONS ISSUED OUT OF COURT FOLLOWING DISCLOSURE BY HARINGEY COUNCIL THAT THE DEFENDANTS HAD BEEN POCKETING THE HOUSING BENEFIT AWARDED TO THEM in respect of and for the occupation of the premises rented to the Defendants under the terms of the Tenancy Agreement.

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff will seek an order for Judgement in the sum of £3067.67 being the balance due and recoverable under the terms of the Tenancy Agreement as stated in paragraph 14 above. And the Plaintiff will apply for statutory interest to be applied to and for the said sum until settled; also for Costs arising out of the need to institute Court proceedings and ALL consequential costs and damages through loss of and waste of time in prosecuting this case with all outgoings and out of pocket funds in whatever manner arising out of these proceedings; consequential thereto against whosoever the Court shall determine upon hearing arid or dealing with the Plaintiff's application by way of Default in the event that the Defendants and or their Legal Representatives fail to respond to the EVIDENCE THEY THEMSELVES FAILED TO SECURE PRIOR TO SETTLING AND ENTERING THE ALLEGED DEFENCE RELIED UPON IN ORDER TO GENERATE WORK FOR THEMSELVES THROUGH RECKLESS FAILURES TO DILIGENTLY ENSURE PROPER AND JUSTIFIED USE OF COURT FACILITIES AND TIME AND LEGAL AID FUNDS.

TAKE NOTICE THAT THE PLAINTIFF will apply to Court on Thursday the 24^th day of Oct. 1996 at 11.30 arid in tire event that you fail either to communicate with the Plaintiff and or her representatives I agent and or to make any genuine arid well founded representations and or offers to meet forthwith the outstanding balance of which you have been fully aware of as of 26th September 1996 (following the only remittance received from Haringey Council) AND OR IF YOU DEFAULT TO APPEAR ON THE DAY AND TIME the Plaintiff will enter Judgement as herein applied for.

FOOTNOTE:
   Special Dedication.  Paragraph 19 of Mrs. D. Englezakis' Affidavit, above, is dedicated with the compliments of Mr Andrew Yiannides to the self-appointed 'master scout on the trail of the activities of the Freemasons', the alleged Freemason basher, Mr. Maurice Kellett of County Durham, in the United Kingdom. For years he was & has been asserting and promoting allegations (without ever producing any evidence in support of his repetitious promotions) that an abuser of judicial chair occupation, at a County Court, 'indulged in amalgamation of court actions' and through such abuse imposed, illegally, perverse rulings and judgements', leading to assaults on Mr M Kellett's assets, care of false instruments* [*Link from here to the page where we point to the law applicable when false instruments are created & used in order to steal from & defraud third parties]. To start with, Mr Kellett, as an alleged member of the human-rights.org Community on Line, was pointed to his 'convenient failures to support his allegations with any evidence, such as Court Applications, Pleadings & Orders. He was also pointed to the brief introduction in the page /lawcompi.htm where the provisions under the Theft Acts (1968 & 1978) provided the platform for indictment of any abuse of judicial chair occupants who issue FALSE INSTRUMENTS through contempt of the established facts and documented evidence that apply to the provisions he was pointed to umpteen times. However, as an instrument for the state of subliminal indoctrination of the masses that he has been targeting for over a decade (as of 1997 that we know of) he simply carried on and carries on, IN CONTEMPT OF HIS OBLIGATIONS TO SOCIETY AT LARGE as stipulated under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and in contempt of the clarifications on the Law, by the House of Lords through the ruling and deliberations in the case we point to and reproduce above. The very person as of mid 2005 has engaged in all manner of inexcusable and unfounded evil assaults - through email submissions - on the founder of human-rights and proponent of the Community on Line, which the 'fraud of an alleged human - thinker - joined but NOT as an alleged victim challenger who wished to co-operate with others in order to EXPOSE THE ABUSED COURT FACILITIES by abusers of judicial chair occupation, bust as a lover of the system as is, and as an ass who fell for the carrot dangling on the strings at the end of the dark tunnel of fraud aplenty and corruption of selfish illiterates in law and lovers / chasers  of greens & silver no matter how 'secured / gained' by such amoral persons. ALL CARE OF THE ARRANGEMENTS IN PLACE by the followers of the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything. [*Link (a) from here  to the root of the plans for the sons of men* [*L] and (b) to the arrangements in place FOR the subjugated and conditioned through the abused court facilities to fall for / succumb to the temptation AND BLACKMAIL STIPULATION [*L] through which non-thinkers of Mr. Kellett's aptitude and mentality change coats and colours like chameleons and as converts to and lovers of it all assault persons who rejected invitations to enjoin with the organisers of arrogant and blunt fraud on the taxpayers as in the exchanges between Mr Johan Michael Richard Foenander and Mr Norman Scarth, two of Mr Maurice Kellett's associates and affiliates who went for the carrot and for years have been operating as promoters and maintenance engineers of the system of operations ALL THREE ALLEGEDLY OBJECTED TO & SET OFF COMPLAINING ABOUT].
    1.   Genuinely concerned readers, researchers and victims of the established practices - HOW THE COURTS ARE USED & TOWARDS WHICH ENDS - should access the conclusions of a victim who was writing of his conclusions soon after he got to know of the arrangements between the legal circles, the police and more than likely with Members of Parliament*. [*Link from here to an extract from a solicitor's letter to a client and come to terms with the content and the revelations, simply ASK: "Why are the judges free to act in contempt of the Parliament's Law?]. Servants of the Public and the Law receive hundreds of complaints daily; yet they all fail to consider the issue of the BREACHED CRIMINAL CODE (law) & THE ARROGANT FRAUDULENT IN ESSENCE & INTENT MISREPRESENTATIONS, by Public(!) Servants(?) INCLUDING THE POLICE carry as non-events*. [*Link from here to the victim's conclusions in 1972 which   conclusions the victim used 17 years later]. Use of the conclusions were made in conjunction with 'the state' one Norman Scarth had been driven to & of himself created - chose to permeate in, through collaboration and association with known converts to and lovers of the abused courts' facilities. The plans of such persons, simply, to use new victims of the system they were pointed to or suck into their world, care of 'plenty of crocodile tears (as victims of the system of operations) at every opportunity and through any avenue. And, as 'wised-up' gurus, they were / are in a position to help other victims.... to benefit too. [*Link from here to the element and the facilities in place for REWARDING PERSONS who agree & or capitulate to their own greed and to the blackmail condition that lands them in the nets of the criminals who are and have been in control, of thoroughly corrupted legal services and courts. *Link also from here to the facts stated and the activities of such a person, who simply co-operated with a known convert to and lover of the rampant fraud imposed, on the serfs' (creative and frugal citizens) through abuse of the courts facilities; for the occasion the two engaged in the lodging of an inexcusable and doomed application for and in respect of an action that HAD BEEN STRUCK OUT and in accordance with their infinite wisdom as legal gurus there was no need to appeal the striking out..... however the doomed and by design reckless application, through the obvious abuse of the courts' facilities DID PRODUCE THE PLANNED-FOR COSTS ORDER for and in the interests of the legal circles, which circles, allegedly, the applicants were challenging >>>> by dancing cheek to cheek with them in the theatres of abducted Justice. In the meantime the convert-to and lovers-of such activities in the courts, through his solicitor, (featured in the affidavit below) had written to another solicitor that his client, (the convert-to and lover-of the system of operations through the courts) had more or less concluded his negotiations with the government through 'the confidential facility / service provided by the European Commission (Court) on Human Rights.
    2.   Readers, researchers and victims of blunt and arrogantly Organised Crimes Against Humanity, (the law abiding, the frugal and the creative citizens of the European Union) should access the pages .org/uaccount.htm - .org/abuse.htm - .org/attempts.htm - .org/contempt.htm - .org/convicti.htm - .org/4deceit.htm - .org/confraud.htm - .org/poliforg.htm - .org/evilones.htm and THEN read the content of the following pages : .org/protocol.htm - .org/humraped.htm - .org/intropro.htm
    3.   In the United Kingdom, persons who had / have cause to apply for Housing Benefit assistance, under the Social Security system, are, or should be, aware that when citizens call upon the Social Services to look into and deal with their entitlement and rights to assistance, the Local Authorities, as handlers of Central Government funds under Social Security provisions, in the matter of rented accommodation (for housing needs) a Rent Officer is called upon / appointed to visit the property / accommodation in order to set the rental value for the occupied premises. And, in the event that the property was not visited and valued -for rental purposes by an officially appointed Rent Officer earlier, the Local Authority MUST start provisional rent payments within 14 days of the application and adjust accordingly the level and balance for the remittances when the Rent Officer sets the official rental value for the accommodation. IN THE INSTANCE AT HAND THE PROPERTY / ACCOMMODATION HAD BEEN VISITED by a Rent Officer (years earlier) when the properties (other accommodation too) were handled by Mr. Sotirios Neophytou Englezakis. The objectives of the last, for the bereaved mother, had not been materialising, as he and others (including the youngest brother:- Mr. Savvas Kyriacou Joannides, the eldest sister:- Mrs. Maria Kyriacou Joannidou-Antoniades and the younger brother:- Mr Constantine (Costas) Kyriacou Joannides, two of Mrs. Despina Englezakis brothers and her one and only sister) had planned for her. THE FACT was and remains that the staff and officers, from within the Social Services of Haringey Council HAD BEEN LENDING THEMSELVES TO THE FALSE SCENARIOS ASSERTIONS, inclusive of the intended false computer print-outs (which they organised later) in their quest to further promote the ORGANISED CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS aimed for materialisation through THE CORRUPTED LEGAL SERVICES and the INTENDED FRAUDULENT COURT PROCEEDINGS (such as the solicitors engaged in later). The orchestrated and co-ordinated activities and deafults LEAVE NO ROOM FOR ANY DEFENCE to the CONCLUSIONS REACHED WAY BACKmin 1972 - 1975 by Mr. Andrew Yiannides, the eldest brother of *the targeted and treated as a serf*, Mrs. Despina Kyriacou Joannidou-Englezakis. [*Links:- (a) from here [*L] to the clearly stated conclusions of Mr. Andrew Yiannides *the founder of human-rights and creator of this website* as submitted to many Members of Parliament & Ministers (as of 1975); (b) from here* [*L] link to the page where we published -years ago- a letter from the Legal Aid Board -dreamers- who attempted to claim a liability by the targeted victim of all, a claim for alleged legal services by the fraudsters -solicitors- who indulged in the blunt criminal activities BOTH FIRMS OF SOLICITORS ENGAGED / INDULGED as Mrs. Despina Englezakis' Affidavit, published in this page / domain file clarifies. (c) from here [*L] link to the challenge, as submitted to Edmonton County Court, in an Appeal situation (that was created by the same County Court staff and officers, when Enfield Council staff and officers engaged in arrogant and blunt abuse of the County Court's facilities while of opinion that the usual INTENDED & PLANNED-FOR FRAUDULENT DEMANDS ON OTHER TARGETED PRIVATE LANDLORDS could have been imposed (on *the targeted serfs* = the serfs who create for abusers of public office to just take as 'they plan for the serfs', through contempt of the law and abuse of court facilities, by persons who entertain such contemptuous of the law activities, abusers of judicial chair occupation). (d) from here to ex Minister Frank Field after securing more than enough ecvidence on the issue of the arrogant and bluntly ORGANISED FRAUD ON THE CITIZENS BY ALLEGED SERVANTS OF THE PUBLIC who simply rely on abusers of judicial chair occupation precisely as happened in the case at hand [*L1] and OTHER CASES [*L2] FOUNDED & RESTING ON ORGANISED [*L3] HOUSING BENEFIT FRAUD with the blessings of the police and judicial chair occupants [*L5] .
    4.   Mr Scarth at the time, care of the convenient defaults and omissions he, Mr Scarth, was noted to have engaged in, prior to and during 'the infamous trial' in Sheffield Crown Court, before a Jury we emphasise, ended up benefiting from a custodial sentence. Mr Scarth had arranged with Mr. Patrick Cullinane for the latter to collect, from London, and to drive Mr. Andrew Yiannides to Bradford, in order for the two to witness the last week of the trial of the case against Mr Scarth. Everybody was aware, at the time, or got to know subsequently, that Mr. Scarth was conducting the trial of the case against him, alone and AS HE HAD PLANNED, but we had and have our reasons to doubt if he, alone, was responsible for the convenient contemptuous failures to ensure that the Jury benefited from unadulterated truths and facts, such as the evidence Mr Scarth & the judge suppressed with arrogant contempt. The production and conduct of 'the trial' did lead to the much publicised custodial sentence; however the subsequent moves and transfers of Mr Scarth, from and to various 'correction centres' were not as well, let alone widely, publicised. Notable also, at the time, was Mr James Todd's - of VOMIT repute - contribution expressed in a cartoon he attached to an email whereby Mr. Scarth was referred to "As the guest of Her Majesty'. Andrew EXPECTED to benefit from and through undertakings by Mr Scarth to co-operate, as the beneficiary of the The Community on Line website. Mr. Norman Scarth, however, was otherwise busy and preoccupied, not for the appeal which Mr. Scarth treated as a secret and private matter (as far as Mr Scarth was concerned) DESPITE THE AGREEMENT HE ENTERED INTO with Mr Andrew Yiannides, AFTER THE GUILTY PRONOUNCEMENT by the Jury, which Jury Mr. Scarth ensured never benefited from the evidence the Foreman specifically asked for the jury to have sight of. Of such realities no other ever spoke of or raised issue, with Mr Scarth or his affiliates, the aspiring Alternative Legal Services 'fraudsters club recruits'. Among Mr. Scarth's more important priorities, 'were the setting up of Law Centres in prisons, and the work born of such creations, as Mr Colin Peters, Ms Carolyn Marsden, Ms. Felicia Daniels, Mr. Terry Ewing, Mr. Peter Sainsbury and the rest of Mr Scarth's troupe from within the LIPS crowd/mob and their close affiliates and associates from within other organised beehives for more of the same activities & contributions towards the building of the New World Order Societies BY FOLLOWERS OF THE TEACHINGS BY EXAMPLES STATED in the most vile of works ever to have been presented to mankind. [*Link from here to a page where we released letters relative to the activities of alleged victims of the legal system and the abused courts' facilities and recognise the evil forces at work behind the scenes].
    5.   VICTIMS, readers and researchers are pointed to the relevance of the House of Lords ruling pointed to in this page; the judgement / precedent case on record as of 1940. And elements we point to, most clearly clarified by their Lordships as of then; everything resting and founded on the arrogance of allegedly Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court; such persons indulging as they please. Indeed, in the instance at hand both solicitors indulged and BOTH WERE RELYING on District Judges - three in fact - all operating out of Edmonton County Court, and all relying on the Chief Clerk / Administrator of the Court; all collectively seeking and aiming for conversion of the rents owing, to allegedly legitimate legal costs. We are to release documented EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING BEYOND ANY DOUBT that staff and senior management operating out of the Legal Aid Board were very much involved in the RAMPANT FREE-FOR-ALL and the constructive frauds IMPOSED ON THE SERFS through abuse of the facilities of the courts. Many the dignitary who addressed such issues, from (a) Aeschylus, (b) Jesus Christ, (c) Saint Paul of Tarsus, (d) William Shakespeare, (e) Charles Dickens, (f) Charles Louis Montesquieu, (g) Thomas Jefferson, (h) George Washington, to which persons Andrew Yiannides (i),the creator of this website and founder of human-rights.org, also NOT forgetting the advance WARNING* (*j) disseminated to the 'sons of men on planet earth', in the context of the 'Old Testament' by the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything for over the 2300 years span that covers the span of time the aforesaid observers proclaimed their observations. [NOTE all hyperlinks from this paragraph connect to our 'Quotes' page and relevant passages INTENDED, by the creator of this website, TO AWAKEN 'the sons of men' : 'the serfs who create for their Lords & Masters to  take as they please through the fraudulent in intent creations by the followers and the stooges used by the followers of the teachings by examples stated in the grossly misrepresented work / creation of the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything] 
    6.   Victims, readers, researchers and taxpayers -in any pseudodemocracy- who ever questioned activities by Public Servants (including official government actions) need to access and read the extract from Chapter 16 [*Linked to from here]. From the extract, we point to, follow the link to the page where we pointed alleged authorities (self proclaimed) on Freemasonry, such as Mr. James Todd of VOMIT repute, Mr. Maurice Kellett, Mr. Paul Talbot-Jenkins, Mr. John Harper, Mrs. Helen Patey, Mrs Veronica Beryl Foden and Mr. Joe Stirling. In the page we pointed, years ago, the self proclaimed authorities / experts we released evidence connecting 'The Brotherhood" to the most vile of works ever to have been presented to mankind by evil persons. In the latter page, evidence connecting the solicitor Kypros Nicholas, a fraud of an old school friend of the creator of this web-site, Mr. Andrew Yiannides, founder of human-rights.org and of the concept for the Community on Line. Anyone doubting the validity and conclusions of Mr. Andrew Yiannides in respect of the assertion 'the most vile of works ever presented to mankind', the genuinely concerned victims, readers and researchers MUST ACCESS, from the page connecting 'The Brotherhood' to the aforesaid work, THE EXTRACT FROM THE VILE CREATION OF THE EVIL ENTITIES & READ ALSO the short lesson by examples stated in works of earlier times, long before the creation and promotion of the work of the evil ones, in the 3rd century BC. Additional information through recorded historical events and material - DELIBERATELY SUPPRESSED FOR OVER 1700 years - kept in inaccessible vaults, by the followers of the teachings, by examples stated, in the work of the evil ones. 
    7.   *Link from here to paragraph 17 of the affidavit, above, sworn by Mrs Despina Englezakis, the landlady. Read of elements such as the abused facility for Local Authority Housing Accommodation. Improper use of a Public Service / Facility, assistance to tenants who were running away from rent liabilities after they were served with a Default Summons, and the Local Authority staff / officers party to the creation of the liabilities / encouraged defaults to meet contractual obligations. DO NOT OVERLOOK THE FACT that Local Authority staff and officers were involved in the dishonest and deceitful promotions by one and all. Do not overlook the fact that the alleged Housing Benefit remittance was posted to an inexcusable address, to the husband who was boasting he could buy the services of one and all, including the police who, conveniently, defaulted to prosecute the tenant (ASSAULT WITH Grievous Bodily Harm, do not ignore such issues) or any other who engaged in the fraudulent misrepresentations and the constructively engineered FRAUD intended to lead also to the fraudulent abuse of the Legal Aid facility (to the tenants who ran away without meeting their contractual undertakings / liabilities), hence the submissions to the Legal Aid Board. The submissions to the Legal Aid Board were called for the moment the element of a Certificate for Legal Aid was promoted (and attempted by both firms of solicitors), both of whom were looking forward to the conversion of the rents owing and payable to the provider of the accommodation. Both solicitors aiming / planning - with assistance from others - to convert the funds owing to allegedly legitimate legal costs incurred for the prosecution of the default summons claim (no defence to it, remember) and the attempts to create / concoct an allegedly legitimate claim against the targeted landlady.... AS ARRANGED & ORGANISED BETWEEN THE HUSBAND OF THE TARGETED LANDLADY (by the father who caused his 23 year old daughter to commit suicide) AND STAFF & OFFICERS MAINTAINED BY HARINGEY COUNCIL. After reading the paragraph, the link points to, consider the additional facts, namely, that abusers of public office, from within Haringey Council, HAD, FOR MONTHS, BEEN ENGAGING IN THE PROMOTION OF LIES as to the alleged Housing Benefit Application by tenants who were being used and encouraged to lie by others who tutored and supported them in the promotion of the false state, the alleged redundancy / unemployment. Consider also the issue of the allegedly misdirected Housing Benefit Giro Remittance to the address where the generous corrupter was residing, despite the fact that the Tenancy Agreement had not been endorsed with such an address. Read the affidavit carefully and consider the fact that there exists more evidence, which the police had sight and copies of.... but as usual when the invisible services wing of CIUKU Enterprises are involved *the law exists not and the targeted serfs, have no rights*, as organised by the creators of the alleged creator of all and everything through the followers of the teachings by examples stated in their creation. *Link, therefore, from here to the most obvious of elements incorporated as a hint to users of grey matter, and if the element pointed to in the Old Testament causes awakening of senses, consider the House of Lords precedent case referred to in this page. Consider also the headlines of the Daily Mirror on 12th May 1992, on the very day when the creator of this web-site lodged an appeal at Bow County Court (linked to it from here), when he was the targeted 'serf' who had no rights as far as the Law Enforcement Agencies maintained by CIUKU Enterprises were concerned. In that instance a rogue builder was used and encouraged to indulge in all manner of criminal activities after the initial breach of contract by the used / encouraged fraudster, all intended to lead to the creation of the different tongues = conflicts scenario, hinted at and aimed for by promoters and organisers of the followers of the very teachings.
    8.   *Link to the paragraph where we repeat part of the affidavit and how 'the targeted serf' got to know of the interference by a solicitor, a solicitor who HAD NOT BEEN INSTRUCTED, NOR WAS THE SOLICITOR RETAINED TO ACT FOR & ON BEHALF OF 'THE SERF' who was owed the unpaid rents contracted between 'the owner of the occupied property and the occupying tenants'. The facts related should clarify the simple fact that ANYTHING GOES & IS ENTERTAINED BY ABUSERS OF JUDICIAL CHAIR OCCUPATION, so long as another *officer of the Supreme Court = 'solicitor or barrister', happens to be the instigator of the inexcusable and, more often than not, criminally motivated wrong-doing. FRAUD on 'the serfs' (victims or not) who pay taxes for the maintenance of criminals in public office, and, more specifically the Law Enforcement Agencies, infested with followers and or trained, tutored, managed and controlled by followers of the teachings related in the most vile and misrepresented of 'teachings by examples stated in the 'Old Testament. *Link from here to the page where we point to one of the most offensive 'lessons to learn from' as related in the 'Old Testament' ever since it was first presented to the sons of men (humans) in the 3rd century BC.
    9.   xxx
   10.  xxx
   11.  xxx
   12.  Note please that bulldogdsl.com / bulldoghome.com / pipex / Cable & Wireless HAD BEEN INTERFERING with Mr Yiannides' rights under International Law and were obstructing the communication channel in contempt of Mr Yiannides' rights to freedom of expression, exchange of ideas and the distribution of true and factual information as of the third week of October 2006 until the third week of December 2007. In the circumstances, in the event of further problems we request that persons who wish to contact Andrew Yiannides, to use the webmaster@uk-human-rights.org email address and such email will be forwarded to Mr Yiannides by the mail-server of the ISP corporation used for hosting this web-site. xxx