 JOIN the
Community On Line and publish facts and evidence. Use your rights in law. Invite the
offenders to sign and return to you the explicit DECLARATION you can print
from our pages and if they fail to do so EXPOSE them as offenders by relying on the same principles as our judges promoted and used
when Garry Glitter & Lord Archer declined to take the stand and give evidence, submit
to cross examination.
KEY to
Page / Site
The PERSONS page - List The ISSUES - page -
List The VENUES -
List Your Rights - ECoHR &
EU DEDICATION of web-site LETTERS TO
- List LETTERS FROM - List SITE PAGES List OTHER SITES - List PAGE QUOTES - List
SITE QUOTES - Page List UPDATED PAGES - List
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6
Arrogant
council staff recognise no law and they all rely on other public servants to
misconduct in public office - Local Courts  Read this letter and access:- Cowboy lawyers
and the Facts on affidavit
The Court of
Appeal ruling to the point. Yet they all dreamt they could
proceed to conversions of rents, owing, to alleged legal costs via theatrical productions
in the relevant county court.  Note NO damages, even for 'Wrongful eviction based on Shorthold
Tenancy Agreements. Access:- Letter from Council Dreamer National Scandal
(page)
We publish below a 1997 REPORT from a local newspaper. It covers the very
issues as the report above. The FACTS OF LIFE within Haringey Council. An enterprising
member of staff doing for himself that which he was doing with and for others; as he
learned of in the course of his training. How to treat moneys belonging to others. Who
could blame him? Suppression of the facts. Misinformation for the gullible, in both
local and National newspapers ! The Enterprising
member of staff at Haringey Council swindles £100,000 !!!!!
We publish below the REPORT in the Hornsey and Crouch End Journal of 31st
December 1998. It covers the fact that the Council was to benefit from extra
cash from central government after an explicit letter, dated 18 December 1998,
was sent to the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, the Home Secretary. Barely 12 days after the explicit letter
reached its destination and
through the article proof that positive Action was taken.
In February 1998, we noted also, in a local NEWSPAPER REPORT,
that the rampant frauds were featured. WE CAUSED the scams to be EXPOSED in the
local papers after years of frustrating obstructions and volumes of paper work imposed
on us by the corrupt and the corrupted. Many had been closing their ears and
their eyes. They had nothing to say on the serious issues presented to them. ALL ignored
the evidence and the facts, safe that certain actions taken were pre-emptive activities.
The documented evidence, masses of letters etc., can never be erased and or ignored
by any decent citizen, now.
In our letter, of 18th Dec. 1998,
to the Home Secretary we urged SFO and
Public Auditors Investigations.
In 'The
Times' of 17th November 1997, the news that a Rights Bill was on the horizon. The
miracle  occurred
because in an overpayments case Enfield Council were challenged appropriately and blunt
violations of stated ECoHR articles were pleaded by the targeted victim. A Defence and
Counterclaim was filed and served. Link To
a relevant paragraph for brief details.
In the Daily Mail, of 8th April
1998, reference to alleged complacency by Council staff in the matter of Fraudulent Social Security claims.
Housing Benefit Funds Distributed as organised by Public Servants who misconduct in public office and such
activities are nowhere mentioned, in the article! Go to the free for all page as proclaimed on 30th July 2001 by the government when some
of the truths, we have been exposing, were 'admitted' officially. And from 800 million the
sucker citizens who pay taxes FOR RAMPANT FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES were informed of 2.8
billion as the 'stolen funds'.
The
Persons
1. Letting Agents, Crooks
2. Tenants,
Used Crooks
3. Council Staff,
Crooks
4. Council Officers
5. Councillors, dishonest
6. Chief Executive, crook
7. Police Officers, Default 8. Rent Officer
9. Magistrates Court
10. Our Public Servants
11. County Court Officers 12. C.I.C.A Officers,
staff 13. Solicitors, dishonest
14. Barristers, abettors
15. Newspapers, default
16. Modern Robin Hoods
17.
part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
The Issues
1. Fraud by Public
Servants
2. Creative Accountancy
3. False Instruments
4. FORGERIES
5. Misappropriated Benefit
6. Fraudulent Demands
7. Police-Invisible Services
8. Abuse Public Facilities
9. Abuse Legal Aid Facility 10. Government Invited to
11. Abuse-Court Facilities
12. Fraud Through Courts 13.
Constructive FRAUDS 14.
Torment And Torture
15. Police Ignore
Witness
16. The Judge's Duty
17. Blunt THEFTS
18. Police Promote CRIME
19. Institutionalised
Crime
part 4
part 5
part 6
C. The Evidence
1. C.o.A Law Report
2. Letter Evincing Reliance
3. FORGERIES used
4. Letter Withdrawing A Fraudulent Demand
5.
part 1
part 2
part 3
Page Quotes
1. European Union Law provides for
the citizens to be protected from FRAUD and CORRUPTION
2. FRAUD Challenged. The OVERPAYMENTS Fallacy.
3. Officially created fraud on unsuspecting citizens who
then have to rely on the 'merchants of misery' © in order to challenge
the creative accountancy practices by officially appointed and retained in office
criminals.
4. Let Barrabas go &
crucify Christ their motto
part 5
part 6
The Venues
1. Haringey Council
2. Haringey Magistrates
3. Haringey Police
4. Edmonton County Court
5.
part 6 |
|
 Page Created Feb.
1997- Site under reconstruction
Staff - VIOLATIONS - in law
The days when public servants relied on the BLIND DEAF AND DUMB
MEDIA BARONS AND THEIR STOOGES ARE OVER. The days when ALL relied on BLIND DEAF AND
DUMB officers within the law enforcement agencies, are also over. This is the age of FREE
exchange of information and THE unadulterated FACTS OF LIFE within all states, so long
as their citizens are free to exercise, AS WE DO, their basic human-rights that ARE
GUARANTEED under the European
Convention on Human Rights.(ECoHR) (*Link to other Articles
of the European Convention and site)
Article 13.(repeated here) "EVERYONE whose rights and
freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated SHALL have an effective remedy
before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation HAS BEEN committed by
persons acting in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY."
Article 13 is VERY CLEAR. WHERE IS THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY THAT LOOKS INTO THE
VIOLATIONS judges in the United Kingdom endorse, entertain AND INSTIGATE of their
own? The question is simple and the Lord Chancellor with the Home Secretary should
co-operate and produce the formula under which the citizens CAN challenge activities that
blatantly breach national law and VIOLATE Human Rights. NOTE PLEASE: We have on record a high court
case where the Judge made an issue of the serious ERROR of judgements (practices in our
view) by the Ombudsman. All is not as the public is told and as the multitude of facts we
publish PROVE BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT TO THE average citizen. The citizens demand that
they be treated no more as illiterate serfs of the middle ages and or as subjects to
the whims and or the abusive dishonesty of so called 'public servants'; the 'alleged
servants of the public' who serve other ulterior motives* which they fail to
declare.*
The European Union Treaties succinctly provide that the citizens
shall be protected from FRAUD and CORRUPTION. It is time for all quangos and public
servants, inclusive of all retained within the Law Enforcement Agencies, to abandon the
free for all they have been and some are indulging in as the Appeals and affidavits we
publish evince and ESTABLISH beyond any doubt.
FRAUD CHALLENGED: THE OVERPAYMENTS FALLACY. Blunt FRAUD founded, resting and created by the administrating middle men
- the Local Authorities through their well tutored and trained staff and officers. They
make demands, from targeted landlords, for the return of funds, allegedly paid in error,
etc. They label such demands as alleged overpayments and hey... presto.... officially created fraud on the unsuspecting citizens
who would normally rely on the 'merchants of misery' © to challenge the creative
accountancy practices by officially appointed and retained in office criminals. The
letter below, from Haringey Council, makes clear the fact that staff and officers HAD DETERMINED they had
the right to seek and demand recovery of much needed funds in the usual fashion. They had
been insisting on that course of action irrespective of clear statements in lengthy
communications from the targeted victim. The name of the person assisting the
targeted victim was spelled wrongly in the letter for inexplicable reasons, safe the fact
that the very person was being denied a hearing proper in matters arising out of and in
another, similar case and scenario.
The issues raised by
and in the other case are partly (note please) stated in the explicit appeal we publish in
our pages. In that instance transfer, misappropriation and otherwise distribution and
dissemination of Housing Benefit funds was indulged into through use of a forgery. Later
two subsequent clones were introduced by the criminals employed and tutored by the
council's gurus. In that case Haringey Council staff and officers were relying on their
partners in deception and dishonest handling of the properties of others, the managers and controllers of the
Letting Agency. Between them relying on the relevant
county court and its officers to impose/perpetrate/cause and endorse the intended
constructive frauds and criminal damages on the targeted landlords. The managing agents,
were relied upon to block the demanded Review Board hearing in that case, AS THEY HAD
ARRANGED WITH THE COUNCIL STAFF AND OFFICERS. Letters proving the arrangements
between the conspirators can be published and the targeted private landlord will be caused
to review his own part and mistakes in the matters attached to the constructive frauds.
 Page 1.
"Council notified by the DSS that the claimant
had been excluded as of March from receiving Housing Benefit"! A typical
assertion based on convenient mistakes, oversight and or errors if not arrangements
between public servants, who are engaged and trained in the promotion of the CIUKU
enterprises. Reliance on such impossibilities in the days of Information Technology at the
touch of a button. Inexcusable improprieties and attempts
through which to generate and create work for the "Merchants
of Misery ©", solicitors who service the "Self Perpetuating Cancerous
Growth Industry ©" through the practices we expose and challenge in our pages.
 Page 2.
".... landlord had not
materially contributed to the omission by the officers of the Department of Social
Security to notify the Council..." The enterprising
wasters of the time of the targeted citizens KNEW ALL ALONG that such was the situation.
They get paid to mess around with the rights
to life, as the citizens plan for themselves and their families. Public servants
acting in contempt of and in breach of Parliament's and International Law. We refer
our visitors to the sections of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to which we drew the
attention of the Attorney General, as we published in the Stephen Lawrence pages. (Back to Haringey: Review Board changed directions
, assisted HONEST persons)
OUR INVITATION TO GOVERNMENT:- Should the government wish to set up an inquiry and or
investigation proper, we shall be happy to provide full particulars and other instances
where Council staff and officers, county court staff and officers and police officers, all
the way to the office of the Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police all actively engaged
in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises. In the event that the police and Central
Government carry on defaulting to take steps to correct the errors of the ways of public
servants and to ensure that the citizens rights are restored with provisions for dealing
with damages caused through such activities we shall not hesitate to publish full
particulars and ALL letters evincing the ostrich acts of many in public office.
The
CoA law report ( link ) covers aspects attached to Shorthold Tenancy Agreements. No sooner had the judgement been pronounced and a member of staff from Haringey Council, was writing
to the landlady and her agent to promote assertions that were contrary to the legal
position; the author, we understand, is no longer employed at Haringey Council.
We have on record other issues that we may be forced to publish if public servants carry
on ignoring Parliament's Law. The questionable activities of Public Servants within Local
Authorities, such as Haringey Council in North London, have been the subject matter of
well documented highly questionable acts in breach of The Law* and the principles
of law. Irrespective of the law, as it was at the time of the CoA Law report we publish in
this page, Public Servants and two firms of solicitors were indulging themselves. They
were relying on Legal Aid Certificates to
fleece the targeted victim, as with and by others arranged.
The Court of
Appeal Law Report qualifies that both lawyers were ignoring
the very ruling. From within the
local court they were being assisted by Public Servants to seek conversion of the rents
due and payable to the targeted landlord. Through Misappropriation, by local authority
staff, Housing Benefit funds earmarked for the creation of alleged legitimate legal costs
through attempted theatrical productions at court. All via abuse of Legal Aid Facilities, care of public
servants.
The letter ( link ) of
26th March 1996, from the member of staff from Haringey Council in North London went
further and exposed reliance on 'the relevant
county court' the officers of which ignored 'The LAW' and bend the rules.
The arrogant author was quoting an Act of Parliament, years out of
date, and without any reference to the Act under which the Shorthold Tenancy Agreement had
been entered into between landlord and tenant. The audacity of the author extended
to assertions irrespective of the fact that the tenant HAD already MOVED out most of her
belongings after giving notice that she was moving out with substantial rent arrears.
WORSE was the insolence of the author who exposed Council reliance on
the 'relevant county court'. The officers, and even the clerical staff, of that court'
assuming authorities above the jurisdiction and ruling of the Court of Appeal
At least four cases were referred to the Lord Chancellor personally.
His Lordship was requested to call in the files of all the cases from the court. He was
called upon to justify the activities and the defaults of the officers of 'the relevant
county court'. We simply add that in all cases the officers of 'the very court' failed and
defaulted, with intent, to issue and grant Judgements resting on Default Summonses arising
out of failures by the tenants to remit RENTS to their landlords. We add
that the tenants, in two of the cases, HAD BEEN RECEIVING HOUSING BENEFIT while the
council staff were asserting and alleging the tenants had either not furnished the Council
with the essential information and or documents thus hindering the processing of the
respective claims. As alternative 'reasons' the Council staff, had been asserting
inability to process the applications because they lost and or misplaced the relevant
files, and if not, that excuse they would allege the Council computer system had failed, crashed, etc., etc. The rule for
interim payments, within 14 days, ALWAYS ignored by Council staff, whenever targeting
specific victims of the scams and their constructive fraud activities, in tandem with
others.
EVEN WORSE, in
one instance, the tenant allegedly was given a substantial amount of funds through use of a FORGERY. He failed to remit the contracted rents to the
landlord. The Council Staff and the Letting Agents, contemptuously, defaulted to submit
the FORGERY TO THE POLICE even though they were invited to do so. ALL
RELIED UPON AND USED IT, kept it IN THEIR FILES for almost a year and relied on the
police to default in the execution of their Public Duties. You, the citizens of the world,
the Jury, are called upon to refer to The LAW* document we publish in our web-site
pages. The LAW is succinct and clear:- INDICTABLE OFFENCES for aiding a person to
evade / default to meet EXISTING LIABILITIES.
HARINGEY COUNCIL STAFF KNEW NO BOUNDARIES. They recognised no law, yet asserted many
a fraudulent misrepresentation through and because of reliance on 'the relevant court' ( link )
and the author of the letter dared refer to an Act of Parliament, irrespective of the
explicit terms of the Shorthold Tenancy Agreement in their files.
DO NOTE that the £10
difference between the 'average 2 bedroom flat' (£190) and the rent the local letting
agency 'negotiated with the tenants and or the local authority staff, on behalf of their
principals' (£180) was not enough for the participating in the
scams dishonest partners in constructive frauds. To all intents and purposes the
property owner was meant to receive officially £165 per week. The £165 per week, purportedly, was the rent approved for
the property by a rent officer benefiting from an explicit relationship with the Local
Authority; arrangements that make 'impartiality' a joke and 'material for distribution to
the naive and morons'. Rent officers, conveniently, are on the pay roll of local
authorities.
Rent for the
very property had been negotiated, earlier, at £220 per week through another
co-operating letting agent / agency. It was not enough to
negotiate(?) and to 'arrange for a new contracted rent' below market value for the
property as declared in official documents. Council staff and Letting Agents considered,
also, prudent and honourable to assert and declare to the landlord, that the property
merited even less. Through their silence they allowed and encouraged, the tenant to
proclaim even less. The tenants asserted, to the landlords, that the
new approved rent was only in the sum of £145 per week. Council officers and their
legal boffins could and did rely on amenable, to the scams, 'court staff and officers
within 'the relevant county court'.
The tenants, encouraged as they were, remitted to the landlord, only
OCCASIONALLY, rent for the property. The tenants thus built up under various pretexts,
with assistance from the local authority staff, a substantial debt. The staff of the local
authority then CHOSE TO IGNORE the maximum 8 weeks rent/debt rule and regulations. Worse they allegedly ignored the letting/managing agents
who were participating in the constructive frauds. EVEN worse,
IN CONTEMPT of 'The LAW' all who took and take part, in such schemes, acted and
carried in acting in breach of the provisions of the THEFT AND COUNTERFEIT ACTS.
Parliament purportedly enacts Law to protect the citizens. OUR elected politicians and
government appoint, to such 'prestigious' and 'privileged positions', Law Enforcement
Agents, who are meant to serve us, the citizens, as PUBLIC SERVANTS, impartially and
without discrimination on any grounds as Article 14 of the ECoHR, provides.
The Council staff
and officers after remitting funds to the indebted tenant, in contravention of the aforementioned rule and in breach of ACTS OF PARLIAMENT, they advanced, promoted and relied on USE OF A
FORGERY in futile attempts to justify their failures to remit ANY rents to the landlord
and or to the co-operating in the scams letting/managing agents. THE EVIDENCE is too clear and the police indulged and carry on in their usual
games for months and years and only ready to suggest 'their usual tangent exercises'.
Proposing an inquiry and investigation, not of the crimes but one based on the failings of
their colleagues! Another Lawrence fiasco scenario the area in which the Metropolitan
Police excels. Failure to take proper statements from a material witness attached to their
unwillingness to bring about prosecutions of the criminals who steal to secure funds
for their salaries. The FORGERIES treated as incidental and immaterial instruments for the
acts of deception, dishonest handling, and fraudulent distribution and THEFT of funds
belonging to others! To the discredit Metropolitan Police the Theft Acts were/are
published in invisible ink and apparently not in Braille, for the blind among their
circles to know of.
The
police, as the Stephen Lawrence Saga*;and inquiry established, have other
agendas to serve.* Positive discrimination against targeted landlords and their
priorities servicing the needs of criminals and the parasites among them. Blunt omissions, and defaults by the police who failed to take any
statements from the person who submitted copies of the initial and the two subsequent
forgeries to them, are matters NOW, for the Home Secretary and the persons who determine
that by an Act of God they have the right to act as modern day Robin Hoods and to steal
(robbing) under cover of shady acts (hoods), not from their rich friends and mates down
the road, but from the frugal and creative, Mr
and Mrs Average. And our modern day Robin ('robbing) Hoods
(under the 'hoods' disguising their true undeclared aims) busy distributing the spoils of
their God given rights to act outside Parliament's Laws, to their chosen circles, to their
imported tools and proteges that their mates in other lands, in tandem, created for and
through other gains from spoils for and from warmongering activities at the expense of Mr
and Mrs Average, world-wide. And the scriptwriters of such scenarios treating today's
world citizens as yesteryear serfs and as illiterate peasants of the Middle Ages.
The police
electing throughout to ignore the person who has full knowledge of the facts they
have chosen to disregard for over four years, for obvious reasons to any person who is
gifted with a slight hint of common sense and logic. They simply do not wish for the
facts and the evidence to be officially recorded, as in many other instances they
'systematically' indulge. Reckless indifference for no good cause safe the
promotion of CRIME through endorsement, if not contempt for the rights in law of the
victims. Yet again the "Let Barrabas live; crucify Christ" policy!
MANY the submissions
to all; especially to the police who were called in to conduct an investigation proper
BECAUSE OF THE FORGERY that gave birth to the other two FORGERIES at a very crucial point
in time. They were meant to charge the OFFENDERS, those who indulged in THEFTS through
deception, dishonesty and misappropriation of funds (moneys belonging to others).
The main offenders sitting, for well over a year, on a Section 9 Statement
signed by the victim of all, the landlord. The offenders did make USE OF AND RELIED ON
BLATANT FORGERIES to justify misappropriation attempts and THEFTS (plural intended) yet
the police simply drag their feet for their own reasons. The 'relevant county court and
its officers' aware of the scams and the frauds on the private landlords and THE STATE, on the Social Security FUNDS. Nothing but misconduct
in public office* and endorsement of CRIME. Refer to the Appeal we published because
of wilful failures by all to act, safe to give extra funds to the promoters of the free
for and the land of milk and honey reputation they built on thefts and INSTITUTIONALISED
CRIME, through their CORRUPT PRACTICES that our pages cover.
We
publish (*Link in the left panel) A NEWSPAPER REPORT
covering the scams they were caused to deal with. WE CAUSED the scams to
be EXPOSED in the local papers following years of frustrating work and volumes of
paper work imposed by the corrupt and the corrupted. Many had been closing their
ears and their eyes. They had nothing to say on the serious issues presented to them. ALL
ignored the evidence and the facts, safe that certain actions taken were pre-emptive
activities. The documented evidence, masses of letters etc., can never be erased and
or ignored by any decent citizen, now.
Back to National Scandal: Council
Staff Scams , Haringey: they didn't know , forgeries to the police
We first became aware of the facts of life at Haringey in
March/April 1996. For months lies and fabrications (recorded, audio tapes) attached to
inexcusable falsehoods (fully covered by The LAW* we publish on our web-site) were
advanced, promoted and relied upon by the criminals in the confines of the local
authority. As we put these pages together, now, we are waiting for 'The LAW' to be applied
in the very serious case of the FORGERIES used and relied upon by the criminals. Through
the FORGERIES diverting and denying access to funds, the properties of the targeted
victims. Private landlords seen and treated as easy prey by the dishonest who relied
and still appear to be relying on 'public servants to default'; to misconduct in public
office. We will not hesitate to publish ALL of the documented evidence at our
disposal IF THE INTENDED VICTIMS are not fully recompensed in every respect. The victims
must receive forthwith the rents they ARE OWED and have been denied access to for far too
long through THE SCAMS AND THE CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS ONE AND ALL INDULGED IN.
In another case we caused the government to rush and announce
the 'Bill of Rights'. The report
above/left, in 'The Times' of December 17th, 1997 qualifies: "THE BILL WILL MAKE MORALITY PART OF THE LAW"!
( link )
The events that led to the announcement arose out of the organised deceptions, the
dishonest handling and distribution of Housing Benefit Funds, entrusted to and at the
disposal of Local Authority staff and officers. It was but a typical attempt by public servants to defraud targeted
victims through misconduct in public office and ABUSE OF THE FACILITIES, as arranged
through the CIUKU enterprises. From
within the confines of another Local Authority, staff and officers instituted county court
proceedings for and in respect of alleged 'Housing Benefit Overpayments'. As usual, they
had ignored all correspondence on the matter and the issues arising out of their 'adamant
demands'. CONVENIENTLY, and in the usual fashion, they proceeded to issue the Summons out
of 'the relevant county court'. A Defence and COUNTERCLAIM was settled, lodged at
court and served. Without any notification and or hearing at
court, an amenable court officer, proceeded to issue a court Order simply striking out the
counterclaim. An appropriate
APPEAL was settled, lodged at court and served on the offending 'public servants'. Copy of
the Appeal was also sent to the Lord
Chancellor's office. Thereafter the 'dictators' who had issued 'false instruments'
were caused to re-instate the Counterclaim. The Lord Chancellor and his officer HAD
BEEN INFORMED that as the Defendants had pleaded violations of fundamental human rights
the case could not be dealt with in our theatres of justice. It would be transferred
to the Court at Strasbourg because our judges had no jurisdiction on the matter, care of
OUR PARLIAMENT in an alleged Democracy founded and resting on the rule of Law and Order. The
Lord Chancellor's office was informed that because of the issues AND LAW PLEADED the move
would be but a formality. The Defendants would not be agreeable to wasting years in
the theatres of justice as maintained and run by successive Governments some forty years
after drafting (copying and amending parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
and signing up to the European Convention on Human Rights and other international treaties
and accords. The offenders were caused to re-instate the Counterclaim. A number of other
'improprieties, false statements and assertions had been indulged at court. The court in
re-instating had issued also directions in the matter. There followed attempts by the
court staff and the legal team of Enfield Council to 'railroad the case into other
avenues'. These were appropriately challenged and the court 'eventually' was caused to
invite the offending Local Authority, and its legal team, to withdraw Enfield Council's ill-founded claim and
to enter a 'non suite' plea. (Back
to Haringey: relying on the officers ..
)
The
article from 'The Times' categorical BUT it establishes the issue
covered in our founder's conclusion. The news item we looked upon as the Lord Chancellor's
way of stating that our citizen's rights in law would be kept in the hands of
administrators who have no time for justice and contempt for Parliament's Laws. (Back to Haringey: The FACTS , )
The above
facts and our statements are fully documented. We publish below an explicit letter covering another attempt by staff
and officers at Haringey Council to defraud another private landlord as they
targeted. They had been demanding from the victim alleged "recoverable Housing
Benefit Overpayments"; the Council's avenue in creative accountancy practices,
through which to reduce its liabilities.
Back to,
National Scandal: Complacency Local Scam: Haringey Council
The fact remains that for over three years we had
been drawing attention to the unacceptable behaviour of far too many members of staff at
Haringey Council. Our submissions and letters were ignored by one and all. ALL
asserting, in much the same arrogance, their reliance on others to misconduct in public
office* and to ignore The Law* as we were pointing out and the Daily Mail
promoted in their article / investigation in June 1997. Our submissions and the
evidence we were referring to all, including the Daily Mail, predate the article; our
letters to many also predate the said report. The £800 million is a
very low estimate when one considers the knock on effect, the waste of resources and
the ABUSE of the Legal Aid facilities by rogue lawyers* as the lord chancellor's
department referred to members of the profession 'using' refugees in scams such as we have
had to challenge for over 30 months on behalf of targeted victims in one instance.
One couple, private landlords, invested for their retirement in a pension earning
property; the landlords wishing NOT to be a burden on society. HOWEVER OTHERS had their
plans for their properties; building and rents/funds due and payable under the terms of
SHORTHOLD TENANCY agreements.
We refer to unacceptable behaviour by far too many
members of staff. The letter from Haringey Council, that we publish below covers the
creative accountancy practices through the organised arrangements in the execution of the
CIUKU enterprises. Alleged rights to recover, even through downright deductions from other
rents due and payable, allegedly because X claimant was not entitled to the Housing
Benefit we (as alleged complacent public servants) claimed for and on behalf of X claimant
from Central Government. We did use the contract you signed and even though we know
the tenant claimant WAS GENUINE and in occupation of your property, now that he has gone
we are making this claim for claw backs because we need to bolster our income and to
reduce our debts. The letter from the council clarifies 'withdrawal' of the persistent and
adamant demands for refunds without proper and sound foundation in fact or law, by the
greedy and needy. The 'targeted victim' as an HONEST person did not rely on members of the
organised TRIADS operating in our country but was assisted, for the purposes of the
Housing Benefit Review Board 'hearing'. We have covered the names of the parties involved,
dates etc. because we wish to protect the innocent from the dishonest and the maligned
activities of persons who misconduct in public office.
(Back to: National
Scandal: well organised ,
Haringey: dishonesty and lies )
Page Revised: March 02, 2009. |
