Crime - Organised -Institutionalised - Corruption - Fraud - Protection Rackets,  run and managed by judicial chair occupants, in a free-for-all state of abundance. Note the all-embracing guarantee, in place but in contempt of all law:
"The court has inherent jurisdiction to stay an action which must fail; as, for instance an action brought in respect of an act of State". (And by extension any act of any public servant who is appointed, retained and maintained by other public servants for all of whom, the state, as employer, is ultimately responsible, including abusers of judicial chair occupancy and hence, the billions paid out as covered in the exclusive affidavit that visitors can link to directly from here) 

haringey.htm         KEY     Page latest 18 Oct  2002   

Haringey Council Forgeries *Page created July 1998*
hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes)JOIN the Community On Line and publish your Statement of Facts and the Evidence you have. Use your rights in law (link) and ACT with others against the offenders. Join with others in the creation of the DATA and the mass of evidence in the areas we cover in our pages. ACCESS a member's STATED CASE and the VIOLATIONS Pleaded as argued by Andrew and lodged at the European Court of Human Rights. ACCESS the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS in legal terms as defined by three professors in law. Then consider /your rights - page content and consider CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY as the victims act jointly with their combined EVIDENCE. The citizens of the world through you, the proactive, look for the changes WE CAN bring about. Real Democracy and unshackled Justice is in our hands. Join us and help and act within your rights in law.

BEWARE: Persons who joined 'the fraudsters' club' abound everywhere. Planted mischief-makers do target victims who raise complaints and or act by challenging and reporting to the 'disinterested and unconcerned from within our alleged Democracy, that allegedly rests and is founded on law and order.

Affiliated Sites For The Above Project / Activities lbduk.org (group)

Use the human-rights *DECLARATION* and challenge them to complete & return it. Read "OUR AIMS"


KEY to page & Site
Page Issues
Page Quotes
Site Pages
Site Quotes
Updated Pages -  List


Page ISSUES
1. Organised Crime
2. CIUKU Enterprises
3. The TRIAD operates free
4. Stolen Housing Benefit
5. Forgeries used -Thefts
6. Agents Ignore CRIME
7. Forgeries USED - Crime


Page Quotes
1. We present the facts as law abiding citizens.
2. We offer a non existent service to the victims of the TRIAD operating within the public services sector
3. The arrangement is open to abuse because the rent officer is on the council's payroll and in view of......
4. The 'serfs' are not made aware of such facts before they are called to cast their votes in an alleged Democracy ...
5.
Institutionalised RACISM and Racial Discrimination, Mr Singh; take this bit of information with you to the CRE where you moved to AFTER you received a succinct letter to resign...
6. The Chief Executive sent copies of his letter to the staff who took part in..
7. Tenants used by council befitting from the TRIAD's protection rackets.....
8. We publish two appeals covering the practices...
9. Create false records to allege use of stolen funds for concocted expenses
10. Tenants encouraged to cause criminal damages... 11. The self perpetuating cancerous growth Industry takes over the

Back to HomePage


SECTION 4
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6
Back to HomePage


The forgery below gave birth to another TWOforgori.jpg (59319 bytes)  Back to Lord Chancellor:/ Forgeries used or HomePage

We draw attention to the fact that the above document, unlike the two clones, below, is endorsed with a Haringey Council date stamp. Most important is the signature and the hand-written name, title  etc. The very same parts were also used on the two clones that Haringey Council staff introduced months later in their efforts to justify their failures to act within the spirit of the documents delivered to them by the managing agents of the property.

Back to HomePage

Clone number one...forgnoag.jpg (47447 bytes) The document above was introduced to justify the misappropriation of the funds, allegedly to the persons who executed authorisation letters the Managing Agents of the rented property had delivered to the staff of Haringey Council, the users and promoters of the two clones and the initial FORGERY.

Back to HomePage

Clone number two...forgtote.jpg (31061 bytes) the second clone was introduced months later by Haringey Council staff, engaging in the promotion and execution of the CIUKU enterprises.

Back to HomePage

NOTE: Both of the above clones evince a photographic image (copy) from the original forgery that was used and promoted for the reckless transfer and misappropriation of funds. Council, staff and officers, secured the funds from Central government as covered in our pages (Link). Their accomplices and or proteges were in  occupation of the property for which the rental constituted pre existing liabilities. Yet the reckless trained to a 't' in thefts and misappropriation were relying on many a false statement and even FORGERIES in order to indulge in conscious THEFT and misappropriation of the Housing Benefit funds they were/are handling simply as AGENTS for the Department of Social Security Dept.  Many a FALSE INSTRUMENT they generate through the computers at their disposal. Other False instruments were also delivered to the police in respect of other cases and instances of fraudulent misrepresentation. And always arising out of the Housing Benefit  funds secured as rents for others. Blunt Fraud and the police through their established Stephen Lawrence mentality in matters of Crime, indulging as beneficiaries from the spoils of such the creative accountancy organised through the handling of the Housing Benefit funds. The police had and have every reason not to take part in any attempt to cut off the supply of funds to and for their  own salaries.

Back to HomePage


Below, the first page of the letter from the Chief Executive at Haringey Councilhcgslt1r.jpg (84522 bytes) A copy was delivered to the police with relevant notes. We deal with the assertions of Mr Gurbux Singh by: (a) page, (b) paragraph and (c) specified statements.

Second page of the letterhcgslt2r.jpg (68639 bytes) Seconf page of the letter as receuved from Mr. David Graaff.

Below we deal; with the Misrepresentations and waffle from an expert. We draw your attention to the following:

Page 1 Paragraph 1

I. "...concerning the housing benefit claim for Mr Hadjoudj of 196 Lymington Avenue and ..." ( comment )

II. "..... specifically your latest letter dated 2 January ..." ( comment )

Paragraph 2.

I.  "On 17 January 1998 the Benefits Service was advised by Diamond Lettings that they were to act on Mr Antonas' behalf ..." ( comment )

II. "...and requested that payments be made direct to them .... instead of to Mr Hadjoudj".( comment )

III. "....this resulted in a dispute as to whom payments should be made....."  ( comment)

IV. "...contradictory information was received by the Benefits Service ... correspondence purporting to be from Mr  Antonas." ( comment )

V. "...allegations of arrears...."( comment

VI.  "...counter allegations by the tenant concerning disrepair.."( comment) (*Link to an explicit extract from the work / research by Stephen Knight where his informant was very clear. In this instance the owners of the property were treated in accordance with the very practices covered in the extract).  

VII."the Hadjoudj's alleged their landlord was refusing to meeting his obligations under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985."  ( comment )

VIII. "advised quite properly to seek assistance from the Environmental Health Service....." ( comment )

IX.  "... In such circumstances the Benefits Service suspend payment until the matter is resolved.."( comment )

X.   "Payments were reinstated from July 1998 to Diamond Lettings and this arrangement continues to date.." ( comment )

Paragraph 3

I.  "I understand from yourself and ... the 3 letters purporting to be from Mr Antonas ... considered to be forgeries."( comment )

II. "and the Benefits Service that ...... a tenancy agreement dated 27 October 1998 .... considered to be forgeries"..... ( comment)

III. ".. all on file... no attempt .. to conceal their existence......" ( comment)

IV.   "..You will be aware that copies have been provided to Diamond Lettings..."( comment)

V. ".. I understand ... conversation with Mrs McNicholas today ..... you have provided copies of these to the police".  ( comment)

VI. " if they require further information they will contact the Benefits Service"... ( comment)

Paragraph 4.

I.   "..the tenant was interviewed ... stated .... did not know about them"... ( comment )

II. ".... Fraud Team did not pursue that matter further......."   ( comment )

III. "..the documents have not affected entitlement to Housing Benefit..." ( comment )

IV.  "no attempt has been made to overstate the rent or create a bogus tenancy.."( comment )

V. "... documents have not caused... a financial loss to the Council.."( comment )

VI.  "...cannot be considered to be an attempt to defraud the Council ..... there is no matter for us to refer to the police". ( comment )

Page 2 Paragraph 1

I.  "..aware that you consider staff acted inappropriately... in conversations with.. you have made ....  general allegations about the actions of staff". ( comment)

II.  "You have been asked ......  by both officers to produce specific evidence but you have failed to do so". ( comment)

Paragraph 2.

I.  "Mr Antonas ..... appointed Diamond Lettings to act as his agent" ( comment)

II.  "...in respect of his property.... they have assumed the role of the landlord. ( comment)

III.  " lettings agent ... has ... right of appeal as regards ... HB regulations ... only... ". ( comment)

(a) ".. in connection with the payment of HB direct to the landlord... in both mandatory and discretionary cases .....".   ( comment)

(b) "...the recovery of any overpayment ...sought to be recovered from the landlord.." ( comment)

Paragraph 3.

I. "You are not included under these regulations". ( comment)

II.  "....therefore not entitled to appeal against decisions made in respect of Mr Hadjoudj's benefit claim......".
(
comment)

III."no such request has been received, Diamond Lettings do have a right of appeal". ( comment)

Paragraph 4.

I.  "..... your letter of 14 December ...... Mrs Michael told you ...... she feels the agency is being treated unfairly by Haringey staff ....... advised her to write to me.   No such letter has been received by me..." .( comment)

II. "...unless there is specific evidence presented ..... there is no further action I can take in this respect". ( comment)

Paragraph 5.

I.  "...I say .. to you .... principle applies to .....references to alleged wrongdoing by Haringey staff." ( comment)

II. " present specific evidence to ..... then will be thoroughly investigated ......" ...( comment)

III.  "....appropriate action taken.........." ( comment)

V. "staff attempted to explain ...... during telephone ... conversations and meetings."( comment)

VI. "...on reflection, accept that there is little or nothing that they can add to the information set out above". ( comment)

Back to HomePage


Page CHANGES List
1. Council CRIME headlines
2. CrimeSafetyScrutiny Panel
3. Latest In Local Free Press

The LATEST about Haringey Council:
* On Wednesday 31st July 2002 we attended a meeting of the Crime and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel at the Civic Centre.
* The local police were not represented. We informed the panel that human-rights was preparing full particulars for publication in an exclusive web-site under the *human-rights* banner.
* Within two weeks in the local free 'Independent' the news that the Council was dubbed a 'hotbed of fraud and deception'.
* The author of the statement and aforesaid conclusions, was none other than the gentleman who ignored us and evaded the issues and the documents/material we were leaving with his colleagues at the Local Conservative club (Link).  

COUNCIL HOTBED of crime
From the free Haringey Independent of Friday, August 16, 2002

Council dubbed a 'hotbed of fraud and deception'

AN ALARMING number of disciplinary hearings have been recorded at Haringey Council.

The council's Audit Panel has been notified of 103 disciplinary suspensions and offences over the past 15 months. It has led to the authority being described as having a `Fagin's kitchen climate of fraud and deception.'

And in the first three months of the current council calendar a total of 39 cases has been logged.

Local Conservatives said that the figures are "an A-Z catalogue of serious offences".

Among the listed offences are: fraud, theft, deception, moonlighting, assault and sexual misconduct.

Peter Forrest, a spokesman for Haringey Tories, said: "These figures are astounding and vindicate our previous claims that much lower levels of reported cases were simply the tip of an iceberg.

"Haringey has a `Fagin's kitchen' climate of fraud and deception. The list of disciplinary cases reads like an A-Z of serious offences in an anything goes catalogue of crime."

Haringey's list of shame is even more concerning compared to neighbouring Enfield Council, which logged a total of 15 suspensions and four summary dismissals in the last year.

But Haringey Council defended its record, saying that its policy was to stamp out on misconduct.

A council spokesman said: "Haringey employs more than 8,000 staff and there were 108 investigations during the year, not all of these were proven and some resulted in just verbal warnings.

"We are committed to investigating performance and where misconduct is alleged we will not shy from investigating and taking disciplinary action if necessary."

www.independent-series.co.uk

The venue on 31st July 2002scrjl02r.jpg (55302 bytes) In the local press the news that Haringey Council and its officers assert that they have been / are attending to the serious issues we first reported over 6 years ago. However the content of the press release cannot possibly match realities since the  issue of the Forgeries and the multitude of false instruments - the computer printout outs - have not been attended to, by the council or by the otherwise motivated and engaged police they keep on the councils pay-roll.to as the law provides. Forgeries for thefts & misappropriation ate indictable offences not to mention all the other criminal activities that council officers used and encouraged others for their joint ventures. We shall be publishing the evidence and we will demand that proper action be taken, without discrimination or favour.fraudecr.jpg (103689 bytes)  GO to text in HTML for links to parts relevant to matters raised in this page.

 The fact is that Council Officers and staff were and have been relying on the invisible services of old, in the mould of the activities that are covered in the APPEAL published in our pages. We settled, lodged and served the document because the tutored the Council staff used, were assured they could also rely on the arrogant who  abuse public office for absolution through the usual blind, deaf and dumb mentalities. The letter from a member of staff / officer that we publish in our pages establishes the reliance and the contempt of the Law attitude. The fact that the arrogant failed to commit themselves by signing any of the DECLARATIONS we sent to Mr Gurbux Singh the Chief Executive and to other senior officers, indicated that the defaulters KNEW THEY WERE BREACHING CRIMINAL LAW.judheldf.jpg (35058 bytes) The headlines above should assist the gullible to recognise the wisdom of NONE above the Law and to point THE ABOVE realities to the police when they fail to instigate and conduct the necessary investigations on the issue OF MISCONDUCT IN PUBLIC OFFICE and criminal in intent ABUSE OF JUDICIAL OFFICE, period. Refer to the explicit affidavit (Link) where an explicit challenge is clearly stated covering such misconduct / abuse. Challenge ...... CHALLENGE & EXPOSE.

undercon.gif (286 bytes) Site under reconstruction - *Page revised: 15 Jun 2012*

VISITORS ARE URGED to access and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. You will find it at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you will share with us our concerns and most profound disappointment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but downright crimes. We refer to our exclusive page where we expose (as conscientious law abiding citizens) the Confidentiality Between Fraudsters that exists care of the BEST OPEN SECRET.

Guidelines on Navigating through the extensive material: access instructions.  


HARINGEY COUNCIL

a LOCAL AUTHORITY - like many others - DEEP IN DEBT

All from within it, independent of the restraints of Law, National and International


We publish a small sample of the activities of its staff and officers, trained to a 't' in deceptions, dishonesty, fraudulent misrepresentations, and the fraudulent conversions and misappropriation of Housing Benefit funds through organised constructive frauds, care of other public servants.

The best that Crimes Incorporated UK Unlimited offers

We present the material facts and documents as law abiding citizens offering a non existent service to the long suffering victims of the TRIAD operating within the public services sector and specifically the law enforcement agencies maintained by successive governments in OUR country. We need not qualify why 'OUR COUNTRY', (an alleged parliamentary democracy) to the parasites who infest public services and government institutions.


A.     Preconditions :  Housing Benefit funds are secured only after :-

  • 1.    Council staff are satisfied that:
  • (a)  Tenancy Agreements between property owners and tenants exist and
  • (b)   are submitted in respect of genuine properties,
  • (c)   that are occupied
  • (d)   by the tenants who are claiming Housing Benefit.
  • 2.    The rented property is inspected and the contracted rent is authorised by a Rent Officer who, to all intends and purposes, is independent of the Council but none the less receives a salary through the council and 'may approve' only part of the rent for DSS purposes. (The 'arrangement' is open to blunt abuse when you consider the facts stated in these pages - a rent officer can ignore area, amenities AND market trends whereby the creation of avenues through which the "merchants of misery" and "the self perpetuating cancerous growth industry" takes over the life and rights of the targeted landlord. Words in quotes copyright as of 1972).
  • 3.    The criteria qualifying the tenants rights to claim and to receive Housing Benefit are met, while the council staff,  its officers and OTHER PUBLIC SERVANTS satisfy themselves that the claim is valid and genuine.
  • 4.    The Council is duty bound to remit interim payment within 14 days of application by a claimant. (This statutory proviso is the most conveniently IGNORED issue by those who co-operate in the scams and fraud on the average landlord. By and large the main offenders are letting / managing agents and Council staff and officers. However, when other 'dishonest and deceitful activities are indulged into by the Council staff and or the managing agents of private properties THEN THE TENANTS ARE DRAWN INTO THE CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS as in the case stated in our CICA page*. The tenants ARE USED by the initial offenders and they are offered / benefit from protection through the TRIAD racketeers who operate from within the Law Enforcement Agencies as you will determine on recognition WHY (a) the USE OF FORGERIES, (b) why both letting/managing agents and Council staff and officers DEFAULTED to deliver to the police the FORGERY they both relied upon and used for the purpose of theft, diversion and misappropriation, (c) also why they defaulted to deliver to the police the Section 9 Statement that the targeted victim had signed as arranged by the Landlords Action Group, irrespective of the 'disinterest of the police in' organised crime, (d) why the police DID NOT WANT TO KNOW or bothered to take any interest when the initial FORGERY was reported to them by the Landlords Action Group and (e) WHY THE POLICE did nothing after the THREE (initial forgery and its two clones) FORGERIES were delivered to the police (f) Why the office of Sir Paul Condon failed to take any action when matters were referred to his private office at Scotland Yard).

B.    Challenges and the evidence in support of our statements and claims.

  • 1.  The FORGERY and the clones 'produced from it' as used by the staff and officers of Haringey Council are published in this page(I5*). The TWO CLONES were created and or procured by the staff of Haringey Council in their quest to justify their reckless administration and USE OF THE FUNDS belonging To Others (rents secured as Housing Benefit from central government as above under A1, A2 and A3 we qualify) are also published on this page. Other FALSE INSTRUMENTS intended to mislead persons perusing them and or creating / leading to the need for theatrical productions were indulged BY COUNCIL STAFF AND OFFICERS(we can publish the correspondence and the actual false documents, evincing dates and concocted FABRICATIONS on invitation / directions from others). WORSE was the introduction of False instruments that are covered by, and led to, the Appeal we now publish in the 'Local Scam' page. The Appeal clarifies the modus operandi by public servants engaged and trained as specialists serving the CIUKU enterprises. At the top as executives of it all  JUDICIAL CHAIR OCCUPANTS
  • 2. The letter from the Chief Executive, G Singh Esq., dated 26th January 1999, published below, clearly qualifies that the tenant alleged to have been the procurer of the initial FORGERY knew nothing of it and the two subsequent clones the council staff submitted, some 6 months later 'to the agents' purportedly acting for the owner of the properties (building etc, and the moneys secured from Central Government as RENTS). Council and property 'agents' sat on ALL THREE FORGERIES for months and never themselves referred the instruments, of their trade, to the police. Council staff and officers in tandem with the property agents, their partners in deceptions, dishonesty and constructive frauds, (covered in the two succinct Appeals we publish) were simply relying on public servants to ignore the law and misconduct in public office. The initial FORGERY was used AND PROMOTED BY THE COUNCIL STAFF in reckless attempts to justify alleged transfer of funds to the USED tenant, who was participating in the constructive frauds for personal gain and pecuniary advantage as secured through the other parties in the organised scams. We qualify the use of "to justify alleged transfer" BECAUSE they invited others (from within the confines of Haringey Council) to introduce more FALSE INSTRUMENTS resting on concocted and fraudulent in intent assertions. The managing agents of the property co-operating in those attempts too, and for well over a year, ignoring the Section 9 Statement that was delivered to them; and, as with the Council staff (their partners in fraudulent activities) all were relying on the police and the staff and officers at 'the relevant county court' to endorse and promote the constructive frauds that all engaged in. Through amenable beneficiaries and useful 'partners in crime', the conversion of the assets of third parties, the targeted private landlords, in the instance at hand. Transfer to others and for other uses, as arranged by public servants, in an alleged democracy, allegedly founded and resting, on law and order WHEREAS CRIME RULES SUPREME care of the administrators

  • 3.    Haringey Council staff and officers engaging also in the creation of alleged conditions through which to attempt and allege use of the misappropriated and diversified funds. The original offending Haringey Council staff calling upon colleagues in another department to introduce other FALSE INSTRUMENTS in their futile attempts through which to assert and allege USE OF (what were at the time of the introduction of the new false instruments) STOLEN and  MISAPPROPRIATED FUNDS belonging to others. FORGERIES for thefts and pecuniary advantage and gain for the users, the promoters and the parties relied upon to aid and abet the instigators. Such activities from manipulators who assert and rely on alleged legitimate, by them, practices while acting in contempt of and breaching 'The LAW' by using BLUNT FORGERIES AND FALSE INSTRUMENTS, the lifeline of the Legal Circles in the promotion of CIUKU enterprises.
  • 4. The tenants and used tools were, following introduction of the False Instruments by another Haringey Council department, the used tools (tenants) were encouraged by public servants (through acts and omissions) to indulge themselves and feel free to cause CRIMINAL DAMAGES to the rented property in furtherance of futile attempts through which to justify the introduction of the additional FALSE INSTRUMENTS.  And THE LOCAL POLICE, who receive their salaries from the Local Authority, naturally and recklessly with intent refusing and declining to attend to their public duties.  As FROM THE ONSET WHEN THEY WERE CALLED UPON AND DIRECTED TO GO TO THE OFFICES OF THEIR PAYMASTERS in order to investigate and deal with the original FORGERY they also refused to attend to the report of the criminal damages the tenants were causing to the property (they not only defaulted to act but they 'conveniently made mistakes when they recorded the registration number of a vehicle that 'VERY CONVENIENTLY WAS STOLEN' the very night after the police were shown evidence collected from outside the property and driven to the local police station). Convenient defaults by the police for obvious reasons, as with the fiasco and theatrics consequential to the murder of Stephen Lawrence. In the instance at hand, as with the PURPOSES FOR THE FORGERY, the diversion and misappropriation of stolen rents (Housing Benefit funds) ignored by those who are meant to serve The LAW and protect the citizens from CRIME ! THEFT and FORGERY were and remain irrelevant criminal activities to the police in our country. WE know that they do act ONLY when it suits their purposes and or when called upon to apply 'The LAW' because an alleged victim of even a minor crime, is a member of the TRIADS that operate freely in CIUKU. (NOTE: the aforesaid comparison was pointed at and a specific MURDER case was related to senior police officers engaged and operating in CIUKU's Haringey division).

We publish material and documented evidence that covers the activities of Haringey Council staff and officers. We point to and submit documented evidence (letter) establishing the fact that they relied, and probably still rely, on the staff and officers of the local county court to ignore facts, statutory provisions, national and international law AND ABOVE ALL TO IGNORE ALL DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE inclusive of the terms of Tenancy Agreements, through which the offenders secure funds from Central Government. The Agreements clearly qualifying pre-existing liabilities, as contracted and covered by 'The LAW' compilation we publish.

Through this page we relate to more and additional documented evidence. We call upon law abiding and diligent citizens, to recognise the purpose of the FORGERIES we publish. Such misfeasance and criminal activities were/are instigated by and through Council Staff and officers in co-operation with 'tenants used and relied upon to act in breach of their contractual liabilities and in contempt of 'national law'. Such activities persistently ignored, when reported to the police. The police simply endorsing, aiding, abetting and acquiescing all manner of criminal activities by the staff of their paymasters, who somehow have to secure 'funds for their salaries' by imposing on the unsuspecting Mr. and Mrs. Average undeclared policies from the organisers of the CIUKU enterprises.

A blatant FORGERY for theft and misappropriation. Inexcusable and unjustified activities and an alleged remittance of Housing Benefit funds to the wrong party. Council staff using and promoting the Forgery in contempt of 'The LAW'.  Reliance also on other FALSE INSTRUMENTS by the Council staff; instruments lacking in material facts and or accountability by the authors. Such activities from council staff through to judicial chair occupants who allegedly operate as impartial and unbiased officers of law out of the relevant county court.

AND THE POLICE INACTIVE; through defaults, participating in the thefts and the misappropriation of the Housing Benefit funds at the disposal of the Council staff, acting as trustees of funds SECURED FOR and BELONGING TO OTHERS. Their defaults and omissions leading also to FALSE STATEMENTS to other government departments as we cover in our pages. The police just as reckless and amenable to crime through defaults and omissions, precisely as they proved to be capable of, over the years, in the Stephen Lawrence saga'; only to repeat their mentalities (as part of the CIUKU enterprises master plan) in the Michael Menson murder too (Haringey police area) until the family of that victim CHALLENGED the 'long established practices' from within the discredited Metropolitan Police.

The Metropolitan police engaging and involved in additional convenient errors, defaults and mistakes; also creating their own false instruments as we cover in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority page we publish in the interest of the public and citizens who are subjected to similarly ORGANISED CRIME in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises.

THE FACTS we state in these pages many private landlords will recognise as the 'modus operandi in other Local Authorities, Council areas, too. An explicit affidavit we publish in our pages covers and relates to another council operating similar policies as in other cases the members of the Landlords Action Group experienced and still experience. Visitors to our pages reported, report and confirm with supporting documented evidence such activities. We could and we can publish the full facts in that case too; however, as the offenders, COUNCIL and COURT, did eventually abandon their fraudulent activities and the Council representatives were invited by the court to enter a non-suite case, we refrain for the time being, pending genuine and concerned action by the present government in view of the commitment, in 1995, to deal with the "FRAUD IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM"; the problem of 'the constructive frauds industry'.

We make several references, in our pages, to the succinct letter to the Home Secretary, dated 18th December 1998. Action was taken by Central Government, within days.  We publish the letter below in order for our visitors to acquaint themselves with the principles involved and the issues raised in the letter. We urged that the issues be dealt with 'on the quite' because we knew we were dealing with a very sensitive issue. Crime, however, IS A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE and ultimately it is the responsibility of the Home Secretary; no matter who the offenders and no matter what their motives and or reasons. 'There can be no discrimination in applying Parliament's Law '; 'dereliction in public office', within an alleged Parliamentary Democracy where ALL ARE ACCOUNTABLE for their actions', is unacceptable.

We publish in this page copy of the INITIAL FORGERY used by Haringey Council staff as the reason and grounds upon which Housing Benefit funds were not remitted to the managing agents of the targeted properties (rents/monies, buildings and fixtures and fittings) belonging to third parties, the private landlords. The persons who promoted the Forgery apparently did not consider it prudent to contact the agents with whom they had and continued to have excellent relationships over the years before and after the Forgery and its two clones were introduced as part of the constructive frauds industry. Copies of the Forgeries, were delivered to the police, not by the 'co-operating in the scams (ACS1*) and constructive frauds' Council staff or the managing agents of the property, we hasten to add, but by the Landlords Action Group.


FACTS:  The claim BY, Mr Hadjoudj, was FOR occupation of a property, Mr Singh! The occupation was secured 'SUBJECT TO A CONTRACT referred to, in law, as a Tenancy Agreement. The agreement evinced and evinces PRE-EXISTING LIABILITIES by the 'claimants to benefit from the state'. That ASSISTANCE is not from stolen funds nor is it intended for theft and or misappropriation to be distributed by third parties to and or for  sharing with others in contempt of the rights in law of the persons whose properties are used to secure 'benefit for occupation in return for RENT payments as contracted".  NOTE: The criminally motivated and or as instructed Council staff and officers, and their partners in crime, the agents, the police and the staff and officers operating out of 'the relevant county court' elect to pretend ignorance of the THEFT ACTS and other statutory provisions, naturally, in the promotion of undeclared policies and the CIUKU enterprises they engage in. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The letter referred to, 21 days before the 3 FORGERIES (original and its two clones) were referred to the police. The original forgery was, adduced, promoted and used by Haringey Council staff, WHO THEN RELIED UPON THE APPOINTED AGENTS, of the property owner, to justify the misappropriation and thefts of Housing Benefit funds through use of the FORGERY as an acceptable for them, activity 'within the law'. As CLARIFIED above, in both fact and LAW, the funds were secured "FOR the occupation of properties as contracted". The properties belong to others and not as the collaborating offenders determine to steal from and or cause damages to through Acts And Convenient Defaults and Omissions"( I6*). Funds belonging to others systematically misappropriated and diversified for other purposes and for the benefit of others. The author of the letter, the staff and Council officers, Haringey Councilors, the agents and the local police (the last receiving their salaries from the manipulators and organisers of theft of moneys belonging to others) RECEIVED COPIES OF "THE LAW"* compilation that is published in our pages. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "..and they submitted a Tenancy Agreement duly signed and other instruments of authority also signed by the tenant ..." The author and or his informants, IF HE DID NOT HAVE THE FILE at hand, ought not to write letters in the usual suppress every relevant fact and important evidence and 'waffle to impress' with gobble-dee-gog. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores more fundamental facts'. We add: "...in accordance with the submitted instruments of authority signed by the claimant / tenants who were also way behind in rent arrears ... well over the 8 weeks statutory period AS OUR STAFF and OFFICERS arranged ... you see the longer we hold back payments the more interest we can secure through the banking system ...".  And by overlooking such facts the waffler promotes material for other blind deaf and dumb justice manipulating directors to bury the realities in the dream-world of their circles care of the condescending media barons and their editors; all together building modern societies and addressing the citizens as illiterate morons and or as the serfs of their hallucinatory delusions. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores MORE fundamental facts as to Council policy and the practices of its tutored staff. We add: "...when we choose to ignore signed instruments and Statutory Regulations which, by our own actions, we brought into effect .... we have to concoct anything and even indulge in FORGERIES in order to proceed as WE PLAN for the rights to properties of others, even if they are the legal owners owners .... WE, determine and WE impose".  Evidently, public servants in managing the CIUKU enterprises anything goes. (Return to letter)  

FACTS:  The author waffles and ignores the core issue, even months after his subordinates were caused to abandon all irrelevant waffle to deal with the core issue.   We add: "..the Benefits Service, as confirmed in the letter, received a letter (and other documents, conveniently not mentioned in the author's letter) from Diamond Lettings".  The agents (persons, subject to human frailties Mr Singh!) were relied upon, by Haringey Council and its staff and officers, to play along and engage with their joined staff in the muddy fields of fraud and corruption.  As of, if not before, 17 January 1998 the author categorically confirms that a letter had indeed been received. Copies of the documents, covered above, were in the Council's  files and in the file that Diamond Lettings maintained for the targeted landlords and their properties.YET the (well trained in theatre and fraudulent misrepresentations) staff and officers of Haringey Council allegedly and or 'naively', without reference to 'the agents on record' entertained the FIRST FORGERY, knew not of 'The LAW' and or ignored it all to establish: "... for the purposes of the misappropriation and 'distribution' of the Housing Benefit funds as others from within Haringey Council attempted to create with additional instruments they knew to be false". Using the word 'purporting to be from Mr Antonas' the author discloses knowledge of the fact that the staff at Haringey Council were fully aware that the first FORGERY they adduced, but adamantly refused to hand copy of to the alleged author and owner of the targeted properties was a QUESTIONABLE creation by fraudsters and thieves of moneys and rights to property, including rights in law. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "well in excess of EIGHT weeks, as our staff arranged, naturally". It was the staff of the Council who ARRANGED the denial of access to funds in the first instance, in their quests to generate MUCH NEEDED INTEREST ON THE DSS FUNDS they receive from central government.  It was as a result of pointing out such facts, by the Landlords Action Group, that the creators, procurers and promoters of the first FORGERY proceeded to the creation of the other two CLONES. The clones first 'surfaced and appeared in the file of their partners in fraudulent activities, the managers of the properties of others operating out of and through Diamond Lettings in tandem with Haringey Council staff, officers and Council policies. Such activities endorsed by the local police and the promoters operating from within 'the relevant county court' as part of the CIUKU enterprises. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "...we know that such allegations were never raised by the tenants until our experts in the creation of FALSE INSTRUMENTS and the promotion of FORGERIES, the Council's own fraud investigators, can and did organise whatever to suit our purposes. We do not have to prove anything we state." The allegations were first made well after the Council and its officers failed to produce any evidence that the funds, allegedly handed to the used tool (tenant), had indeed been paid out and banked by the tenant. The author and his informants fail to state that they introduced their colleagues from within the Environmental Health Service, months after the misappropriation. Calling upon others to assist them with MORE FALSE INSTRUMENTS in fruitless attempts to justify the use of the original FORGERY they relied on other public servants (police and county court officers) to ignore such indisputable FACTS AND EVIDENCE. Seasoned 'public servants trained in the art of ANYTHING GOES in the interests of CIUKU enterprises. The author knew full well that those called upon to produce more FALSE 'OFFICIAL' DOCUMENTS, had been challenged and they apologised for their 'convenient' mistakes! Interestingly those public servants also receive their salaries from funds generated through 'the creative accountancy practices' and thefts of  funds secured as Housing Benefit funds, that in any event are subject to PRE-EXISTING liabilities. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author promotes and relies on the false documents that Council staff created without foundation; as covered above conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "We rely on the promotion of allegations, our staff and officers introduced and instigate WELL AFTER THE THIEVES OF FUNDS AND RIGHTS IN LAW FROM AMONGST US steal; we can seek through another department to allege use of the stolen funds and we can achieve our goals, through misappropriation (as we allege on paper) without foundation or cause. Theft was challenged appropriately by the Landlords Action Group, so we have no choice but to use other avenues and we can rely on others to co-operate through acts (the tenants as used tools) and other public servants who, like us, are servicing the CIUKU enterprises. As you know they DO DEFAULT in the exercise of their 'public duties'; we have the means; we have the methods; we have the allies and we have our partners in the promotion of BLUNT CRIME". Allegations born of creative criminal minds, resting on an alleged Act of Parliament in contempt of (a) the Tenancy Agreement and terms of it; (b) the documented facts and in particular the fact that the property HAD BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY A RENT OFFICER in the first instance; (c) waffle and wishful thinking by a person who failed to consider that even if the concocted fabrications were true, NOBODY, could ever seek to place the cart before the horse through such activities. Public servants of the author's capabilities and training, definitely, as tutored and guided in fraudulent in intent misrepresentations, and all in the interest of constructively engineered damages imposed on selectively targeted sections of the communities they are meant to serve. Apparently Public Servants are instructed and or trained to discriminate in contempt of the provisions under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (abbreviated to ECoHR) to which our country subscribed as of 1951. Public servants evidently are free to ignore such other law and promote any  waffle which they can apply to a non-applicable Act of Parliament.  The author and the rest of the criminals he relied upon HAD BEEN ADVISED to acquaint themselves also with the provisions of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the ECoHR.  The author had been made aware of the fact that despite the arrangements between Haringey Council staff, the agents of the property and a 'conveniently amenable to the practice of denial of rights in law, banking institution' and those from within it were caused to co-operate and furnish documented evidence whereas Council staff were obstructing their targeted victims and failing to comply to demands BY USING AND HIDING BEHIND THEIR PARTNERS IN CRIME (obstructing Justice is a criminal offence, on paper) the managing agents of the property AND relishing in the co-operation because the persons in control of the rented property were obstructing through the special arrangements between Council staff and managing agents. (Return to letter)

FACTS:   The author 'conveniently ignores documented facts and in particular the terms of the Tenancy Agreements. We add: "I am aware that the Landlords Action group successfully challenged the attempt to assert use of the funds as the thieves amongst us and or for the needs of the Council arranged but our partners and colleagues in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises WILL ignore everything, default to act, they will omit to do that which you demand of them and as the police and county court staff and officers ALREADY ESTABLISHED the acts of causing CRIMINAL DAMAGES to the targeted property are and will remain non-events as far as their records show or will ever show; we have the means; we have our partners in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises". The 'convenient failures of the police to act, after the criminal damages were reported to them, were enhanced by other arrangements, defaults and 'convenient mistakes' the police at Haringey indulged in. The police indulged in reckless record keeping practices as direct actions and obstructions to rights in law (promoted as alleged errors and mistakes by them) in the execution of their part in the gains and pecuniary advantage from crime enterprises within CIUKU. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The 'waffling author' conveniently ignores the continuing occupation of the property, AND THE FACT that suspension in the first instance had been for a new Tenancy Agreement; the records in the Council file evinced such realities. We add:   "We, the Council as a whole, benefit from much needed interest on the funds held back as our staff arrange through the practices we trained them in; from the 'claim not processed' over long periods to thefts through false instruments and forgeries and any other excuse in between". Simple straight forward statements resting on the much trodden paths Haringey Council staff were trained in. Assertions and allusions founded on pieces of paper the offenders, from within Haringey Council, create and generate as they go along,  in the prosecution and the execution of INSTITUTIONALISED CORRUPTION and fraud on the citizens. Such assertions are meant for the naive, for the illiterate and for the targeted citizens, Mr and Mrs Average, the persons who, by and by, rely on members of the "self perpetuating cancerous growth industry"(copyright on words in quotation marks, as of 1972) at work within the courts maintained by successive governments in our country.  Endemic and systematic CORRUPT practices in the promotion of THEFTS of properties and the rights in law of the citizens, through use of allegedly legitimate 'practices' while acting in contempt of every principle of our Parliament's statutes and the principles of INTERNATIONAL LAW as clarified under Article 1 of the First Protocol of ECoHR. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author confirms re-instatement but fails to state the fact that the Council staff were caused to do so.  We add: "After the pressures and challenges made of the offending and reckless, in respect of the fraudulent activities by all and AFTER specific pleadings had been lodged and applications had been lodged at the relevant county court". For the time being we publish the very succinct and revealing APPEAL called for in the case at hand. We are also publishing, now, the explicit, and FOR SPECIFIC REASONS AT THE TIME (and for future use) letter dated 25th January 2000, that was sent to the Lord Chancellor at the House of Lords. The case referred to in the letter, is none other than the CONSTRUCTIVELY ENGINEERED FRAUDS, corruptly instigated by Haringey Council staff and officers who simply acted as 'programmed automatons'. Illiterates in law, simply relying on the invisible services of individuals operating, as alleged impartial public servants, from within 'the relevant county court'. (Return to letter)

FACTS:   The author is caused to write because of the FORGERIES Council staff used and promoted and he asserts 'considered' when 'The LAW' and the Section 9 Statement qualify the facts he evades/ignores . We add: "Which facts in law  we knew of from the onset AND THAT IS WHY OUR STAFF DID NOT REFER THE MATTER TO THE POLICE. After all we knew the funds were not to reach the owners, as we planned with others, and we care not about the Provisions of the Theft Acts because other public servants, engaged in the execution and promotion of CIUKU enterprises, have and will ignore the targeted victims' rights in law. We have the means; we have the partners and assistants; we have the corrupted power with us". The author wrote ONLY after the false instruments and THE FORGERIES were being officially reported to the police by the Landlords Action Group.  ACTION was taken simply after establishing over the preceding ten months that: - (1) the Council staff and officers, (2) the participating in the organised deceptions and fraud Letting/Managing Agents, (3) the local police who benefit from the 'misappropriated Housing Benefit funds (their salaries from the council coffers) had exhibited their 'mentality to the rule of LAW, (4) the staff and officers at the local county court had also indicated their attitude and mentality to the rule of LAW and Order, in our alleged democracy, and (5) Central Government, irrespective of its response to the letter of 18th December 1998 FAILED ABYSMALLY to take any steps to safeguard the rights in law of the targeted victims (owners of the properties and the persons assisting and attending to their rights at law).  FORGERIES are FORGERIES, The Law is 'The LAW' and there was blunt intent to steal and misappropriate through many additional criminal acts and false instruments; the usual manifestations by persons in charge of the administration of the affairs of the CIUKU enterprises. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author ignores the Council file records and asserts a Tenancy Agreement for the same property and the continuing occupation at a LOWER and below market value RENT (as arranged between Council staff the co-operating in the scams 'managing agents of the property') as an alleged FORGERY (presumably for pecuniary LOSS by the person instigating and or engaging in such matters. Dreamers and wafflers abound in the Public servicing the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises. We add: "On such 'fabrications we are expecting our partners in constructive frauds and denial of rights, operating out of the relevant county court to ignore HOW the tenants secured access to and occupation of the targeted landlords property. Our partners may even declare the occupants as squatters IRRESPECTIVE of the provisions of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the ECoHR; as successors to and promoters of the policies of Hitler, public servants will proceed accordingly and promote the CIUKU enterprises as we have been trained to rely upon. We have the means; we have the partners and associates; we have the corrupted power".  Interestingly the author dates the Tenancy Agreement as one that was introduced months after Haringey Council staff and officers indulged in the misappropriation and distribution of funds belonging to others through the use of the FORGERY.  Waffle and tittle tattle from an expert in misrepresentations and irrelevant to the situation created constructively by dishonest public servants operating from within the confines of the Council, he represented (and organised / was in charge of). Semantics and attempts in legal games for no good cause or reason, so long as the core and essence of the non-payment and theft of rents (as covered by law) IS EVADED AND AVOIDED by the promoters of the CIUKU enterprises. The waffling author unaware of the fact that the LAG had already caused the instructed (in constructive frauds) staff and officers of Haringey Council, to accept and state that they were dealing with a continuing occupation ONLY AS A RESULT OF THE ORIGINAL TENANCY AGREEMENT.  No amount of waffle and or 'hallucinatory assertions' could change such facts and realities. It had, also, been pointed out to 'the tutored dreamers' (who were following policies as instructed) that the original tenancy agreement had been in operation for some time. It had further been pointed out to Haringey Council staff and officers that it was noted the second Tenancy Agreement (as secured through the agents managing the property) was endorsed with A LOWER RENT that later was proven to be below market value. IN THE COUNCIL'S FILE EVIDENCE that the original agreement was endorsed with a MUCH HIGHER AGREED RENT. It had been RE-SUBMITTED to the local Benefits Agency by the used tool/tenant and at that point in time the Council's senior officers were asked to secure copies of the submissions lodged/filed and served out of 'the relevant court'. Odd that the Council and its senior officers (including the author promoting waffle) FAILED TO REFER THE SERIOUS ISSUE OF FORGERIES TO THE POLICE. The author 'hallucinating to his heart's delight' as an expert in institutionalised misrepresentations to the people. HE WAS, and probably still IS, of opinion that 'he can fool all the people all of the time'. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author's audacity dumbfounds the simplest of humans. Forgeries and Section 9 Statement in the Council's files and he asserts 'no concealment from the relevant Law Enforcement Agencies', naturally. We add:  "And as we have discretionary rights and we are under no obligation to self incriminate and or betray those who work with us in the execution and promotion of the CIUKU enterprises we ignore the Law and ALL of its provisions". The author and all at Haringey Council knew of the Forgeries and the Section 9 Statement.Was there no concealment of the Section 9 Statement for almost a year? And was there NO CONCEALMENT OF THE FORGERIES?  Also why was everybody from within the confines of Haringey Council (as within the confines of other Local Authorities) OVERLOOKING THE PROVISIONS we cover in 'The LAW' compilation that we publish in our pages?  Why overlook the PROVISIONS covering PECUNIARY ADVANTAGE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANOTHER? The word 'another' DOES COVER the Council's own staff, the defaulting in their public duties police and the legal professions too! Public servants instrumental (as tutored and instructed tools) and generating through participation in scams used for the DISTRIBUTION and dissemination of the Housing Benefit Funds entrusted to Local Authorities, in full knowledge that the funds belong to others. Public Servants engaging in creative accountancy and blunt CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES and through other public servants and the CONVENIENT DEFAULTS of such others IMPOSING the need, for the targeted citizens, to seek the services of members of the "Self Perpetuating Cancerous Growth Industry". Public Servants acting as persons licensed to practice in the best interests, NOT of the serfs (citizens) but of others, the new Masters and Lords in control of all activities in CIUKU. The author ignoring ALL OTHER provisions covered in 'The LAW' compilation he, and others, received at Haringey Council. The author also received copy of the human-rights.org DECLARATION to complete, to sign and to return to the Landlords Action Group. He simply ignored the invitation as an alleged public servant serving the public and acting within the restraints of LAW, that the Declaration covers. IF he and his colleagues maintain they were acting within 'The LAW', all would have signed the Declaration without hesitation! (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author alludes to the 'conveniently placed and relied upon' promoters of the constructive frauds on the targeted private landlords. We add: "And as agents for the legitimate owners of the properties, it was down to them to refer the FORGERIES and the Section 9 Statement. However as our partners and collaborators in the scams they are not obliged, like us to refer such activities to the police. We knew of the purpose of the initial FORGERY and we needed other avenues through which to seek 'use of the funds' that were stolen and misappropriated hence all the other defaults, omissions and OBSTRUCTIONS BY PUBLIC SERVANTS and the agents of the owners of the property. As anyone can recognise, from the tenant's statement, we could not possibly deliver to the police self incriminating evidence that would lead to exposure of our practices, COULD WE?"  The aforesaid facts and realities qualify why Haringey Council staff and officers did not contact the police. However, AFTER: -  (1) An application had been made to court. (2) The offending partners of the Council and its staff and officers, had been made aware of the explicit application called for because of other criminal activities ALL engaged in. (3) The 'agents' as partners of the Council and its staff, and promoters of THE ORIGINAL FORGERY, had also been informed and they were caused to instigate an immediate inspection of the file of papers maintained by Haringey Council. Conveniently, however, they defaulted to attend and they arranged for the Landlords Action Group to inspect the Council file, at which point in time, ONLY ONE (the initial) FORGERY was still in existence. (4) The Council staff introduced the two clones after the inspection of the file and they forwarded all three to the agents, their partners in deceptions and constructive frauds; the officers in control and in charge of all activities from within DIAMOND LETTINGS simply filed the copies and concealed the introduction of the additional TWO CLONES (FORGERIES). The Council's partners, at Diamond Lettings, conveniently DID fail to report to the Landlords Action Group the fact that they received THREE FORGERIES and not the only one their agent and the owner of the property had seen in March 1998, also seen by the LAG officer who inspected the Council's file in July 1998. The ONLY FORGERY in existence in July 1998 was the FORGERY covered in the Section 9 Statement which the owner of the properties signed in March 1998. The Section 9 Statement was just filed away by the 'contemptuous of the law' Council staff and officers and their similarly disposed 'partners in crime', the officers in charge of the properties of others as Administrators and Officers of the affairs of Diamond Lettings. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author waffles and alludes to conversations with another BUT IGNORES the dozens of letters addressed to him personally over the years. We add: "I have, therefore, considered sound legal opinion and I am acting on legal advice because even though we act as your absolute masters, Parliament has not repealed any of the Acts you have been referring to me, to my subordinates and to Councilors you contacted over the years. I am therefore RUSHING THIS COMMUNICATION to you because I recognise now that you exist and that I have to give up the ostrich acts I have been indulging in for almost three years now." The innocent of any wrong doing 'waffler' recognised that 'The LAW' was to become the cornerstone of all facts attached to and arising out of the handling and the distribution of the Housing Benefit Funds. HE DECIDED TO ACT FOR THE FIRST TIME.  As a member of the elite in control of the lives and the rights in law of the targeted 'serfs' (citizens) who are subjected to the practices of officers in the CIUKU enterprises. HE RECOGNISED the existence of 'The LAW' on paper, in the statute books, as presented to him and his colleagues, by the LAG and not as ignored by the corrupt and corrupted within the Law Enforcement Agencies. Public servants acting and operating as licensed criminals, in an alleged democracy that allegedly is founded and rests on the rule of LAW and Order. Many the victims now coming forward to state their cases where it counts and not to the actors or the directors in control of a make-belief democracy. (Return to letter)

FACTS:   The author exposes reliance by asserting IF they require, information! We add: "IF the police are so inclined, and IF they should refer to 'The LAW' compilation they received from you and IF they decide to act as their public duties command (not as practiced by them) and IF they ignore their parts over the last three years that you know of ... they will contact us and then arrange for an alleged negligent or incompetent officer to be moved on (and allege retirement or resignation) and they will proceed with the usual tangent exercises as in many other cases of which The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry was and remains the Jewel in the Crown of the Police who participate in the promotion and execution of the CIUKU enterprise." The author alludes to the police who were caught at it; aiding and abetting Council staff and officers in the use of 'participating in the scams tenants'. The police acting as in another case when members of the Legal Professions, with the assistance of and the condescending participation of the staff and officers from within the relevant county court were seeking and attempted to convert RENTS DUE AND PAYABLE (to the owner of a property) to legal costs through theatrical productions. All care of and through ABUSE OF THE FACILITIES at the disposal of the criminals in control and in charge of the funds received by the Council for the occupation of properties BELONGING TO ANOTHER. The 'waffler' dare refer to 'further information' from the paymasters to those who benefit from thefts of properties, through deceptions, dishonest handling and activities and the fraudulent misrepresentations arising out of the use of the THE ORIGINAL FORGERY. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author alludes to assertions by the used tenant, ignores affidavits served on the used tenant, who never complained about the FORGERIES he allegedly knew nothing of months later! ONLY a participant and assured  beneficiary from such crimes indulges as the Chief Executive 'waffles' at that point in time. We add: "All knew we were faced with FORGERIES and crime, including the police; that is why when the Landlords Action group contacted the police, they were not interested in the CRIMES WE INSTIGATE AND PROMOTE, as part of the CIUKU enterprises". Patience exhausted and the police contacted, the 'waffler' who elected to ignore all communications jumped to life and writes to the person who had been assisting and working with and for the targeted private landlord. We know what MIRACLE occurred at that point in time; we are sure our visitors recognise it too. The fact that Council staff and officers (not to mention the local police) knew of those (besides other) fraudulent in intent activities, from within the Council's confines for almost a year by then, was irrelevant to the author of the letter. That the council and its staff had been, and WERE, BENEFITING FINANCIALLY FROM the practices of its tutored staff had been and was, also irrelevant to the author. That some of the Council staff (who had been trained and tutored in the practices) had also used the 'secrets of the trade' for their own private little scams and frauds (on the state and private landlords) was and had also been irrelevant to the author and his subordinates for years.The author would have everybody believe that elephants can fly. He is of opinion that he could assert that he knew nothing about the original FORGERY, or the subsequent FALSE INSTRUMENTS the Council staff and officers indulged in and secured through another Council Department (because of some other MIRACLE and rabbits out of the Council's hat of tricks). The fact is that as soon as the Home Secretary received the succinct letter of 18th December 1998 (LHS1), the government acted also irrelevant and a non event for the intended purposes of the 'waffler'. The author and Haringey Council officials and Councilors must have shoved such realities in the 'family closet with the rest of the skeletons, from the Poulson era days and God knows with how many other skeletons before those facts and since. The author ignores the fact that an opposition Councilor, who had ignored, for months, submissions and papers delivered to his colleagues, came out of the wood AFTER the succinct letter to the Home Secretary. The declarations covering the scams and the frauds within Haringey Council was and remained irrelevant to the author WHO EVADES THE CORE OF THE ISSUES he was fully aware of as ultimate controller of the activities within the confines of the Council and scores of letters evince.  (Back to: HomePage) (Return to letter) 

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently fails to declare' realities and practices by public servants such as he alludes to. We add: "Because public servants are only concerned with fraud on the state and their masters they are not 'duty bound' to protect any other from fraud, let alone protect victims from organised and institutionalised fraud and corruption, and or concern themselves with their colleagues' breaches of the Theft Acts." The citizens (pardon, the serfs) do not merit from any protection under any law, national or international, and so have determined public servants as promoters of the CIUKU enterprises. The citizens may pay the salaries of the public servants (through taxes) but no duty to citizens or law subsists in their retainers, except as qualified herein above. As the TRIAD in control of the citizen's rights (pardon, 'the serfs obligations to the state' ONLY) protects only the conniving, the crafty and the thieves of the properties and the rights of 'serfs', the Fraud Team too, know not of 'The LAW' and recognise no provisions qualifying "assisting another (through defaults and omissions in duty to Parliament's Law') to benefit at the expense of another. SUCH MENTALITIES EVIDENTLY MAKE the provisions "through AN ACT OR AN Omission irrelevant and obsolete provisions for the purposes of the CIUKU enterprises. The 'Fraud Team', obviously owe allegiance only to their employers who are in need of funds; so long as the Council benefits at the expense of  individuals, who cannot rely on "the merchants of misery" (copyright quote) and or the police to protect them from crime, the Council Fraud Team, as beneficiaries too, care NOT. The facts are simple, Police and Fraud Team as public servants receive and accept their fat salaries 'for contracted services, to the public'. As their services are not rendered in accordance with 'The LAW' they are seen to be receiving and accepting their salaries under false pretences, the Home Secretary should note this fundamental reality. Naturally the 'serfs' are not made aware of such facts before they are called to cast their votes in an alleged Democracy, care of the media who ignored all submissions from us until Councilor Peter Forrest was called upon to 'speak up' ONLY after the BLUNT FORGERIES were referred to the police by the Landlords Action Group. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "Entitlement to Housing Benefit is not the same as PAYMENTS FOR OCCUPATION OF THE PROPERTIES as contracted. We know not of such commitments and WE DO NOT PERUSE TENANCY AGREEMENTS. We just accept anything and everything claimants tell us and submit to us".  The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts' and as a waffler he is in his element and at his best. The FORGERIES had achieved, for the Council and others what its staff had been trained to do. As a specialist in GROSS MISREPRESENTATIONS and pretence of ignorance; the author evades the facts and the realities and seeks to brush the true position under the Council's carpets at a stroke. The BENEFIT referred to happens to be payments for the need of AND THE AGREED LIABILITIES in terms of rents for the roof over the heads of the used tools/tenants (indigenous or imported irrelevant and immaterial). The imported kind, naturally, through special arrangements and blatant interference in the internal affairs of other countries. How nice of the author to refer to entitlement of PAYMENTS FOR OCCUPATION of the relevant property. The entitlement NEVER was or can be just a claim by any individual BUT FOR THE CLAIMANTS RIGHTS and the OBLIGATION (under the law) for the state (Central Government) to MEET THE COST OF RENTS. The waffler discloses the mentality of "Elephants CAN FLY, likewise moneys for rents" and ignores the misappropriation and diversion of funds through use of FORGERIES and other FALSE INSTRUMENTS. Public servants under him, indulged in dishonest misappropriation of funds belonging to another through their own plans and THE COUNCIL'S OWN distribution arrangements (with others) and refers to the funds they receive from Central Government as simple entitlement WITH NO COMMITMENTS for the funds irrespective of the provisions covered under 'The LAW' for pre-existing liabilities.No wonder the waffling author never completed, never signed and never returned the DECLARATION document we publish at human-rights for use by victims. The waffler failed to cover the issue of "WHY the need to indulge in any Forgeries and False Instruments at all, IF any of the assertions he was promoting were sound in either law or fact? (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add:" but every avenue and facility at our disposal has been and is being utilised to deny and obstruct access to the funds for the use of the rightful owners, as they can determine within their rights in law. The last issue WE and our partners in organised, institutionalised fraud and corruption have determined should be through imposed theatrical scenarios and productions and the usual CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS as we jointly impose on the serfs. WE have the means; we have the partners; we have the power to use and abuse as we determine". Remarkably the author fails to deal with nor refer to the contents of the affidavits he and his colleagues received; obviously he and his colleagues were relying on the officers of the 'relevant county court' and OTHER PUBLIC SERVANTS to misconduct in public office in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises. Worse, he failed to consider THE CONTENT OF at least THE LAST ORDER SOUGHT ON APPEAL 'at the relevant county court'. That appeal we publish for the benefit of visitors and the serfs benefiting from 'torment and torture' care of the capabilities of the administrators in charge of the CIUKU enterprises. The Appeal was called for, after an officer of that court indulged in the usual railroading practices and sought to introduce his own scenario and his script under the circumstances covered in the appeal; attempts for theatrical productions in pursuit of the usual 'legal costs constructive frauds industry' through and for the benefit of "the merchants of misery". (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores fundamental facts'. We add: "..they were only intended to cause damages to the rightful owner of the funds, AS WE PLANNED AND INTENDED and to lead to the usual CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS through abuse of the courts' facilities as you noted and have evidence of". The author should refer to 'The LAW' compilation he received. Many others received it, including the chief clerk / court manage at 'the relevant county court', after it was discovered that the court officers and staff took part in the generation of FALSE INSTRUMENTS, and in particular after a False Instrument was 'posted late' establishing intent. Such activities in pursuit of the usual 'legal costs constructive frauds industry'. The waffler should consider the very simple fact that the owners of the properties had been denied ..... EVEN TEMPORARILY (the law provides) access to the funds that Council staff 'misappropriated, diversified and or  through use of a FORGERY stole. He should also consider that seeking  with others to convert to others and or for other uses fraudulently had been the objective of all after the initial FORGERY was challenged for that which it was and has remained since in Law. As an 'elephants CAN FLY' advocate, and promoter of crimes', the Chief Executive at Haringey in practicing his own brand of POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION (against targeted sections of the community) he simply 'waffles'. AS A PUBLIC SERVANT he carries on, as the self appointed Master or Lord of the average Mr and Mrs Average whom he treats as modern day serfs and simpletons. He received many letters inviting him to LAND ON TERRA FIRMA, and to ACT WITHIN THE RESTRAINTS OF LAW, before he ever referred to any alleged democratic rule over those who were meeting his fat salary as a waffling parasite of society. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'conveniently ignores the law as it applies to all. He also ignores 'the duty of law abiding citizens to report CRIME to the police'. We add: "And as it was and remained simple acts of theft, forgeries, criminal damages, at the expense of the targeted properties owner, in which our own staff were taking part and actively engaged in, such activities we ignore as we expect the police to ignore too. We care not how the new citizens we import, train and use are seen by any other in the light of the facts and realities you have been reporting to one and all".  The author ignores yet again 'The LAW' and fails to consider the provisions that cover assisting another (and never mind the fact that in the instances covered by the Housing Benefit funds, manipulation) the verb would be USING ANOTHER and FORGERIES. The author refers to Criminal offences, public servants, note. The Law provides EVEN FOR TEMPORARY LOSS and damages. Yet the waffler has the audacity to assert, ".... no matter for us to refer the matter to the police" and fails to add  '....  to those who benefit through our practices .....". (Return to letter)

FACTS:  Matters acknowledged by the author at that point  were referred to him personally throughout. He chose to ignore it all until the FORGERIES AND FALSE INSTRUMENTS were referred to the police.  We add:"The staff only used, promoted and relied on the promotion of the initial FORGERY to justify their part in the misappropriation and theft of funds that the Council and they secured for another. In so far as the Council and our staff are concerned there was nothing wrong in such promotions, engagements and practices; co-operation with and reliance on other public servants is the name of the game; we are not concerned with the law and or the facts supported by documented evidence; pretending your 'allegations are unfounded' has been my aim from the onset; and so it remains; who cares about the FORGERIES?". The author decided to put himself on record ONLY AFTER THE THE FORGERIES, FALSE INSTRUMENTS, and the SECTION 9 STATEMENT were delivered to the police. Haringey Council staff all too ready to use, promote and RELY ON THE USE OF FORGERIES to justify their part on CRIME and the   author, a senior public servant HAS THE AUDACITY to assert 'general allegations' as if the evidence we publish did not exist and or as if the FORGERIES WERE NOT USED FOR a number of reasons, for a purpose and or with intent. Suppressions and concealment which he acknowledged as a known offence in law, presumably in the author's mind are general allegations. The author ignores the simple question "WHY the staff instigated other FALSE INSTRUMENTS through another Council department, if the original FORGERY was a prank without effect or imposed damages on the targeted victims. He overlooked such facts and realities especially AFTER the Council and its staff discovered that the 'targeted victim - serf' was not relying on a member of "The Self Perpetuating Cancerous Growth Industry" (copyright quote). He was ignoring WHY the police were not contacted by the staff who were tutored and trained in criminal activities while all relied on the invisible services by the staff and officers at the relevant county court'. The author ignores the fact that another 'colleague of his had been blocking, with intent, reference of a succinct complaint to the Review Board, as an administrator of Haringey Council's CIUKU enterprises.We publish now documented evidence establishing that the Council's Review Board CHANGED DIRECTIONS when it was challenged appropriately in a matter of demanding 'claw-backs' in a case of alleged overpayments of Housing Benefit funds. Irrespective of 'The Law' the author alludes to general allegations while the USERS and promoters of the FORGERY were also acting as KEEPERS OF IT with rights to conceal an instrument THEY USED for joint purposes with AND FOR OTHERS TO BENEFIT. For over 10 months the Council staff party to concealment of serious CRIMES they took part in and were willing accessories and abettors if not crimes instigated by the staff of their own or as parties to Council Policies. Blunt defaults and OBSTRUCTIONS to rights in law and the author contemptuously asserts "general allegations". (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author 'rushes to write as soon as he is made aware of the fact that the FORGERIES, other FALSE INSTRUMENTS and The Section 9 Statement in the files Council staff maintained and both officers had access to, and he has the audacity to assert "... you have failed .... to .... produce specific evidence". Only the blind and reckless could ignore the FORGERIES and the extensive correspondence not to mention 'The LAW' and the human-rights DECLARATION in the Council files. The author as an elephants can fly advocate assumes also that the person he was addressing was simply a serf with no rights and could be treated contemptuously by the masters with absolute power in the promotion of CIUKU enterprises he and his colleagues engaged in. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author simply relies on the arrangements between the relevant Council staff and officers with the 'appointed agents. The Council and its officers benefiting from 'convenient lack of interest and defaults to challenge the FORGERY' by the appointed agents; the agents who were seen to have been co-operating in the scams and the constructive frauds industry from the onset, and as they proved through defaults to refer the initial FORGERY to the police. The agents who were keen participants in the promotion of the original FORGERY and the subsequent FALSE INSTRUMENTS that were instigated by the Council staff and officers, that were covered in Council letters. In short NOTHING but promotion of the reliance on the agents who were co-operating in the attempts at constructive frauds. Shear RELIANCE on the acting agents to carry on defaulting and participating in the scams. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author's reliance on the Council's partners in the criminal activities, as the Council staff and officers instigated and promoted is crystal clear. The 'waffler' alludes to the 'officers of Diamond Lettings', as 'acting landlords' and like the staff and officers of the Council he relies through promotion of such assertions, assuming his assertions to be justifiable' in law. Use and promotion of FORGERIES and other false instruments in the author's mind are acceptable in law practices through which to defraud and deny access to another's properties. The author and the participating beneficiaries from the scams, the police at Haringey, should refer to 'The LAW' and in particular to the R -v- Dytham  case we refer to in our pages. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author fails to add, IF the agents are not part of the scams and constructive frauds AND IF THEY WISH TO use the right of appeal after establishing that the agents were never so inclined but were part and parcel of the modus operandi in the use and distribution of Housing Benefit funds. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author fails to acknowledge the fact that the Council staff and officers had but one avenue open to them. They failed to remit to the landlord's agents AFTER,  (1) they arranged for the accumulation of rent liabilities, by the used tools, well in excess of the statutory 8 weeks principle under which the tenants HAVE NO RIGHT of ACCESS to the funds secured from Central Government for the occupation of the properties of others. (The tenants have none at all under the provisions of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the ECoHR). Neither the tenants nor 'waffling' public servants can assume any powers to act as FORGERY procuring, FORGERY using and FORGERY promoting intermediaries in the service of the CIUKU enterprises. Nor have they any rights to indulge in the thefts of the properties of others, including the citizens rights in law. (2) Council staff and officers disregarded and discarded the Tenancy Agreement, as a document of no consequence, as with Parliament's Law. The did so, even though in their file, and they also ignored the fact that the Tenancy Agreement, endorsed with the higher agreed rent, had been submitted to the Benefits Agency (further proof of deceitful and dishonest activities at the expense of Mr and Mrs Average in the CIUKU enterprises environment). (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author discloses the favourite avenue through which private landlords were and still are being defrauded / cheated out of funds.  The author was in a position to know better than to even think of the above activity, let alone write of it.  He was made aware of the fact that the person he was writing to assisted other, HONEST persons to CHALLENGE SUCCESSFULLY allegedly recoverable Housing Benefit funds founded and resting on false unjustified and inexcusable in law assertions. We still receive complaints from private landlords who are targeted and cheated through arbitrary actions by Councils and denial of their rights to properties as contracted; their rights to rents that Central Government pays out for the occupation of their properties. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author through the words above simply discloses the grounds upon which the fraudulent and dishonest handling of the properties of others is conducted and how and WHY the use of FORGERIES AND FALSE INSTRUMENTS as stated in the APPEAL we now publish.  Activities outside THE LAW, as practiced by Haringey Council staff and officers and as endorsed by the local police (who receive part of their salaries from such activities) NOT forgetting  the activities of officers and staff at the relevant county court, naturally. NOT CHALLENGED by beneficiaries and or by the persons who participate in the constructive frauds, corruption and  fraud on targeted victims does  not constitute any reasonable or acceptable excuse let alone justifiable grounds for the constructive frauds instigated WITH INTENT and promoted by Council staff through Council policies. There exist other letters; one in particular was from a 'senior officer engaged in the department that specialised in the organisation and the execution of the scams; he relished at the fact that the officers of Diamond Lettings were in command and control of the targeted properties. The author ALSO HAD TO point to the Council's luck at having to deal with persons who were participating in the deceptions, promoting NOT CHALLENGING the initial FORGERY, concealed it FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES and were seen to be party in the dishonest handling of funds belonging to others and the constructive frauds through misconduct in public office through COUNCIL POLICIES and practices. The author pointing to the fact the Council was NOT OBLIGED TO DEAL WITH THE PERSON WHO CHALLENGED blatant thefts and attempts to defraud through the usual channels the Local Authority staff were trained and tutored to use as unchallenged administrators of the CIUKU enterprises. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author failed to add "The agents of the owner of the property have no problem with what we are doing AND THEY ARE NOT SEEKING AN APPEAL; go away pest; you are interfering with our freedom to steal and plunder with others, because we need to finance the needs of the imported new citizens at the expense of those WE target." The above paragraph covers it all. The author merely hallucinates and refers to the misappropriated and diversified funds, simply as a benefit claim and ignores:

(a)  The stolen and misappropriated funds were moneys received for and in respect of the occupation of the targeted property; the property belonged to others and NOT to the agents (allegedly managing the property), NOT TO HIM and most certainly NOT TO THE TUTORED TOOLS who were acting outside 'The Law' and Statutory Regulations but as the instructed operators of the scams organised by the corrupt and the corrupted who were/are in charge of the 'financial affairs of Haringey Council'; all activities within knowledge of Councilors who were endorsing the deceptions and the dishonest handling of the funds belonging to others.

(b)  The 'rented property had been approved by a rent officer in the first instance, and the rent officer WAS on the payroll of the Council; there was nothing wrong with the property and it was not a bed and breakfast provision. The created Tenancy was founded on a contract that was endorsed with succinct terms and in the circumstances ANY 'hallucinatory delusions' from the corrupt and the corrupted ought not to be in contempt of the terms of contract.

(c)  Using an illiterate in law import and or relying on others to ignore the terms of contract and to create theatrical scenarios and scripts in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises (by the corrupt and the corrupted) was but a hallucinatory delusion.

(d)  Relying upon and using (in the normal run of events) the participating in the scams agents  was and is being challenged whether the dreamer likes it or not.

(e)  Instigating and seeking to promote additional FALSE INSTRUMENTS after the initial FORGERY was but further evidence of HOW DEEP THE CORRUPTION within Haringey Council. The False instruments were challenged accordingly (whether the author liked it or not) and the offenders (who elected to ignore the Terms of the Tenancy Agreement) had apologised for the errors of their ways.

(f)   Hiding behind others whether negligent in the conduct of the handling of the properties of others (and that includes the staff who allegedly were stealing Housing Benefit funds for themselves, as released to the press by Conservative Councilor Peter Forrest who came out of the wood to declare that such was the case in Haringey Council) or as active participants (through acts or convenient omissions) like the persons the author alludes to and writes of. All engaged in futile attempts to justify the fraudulent activities and corruption within Haringey Council, in no way JUSTIFIES charging the citizens a substantial sum of money 'as Council TAX' in order to maintain the likes of the Stephen Lawrence fiasco practitioners in office when they fail to take any action against criminals who indulge in blatant FORGERIES yet seek to waste TAX PAYERS moneys in the usual tangent exercises as we had in the interests of the legal professions for and in respect of the Stephen Lawrence defaults AFTERMATH, and as we had with and in the Pinochet extradition theatrical fiascoes.

(g)  The author obviously, hallucinating and suffering from delusions. He received copy of 'The LAW' compilation and letters drawing his attention to the provisions of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the ECoHR. For his benefit and all our visitors We QUOTE: "Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his (sexists settled this document) possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the principles of international law". Mr Singh and many others, INCLUDING our Prime Minister, have been challenged to produce any act of parliament that granted to the tutored and or free to indulge staff and officers at Haringey, and other Councils, the right to use and rely upon FORGERIES in the misappropriation, diversion and dissemination of funds belonging to others. Mr Singh and all others he relied, and relies upon, were/are called upon to state and produce any act of parliament that granted him and or any one from within Haringey Council & the United Kingdom to abduct and steal OUR TIME in order to challenge their corrupt and constructive fraud practices. We simply draw their attention to Article one of the ECoHR and we QUOTE: "Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law". The article is meant to provide for physical being; we maintain that it covers and should cover the right to a life as the citizen chooses SO LONG as the citizen does not infringe upon and or violate the rights of any other citizen, in any state founded and resting on the rule of law and order. The facts are:

   1. Public servants do breach national law and violate international law.

   2. Public servants DO INDULGE WITH OTHERS IN CRIME in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises   and USE FORGERIES and FALSE INSTRUMENTS *as defined by law*

   3.   Public servants breach law for the benefit of those they use and or co-operate with  AND they CREATE and impose the warranted challenges by the targeted victims in gross violation of articles 14, and Article 1 of the First Protocol AND

   4. Public servants RELY on violations of Article 13 by persons who allegedly act in a judicial capacity YET IGNORE ALL LAW APPLICABLE AND ALL EVIDENCE in contempt of both and in contempt of the rights of the targeted by the alleged judicious persons put in place to cover up and endorse the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises as and for the dictators who parade themselves as persons who adhere to the rule of law in an alleged democracy.

   5.   Until such time as the hallucinating author produces evidence that the funds stolen, misappropriated and or 'otherwise earmarked' by the tutored public servants, WERE RECEIVED by the owners of the targeted properties ALL public servants including the police, Members of Parliament and Ministers, also the Prime Minister who to all intents and purposes referred the serious issues we raise herein to the Home Office MUST CEASE PROMOTING hallucinatory delusions caused through corrupted power and grandiose schemes at the expense of others.  Any plans they hatch up with third parties that were not put to the electorate before polling day SHOULD be met by the authors and not through impositions by and through CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES, from FORGERIES TO BLACKMAIL as the police know of and the 'agents' (relied upon by the hallucinating author NOT TO APPEAL) indulged in with the tool (imported tenant) they used with the staff and officers of Haringey Council. "None above the Law" Mr Singh, is a basic principle and tenet of law. 

In the circumstances the citizens who ARE being caused to challenge the offenders through all means available to them and have had to change their plans FOR THEIR LIVES, they can and they should make a case founded and resting on RIGHTS TO LIFE VIOLATED through policies pursued without mandate from the electorate in an alleged Democracy. ALSO as our governments, through the ballot box, confirm their grandiose DEMOCRACY ILLUSIONS the victim / citizens should challenge the violations of their rights as nothing short of CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY by self appointed dictators and or puppets on strings acting for and or through others. 

Anyone who takes time to print and read through the FACTS attached to the Housing Benefit Frauds and Scams by Council staff SHOULD RECOGNISE WHY THE internal Appeal was being blocked by a senior officer in control of Benefits and WHY the agents were similarly disposed!  The Appeal Board / Panel WOULD INCLUDE Councilors and they had to be protected as the actors representing PARTY POLICY, and not the citizens (not Serfs of the Middle Ages or outcasts in India, Mr Singh!) from whom they secure votes through gross misrepresentations and seek only to promote their 'political careers at the expense of IGNORING THE RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS, Mr Singh, who voted them in their seats of corrupted power that is PROTECTED, by the likes of persons blocking a legitimate right in law. CRIME can be reported by anyone who is made aware of it, Mr Singh, and the police are duty bound to investigate and MUST present the case to the Crown Prosecution Service. The police, Mr. Singh, on the payroll of the instigators of crime (through corrupt policies and practices that include FALSE INSTRUMENTS AND FORGERIES), have no 'discretionary powers to DISCRIMINATE under the terms of their retainers. If they have, such arrangements have been withheld improperly from the citizens AND HAPPEN TO BE A GROSS VIOLATION of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. FURTHERMORE since you and all others you are relying upon wish to play at law consider also that under Article 29 of the Consolidated Treaties of the European Union, the citizens are meant to be protected:

A.  "Without prejudice to the power of the European Community (not the corrupt and the corrupted in Haringey or any other managing the CIUKU enterprises), the Union's objective shall be to provide citizens (not Serfs or outcasts) with a high level of safety (not as practiced by those who indulge as in the Stephen Lawrence, Michael Menson and or the present Antonas case) within an area of freedom (not freedom to indulge at the expense of any other through FORGERIES AND FALSE INSTRUMENTS) security and justice (not as relied upon by the corrupt and the corrupted because of the CIUKU enterprises, BUT WITHIN THE LAW) by developing common action among Member States (not independent of the law, Republic of Haringey) in the fields of police and judicial co-operation (not police and judicial cover ups of CRIME indulged yet ignored) in criminal matters (as the FORGERIES establish without any shred of a doubt) and by preventing and combating racism (not by importing and encouraging other races, as arranged with others, in order to create, through the blunt defaults following the murders of Stephen Lawrence and Michael Menson and the countless cases by using the imported refugees - created by meddling in the internal affairs of other countries - leading  to many a FRAUD on the indigenous populations. With intent and or recklessly aggravating and provoking racial incidents and tensions) and xenophobia (No one in civilised UK is in any way xenophobic; BUT EVERYONE DEPLORES CRIME against targeted (the indigenous populations) as in the instance at hand WHERE IN FACT the targeted victims of Housing Benefit Frauds are by and large members of SELECTED COMMUNITIES, leading to claims of institutionalised RACISM and RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, Mr Singh; take this bit of information with you to the CRE where you moved to AFTER you received a succinct and explicit letter AND REMIND the officers at the CRE that we have a file on them too, as to their RACIAL DISCRIMINATION practices).

    B.   "The objective shall be achieved by preventing and combating crime (not instigating through public services and promoting it through public servants) organised or otherwise (nor institutionalised and endorsed through corrupted legal services), in particular terrorism (as the imported and USED, tutored tenants are encourage to indulge in) trafficking in persons (as organised through the conflicts instigated through interference in the internal affairs of other Non Member States) and offences against children (not as proven, yet again recently, by absolving and protecting pedophilias in CIUKU) illicit drug trafficking (in which the police are seen to be free to indulge and occasionally/rarely called to book by the authorities that permit the spread through alleged inability to .... while fortunes by the traffickers are amassed only to be confiscated by those who sell to the electorate alleged inability to prevent   As With The Cheats Who Beat (alleged-Fraudbusters commissioned to investigate Social Security Fraud allegedly - REFER to the letter to the Home Secretary of 18th December 2000) and illicit arms trafficking (except the provision of arms to 'rebels and alleged freedom fighters' as in cases proven in the past and in the making now where the CIUKU enterprises promoters have their fingers in the honey the bees will produce with interest later as supported by the interfering outsiders seeking to create break-away new states that WILL owe moneys and interest to the promoters of the divide and rule principle) CORRUPTION AND FRAUD (arising out of the practices Council staff and officers were instigating, promoting and or had their meddling fingers in through the misappropriation and distribution arrangements for the Housing Benefit funds secured for and owing to others). (return to Your Rights) (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author fails to state: "IF THEY ARE SO INCLINED". By assertively confirms the fact that agents (through defaults and omissions) were failing to challenge the 'wrongs they were speaking of and failing to put in any letters the author provides additional evidence of the SPECIAL relationship that existed between the council, its staff and officers and their partners in deceptions, in dishonest handling, in thefts of properties and theft of rights by engaging in constructive frauds with others while relying on others to assist and offer protection THROUGH ORGANISED INSTITUTIONALISED CRIMES imposed on Mr and Mrs Average by public servants engaged and retain in the management of CIUKU enterprises. The author conveniently fails to state that having a right is not the same as exercising it, especially when others suffer damages and not the person who defaults to exercise the right he alludes to. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author fails to add:"What she told you and what she had been doing and or was likely to do are two separate things. Only a fool could expect Mrs Michael to act, especially one such as you, who recognised from the onset what had been on the agenda for the targeted victims through the use of FORGERIES and all the defaults by the police who, as you know, were involved in other Housing Benefit Fraud, cover ups and introduced their own FALSE instruments to cause additional damages to the victims of CRIMES. Wake up Mr.Average, WE ARE the managers in control of the CIUKU enterprises". The author still acting in contempt of and or electing to remain oblivious of Statutory provisions as covered by LAW.  Evidently neither the council staff and officers, nor the 'managing' agents of the properties of others and or the local police were ever made aware of the simple 'term THROUGH AN ACT OR AN OMISSION' a crime, if the result is to cause the damage and or to promote the crime, as distinct from any tacit approval. The fact was and remains that so long as the defaulting party and or parties and OR ANY OTHERS DO BENEFIT from the spoils of the crime then the party/parties are guilty of the offence; in the instance at hand THEFTS OF PROPERTIES and pecuniary advantage/advantages for others at the expense of the targeted victims THROUGH USE OF A FORGERY. The author and others, including the police, ignoring the fact that a right in law (lost / stolen / not used / ignored BY AN AGENT with intent no longer can be termed as negligence, particularly where there exists gain and or reward of ANY KIND. The author and Haringey Council officers should know better than to expect that others, including the legal circles who sought benefit through contempt of the rules of procedure and a readily granted Legal Aid loan (as covered in the Affidavit we publish) were meant to be beneficiaries from impositions by public servants through use and promotion of a FORGERY as an alleged legitimate instrument that was used for theft of properties no one bothered to return EXCEPT seek to expand upon through the introduction of other FALSE INSTRUMENTS subsequent to the transfer / theft / misappropriation of funds belonging to another. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author and the council staff and officers having benefited from the acts of the initial FORGERY, hallucinates while an opposition Councilor exposes the CRIME INFESTED corridors or power at Haringey. With TWO ADDITIONAL FORGERIES, CLONED FROM THE INITIAL FORGERY the author had the audacity to allude to evidence, yet ignore the release to the local media who were sitting on the information and the evidence they all received. The author behaves as if the forgeries were, or could ever be declared by anyone to be, legitimate instruments.  The author writes of the instruments (THE FORGERIES) and appears to be oblivious of the fact that the FORGERIES were used for specific purposes; in his mind probably justifiably and or without cause or effect; he might even assert that the forgeries were used for good cause and for the best of reasons in the Council's CAUSE (of course) and or in the interests of the CIUKU enterprises. He could never claim that it was in the interest of the victims! (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author ignores, with intent, the initial FORGERY that the council staff used and promoted; he ignores the Section 9 Statement the Council staff  were sitting on for almost a year by then; he ignored the TWO additional clones the council staff secured and sent to their partners in crime, the property agents they were relying upon to promote the FORGERIES as acceptable instruments. The author ignores the additional FALSE INSTRUMENTS another council department was called upon to introduce after the misappropriation of the funds through use of the initial FORGERY. And the author even has the audacity to ignore the statement from the used tenant, the imported new citizen that was also being trained, tutored and encouraged to cause criminal damages to the properties while all were relying on the defaulting police and the staff and officers of the 'relevant county court'  to ignore and endorse such activities, in the promotion of and the execution of the CIUKU enterprises. And of course the author HAD to ignore the news release through the Councilor that came out of the wood as soon as Haringey Council staff and HIS OFFICE were made aware the FORGERIES and FALSE instruments re referred to the police. NOW copies of the FORGERIES are available on the Internet for the world to marvel at the ingenuity of the architects in control of the CIUKU enterprises. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author, as a hallucinating person suffering from delusions and loss of memory, IGNORES THE EVIDENCE he and his subordinates had on file for almost a year. He ignores the FORGERIES that the alleged investigators should have investigated in the first instance. The allegedly concerned/competent 'investigators' who should know of the law and the provision ".... pecuniary advantage FOR ANOTHER ..... "  should have SECURED the co-operation of ALL Council staff to cause the authors and procurers of the FORGERY to return the stolen and misappropriated funds to their rightful and legitimate owners. They ought not to have indulged in the attempted promotion of other scenarios through which to allege use of or misappropriation (on paper without cause or legitimate right) of the diverted/stolen funds. The investigators' priority has always been to serve the LAW and the citizens NOT the dishonest and the thieves who need funds to finance the Council's needs of the imported new citizens being trained and used in criminal activities from an alleged party in the creation and use of the FORGERIES, to the encouragement to cause criminal damages to the rented property. The author MIRACULOUSLY ignores the fact that reference of the FORGERIES to the police did cause the opposition Councilor Peter Forrest to come out of the wood and to expose the scams and ongoing frauds in the Housing and Social Services Department.  For years the fraud department being informed of the fraudulent activities in which Council staff were involved and through such activities generating chaos and confusion. Their convenient MISTAKES  included posting, with intent, payments for non existent tenancies OF WHICH ISSUES HE WAS FULLY INFORMED PERSONALLY.  Yet the hallucinating author deludes himself and none other, and he has the audacity to assert: " will be thoroughly investigated..." (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author should have stated 'we shall arrange for an opposition Councilor to speak of that which we knew of, and were engaged in; arrange to blame the staff we trained to misappropriate and steal funds in order to keep up with OUR LIABILITIES and commitments to the new imported citizens. We knew and know that we can rely on the participating in the scams (through defaults) police to ignore our indiscretions and crimes, just as we have been relying on the relevant courts 'with no knowledge of applicable law or rules', to obstruct the victim citizens when the citizens seek their rights and the protection of the law". The citizens of course are not informed of the fact that ALL LAW has been brushed, by public servants, under the carpets for the purposes Council staff and officers engage in. Yes such actions are taken in the running of the CIUKU enterprises. Appropriately organised in the circumstances covered in these pages. (Return to letter)

FACTS:  The author forgot to add: "They tried to explain to an illiterate in law peasant-serf, such as we treat you and any others we elect so treat, as your masters.  Neither I nor any member of our staff are prepared to complete and sign the DECLARATION published at human-rights because your masters and lords do not subscribe to such 'trash' WE are the law and no other exists for us; we are the lords and no other exists above us". Public office is power.  Power corrupts as in the Hitler / Franco / Pinochet mould. The corrupted theatre in the Pinochet extradition farce was but a typical example of conversion of assets and asset stripping practices by the Lords and Masters as in any corrupt and dictatorial state. Democracy?  Where be the punishment for the use of FORGERIES in the transfer / misappropriation of funds covered in these pages?  We do not and we will not accept any assertions that the theft of funds and the ENJOYMENT OF ONE'S PROPERTIES / POSSESSIONS (including moneys, peace of mind and rights under the law) could ever be justified as 'in the public interest' in an alleged democracy allegedly founded and resting on the rule of law and order, where crime rules supreme as instigated, aided and promoted by public servants of the caliber of the persons in charge of Haringey Council. (Return to letter)

FACTS: The author, and any other public servant should read the above comments and recognise that the average citizen (not serf) is not as illiterate in law and rights under the law as public servants presume the citizens to be; and that THE PUBLIC SERVANTS MUST CEASE TREATING Mr ad Mrs Average as serfs in an alleged democracy where public servants and politicians indulge in the promotion and execution of undeclared policies for which they have no mandate from the electorate that keeps then in office through taxes. (Return to letter)

The Chief Executive sent copies of the above letter 'by way of a brief' to the staff who took part in the questionable and fraudulent activities we raise herein. The one single act that no public servant and or Central Government cannot waffle out of is covered in the last paragraph of 'the Appeal that was lodged at 'the relevant county court'. We have now published that document too, for the benefit of citizens in order to assist them to challenge wafflers and criminals who manage in similar manner funds they secure for the use of the properties of others. Blunt acts of theft in breach of 'The LAW'. In no way can the public 'buy and or fall for the "complacent bit" sold in news releases to the media, who readily distributed such tripe, irrespective of the true facts such as the Daily Mail was caused to investigate and report and we draw attention to.

Links to:   Violations by Local Authorities  human-rights Home Page     The LAW

Links to:   Misconduct by Public Servants    FRAUD Vitiates Judgements   Cap's- INDEX

Links to:  The Violations - the public kept in the dark   National Scandal DSS fraud

Revised on June 15, 2012

Back to HomePage

The creator of this website invites victims to access URrights & join him with other victims to expose & challenge abusers of trust & public office

APOLOGIES to friends and persons who could not access URrights following the recent changes by the providers of the facility (ning.com) Andrew Yiannides used to create the presence on the Internet for the group of victims / challengers of abused public services in allegedly civilised societies > PSEUDODEMOCRACIES <.
The changes related to the introduction of charges for the facilities, included the facility for ning.com to archive the material at URrights; also the facility to download the archived material to the creator's system (computer) while the creator and his group of friends considered which of the level of charges and service the group was to adopt.
HOWEVER the creator, Andrew Yiannides, WAS UNABLE TO DOWNLOAD THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL and all attempts to engage the providers and their staff in reasonable explanation as to WHY THE FAILURES TO CONNECT / DOWNLOAD from the ning.com system THE ARCHIVED MATERIAL, were ignored.
Emails to the Publicity, to the Promotion, to the Public Relations, also to the Chief Executive's Office merited no response whatsoever from anyone acting for ning.com
In the circumstances Andrew will appreciate any information related to the problems covered above. Andrew will also appreciate any information relative to exchanges with or email postings, from ning.com to existing members.
EXISTING URrights members, victims of the legal system, victims of solicitors and the courts should access the updated pages at .org/solicitors.htm and .org/solfraud.htm by using the links from the list below.

Below pages where we expose known lovers of it all, users and maintenance engineers of the system as is

.org/199dfax.htm .org/1ofmany.htm .org/2lipstalk.htm .org/4deceit.htm .org/absolute.htm .org/abusers.htm
.org/account4.htm .org.actors.htm .org/actors2.htm .org/adoko.htm .org/bankers.htm .org/beware.htm
.org/blunket1.htm .org/chaldep1.htm .org/confraud.htm .org/contract.htm .org/convicti.htm .org/courts.htm
.org/corruptcourts.htm .org/crimesin.htm .org/dreamers.htm .org/evesused.htm .org/evilones.htm .org/famfraud.htm
.org/govolso.htm .org/guesswhy.htm .org/len.htm .org/mauricek.htm .org/media.htm .org/solfraud.htm
.org/solicitors.htm .org/someplan.htm .org/someploy.htm .org/thefacts.htm .org/theproof.htm .org/thenerve.htm
.org/twisted.htm .org/uaccount.htm .org/ukmm.htm .org/uwatchit.htm .org/watchit1.htm .org/yourtax.htm
Every single person we name and expose in the above pages elected to ignore THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO REPORT (to 'the serfs' = 'the taxpayers'), THE ABUSERS OF PUBLIC OFFICE & PUBLIC FACILITIES. All were/are relying on the Intellectual Prostitutes, from within the media, to keep it all in the family closet.
All, as typical twin-tongue hypocrites carry on complaining about the media for failing to report & for suppressing the facts and the realities they allegedly reported to the hard of hearing, to the otherwise committed angels blowing their silent trumpets for decades, all ready and gearing to welcome the expansion of the New World Order.
Of such parts the contributions from and failings of the persons we name and expose, AS IF THEIR OWN SILENCE, THEIR FAILURES  & THEIR BLUNT OBSTRUCTIONS to the work and other actions by the creator of this website, Andrew Yiannides, treated by one and all as if non-existent with the exception when the wily Norman Scarth, set off to abuse the trust he was allowed to benefit from, while his parts and questionable activities / performance were under scrutiny, specifically after HE FAILED to publish the full transcript of the Court of Appeal hearing HE WAS ALLOWED TO RECORD* [*Link from here to the food for thought page created by Andrew Yiannides, in the first instance].
Not one ever bothered to address the issues we expose in the explicit page, despite the fact that we have been pointing all of our contacts, since May 1992, to it all.
Visitors, readers and researchers are urged / invited to access and read the letter which the Hon. Secretary of the Litigants In Person Society, Mr. Norman Scarth sent to the founder of human-rights, Mr. Andrew Yiannides, reproduced in the page .org/4deceit.htm* [*L]
The author's statements, such as 'what for and why seek additional assistance', thereby spelling out his parts as a lover of it all.
Common sense dictates, that he should have directed his request to his partners in deceptions aplenty, one & all engaging in fraudulent misrepresentations AND NOTED TO HAVE, WILFULLY, BEEN SUPPRESSING, FROM THE TAXPAYERS, THE FACTS OF LIFE RELATIVE TO THE RAMPANT ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES as the failure of all to co-operate as covered and pointed to at:- [*L]. One and all fallen to the facilities for fraud aplenty on the taxpayers and the corruption of illiterates in law, the conditioned victims of the legal circles & courts who fall to the blackmail element attached to the REWARD for keeping the realities away from the taxpayers; just like the media and the Ministers responsible for the application of long existing law to the criminal activities we cover in our pages, do.
All the while one and all were / are engaging in the scenarios we cover in the exclusive page, which page the author of the letter which Mr Norman Scarth sent to Andrew Yiannides, afforded us the opportunity to address the issue of the contributions of his partners and affiliates in fraud aplenty on the taxpayers; despite the reminder one and all, named in the new page simply shoved it all in the dark corners of their devoid of grey matter skulls, their perverted / corrupted mind(s)

> MOST IMPORTANT <
On Sunday morning, the 19th September 2010, the Deputy Prime Minister, leader of the Liberal-Democrats in the course of the BBC TV politics programme, spoke of the coalition government's commitment to address the element of waste and fraud through the public services sector. We trust and hope that the elements we expose in our pages and the parts adopted by the conditioned victims of the legal circles, the persons who engage in PROMOTING & EXPANDING THE ONGOING CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD ON THE TAXPAYERS, THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES, will be on the top of the list of government priorities.
Visitors, readers & researchers are urged to access the letters to Minister Frank Field [*L] after he had been directed by the Prime Minister to think/do the unthinkable.
Link also from here [*L] to the explicit letter to the Home Secretary in December 1998 with submissions arising out of the RAMPANT HOUSING BENEFIT FRAUD
On Tuesday 23rd November 2010, 'the Guardian' in its Comment & Debate page carried an article by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister. In the evening of the same day the Deputy Prime Minister addressed a large audience at Kings place in respect of the government's changes on university students fees / loans.
Access from here the page where we reproduce an image of 'the Guardian' article & consider the simple fact that we, alone, have been asserting and proclaiming our objections to the theft of funds from the national budget leading to the ever-increasing annual deficit in the state's balance of payments.

ACCESS:  http://www.justice-uk.human-rights.org/ (For an important message at this Community-on-Line web-site) & thereafter, access also the realities as submitted and lodged at the European Court for Human Rights covered at http://www.law.society.complaints.and.human-rights.org/ (Judge instigates Fraud On Tax Payers - he knows not the difference between 'imposed' & 'no undue influence'). APOLOGIES FOR THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THIS WEBSITE. It appears that the beneficiary of the work, both for applications to the courts in the United Kingdom and the submissions to the ECoHR* [*Link from here to the Statement of Facts submitted to the ECoHR]. The beneficiary arranged with the providers of the free web space to erase the Intellectual Property of Andrew Yiannides, the founder of the human-rights Community-on-Line, without any reference to the creator of the website and owner of the Intellectual Property!
All visitors, serious readers and researchers are urged to access and read the arrangements in place FOR CORRUPTING THE MORONS who fall prey and victims of the legal circles / the abused courts facilities in all allegedly civilised PSEUDOdemocracies care of the CASH REWARDS to the morons who agree to join the club by accepting the rewards on offer through the European Court of Human Rights under the conditions stipulated as the evidence we point to clarifies and qualifies at:- http://www.human-rights.org/confraud.htm#RECOGNISE
Copyright subsists on all material in our web-site, owned by the authors of same.
Visitors can refer to these pages in any non commercial activity, so long as attribution is given as to source. License to use, for commercial or other specific use of the material, shall have been secured in writing first, from the owners of any property and material from these pages. No material shall be reproduced in any form and by any means without prior agreement and or license in writing from the copyright owners. The Press are invited to contact us if they wish to publish material in the Public Interest, As We Do.
For any problems or questions regarding this web-site contact:  webmaster
...

,,,