The days when public servants relied on the BLIND DEAF AND DUMB MEDIA ARE OVER.   The days when ALL relied on BLIND DEAF AND DUMB officers within the law enforcement agencies are also over.

This is the age of FREE exchange of information and THE UNADULTERATED FACTS OF LIFE within all states, so long as their citizens are free to exercise, AS WE DO, their basic human-rights that ARE GUARANTEED under theEuropean Convention On HumanRights (ECoHR).  

Article 9.  "EVERYONE has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..."

Article 10.  "EVERYONE has the right to FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION....to HOLD OPINIONS...TO RECEIVE AND IMPART INFORMATION AND IDEAS without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers..... (with provisions attached to) maintaining the authority AND IMPARTIALITY of the judiciary". (NOTE: Impartiality does not imply or mean independent of the restrains of law).

Article 11.  "EVERYONE has the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of  ASSOCIATION with others.... rights to form and join ... for the protection of HIS INTERESTS".

Article 13.  "EVERYONE whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated SHALL have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation HAS BEEN committed by persons acting in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY."

Article 13 is VERY CLEAR. WHERE IS THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY THAT LOOKS INTO THE VIOLATIONS judges in the United Kingdom endorse, entertain AND INSTIGATE of their own?  The question is simple and the Lord Chancellor with the Home Secretary should co-operate and produce the formula under which the citizens CAN challenge activities that blatantly breach national law and VIOLATE Human Rights.   NOTE PLEASE:  We have on record a high court case where the Judge made an issue of the serious ERROR of judgements (practices in our view) by the Local Government Ombudsman. All is not as the public is told; the multitude of documented facts we publish PROVE SO BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT to the average citizen. The citizens demand that they be treated no more as  illiterate serfs of  the middle ages and or as subjects to the whims and or the abusive dishonesty of so called 'public servants'; the 'alleged servants of the public' who serve other ulterior motives*, which they fail to declare.

In the column on the left a 'Times' Law Report. It covers aspects attached to Shorthold Tenancy Agreements. No sooner had the judgement been pronounced by the Court of Appeal and a member of staff from Haringey Council, was writing to the landlady and her agent to promote assertions contrary to the true facts in the case he was alluding to and irrespective of the true legal position. The author of the letter, which we publish on this page, was reported subsequently as no longer employed at Haringey Council.

The Law Report is succinct and clear: "NO DAMAGES FOR WRONGFUL EVICTION" in a matter of Shorthold Tenancy Agreements, even in the case the Court of Appeal was called upon to determine, on appeal from a county court. In that instance the tenants actually were evicted without any court proceedings and or court rulings in the matter; the fact was that the property owner had sold it as an empty property and the tenancy was but a Shorthold.

We have on record, however, other issues and documented evidence that we will publish in these pages. We have been left with no choice because public servants carried on ignoring the victims, went on to act in additional contempt of Parliament's Law and they indulged in the creation of their own false instruments. Through such convenient defaults, omissions and downright criminal activities, they set about to cause damages to the person who reported the rampant fraud and corruption their employers (Haringey Council and its staff and officers) engaged in, as endorsed, aided and abetted by officers and staff at the Local (relevant) County Court.

The questionable activities of Public Servants, operating within Local Authorities such as Haringey Council in North London, have been the subject of well documented presentations and complaints by us. We have been waiting for over three years for a dreamer within its confines, to set down one complaint for presentation to the council's own review panel. He has persistently defaulted to do so with intent, simply because he knows that in another case the fraudulent demands the Council was seeking to impose on targeted victims, private landlords, ended at that stage without the need for theatrical productions outside the council's confines because the LAW is the LAW, and facts are facts. We publish the letter that the Chief Executive was caused, eventually, to write on 26th January 1999 to which you can link now). He was making issue of the fact that Haringey Council staff and officers, en masse, were dependant and relied on their partners in deceptions and fraud. He alluded to the persons who were acting as managing agents for the targeted owners and the targeted property. We have been left with no option but to publish other documented evidence that covers the part the police played and play in the promotion of the CIUKU enterprises, not to mention the break-up of families, an even worse offence in an allegedly civilised state. We demand proper actions and prosecutions of the criminals who treat Social Security Funds (including Legal Aid funding facilities) as easy pickings as our founder clarified in his letter of 18th December 1998, to the Home Secretary and as qualified in the Appeal published below.

Council staff acting in contempt of 'The Law'* and the principles of law, asserting that they act on directives from above and in accordance with 'the regulations' to which allegedly they 'adhere' in presumed ignorance of 'The LAW'.  Such practices irrespective of the dictum "Ignorance of The LAW is no defence". The Law report we publish above, immaterial to public servants, Court Officers and staff. Two firms of solicitors indulging themselves and looking forward to use the court's facilities through which to convert RENTS DUE AND PAYABLE (to a targeted landlord) to alleged legal costs. Attempts to defraud through the usual theatrical scenarios and presentations by 'legal boffins' irrespective of the facts, the evidence and the law applicable in that instance. Everything had been arranged by and care of the Housing Benefit Fund manipulative administrators. Public servants who work with and for dishonest tenants, for and with the 'legal parasites', for and with amenable letting agents, as the council's own legal experts arrange through directives to the blind and the illiterate in law Council staff; such arrangements as other public servants endorse and entertain.

The facts covered in the Appeal below were and ARE fully documented. The criminal activities indictable offences in breach of Parliament's Laws; as in another case all was reported to the police. 'The LAW' compilation published in our pages, for the benefit of all UK citizens and residents, covers it all. Nonetheless, the criminals, in both instances, used, encouraged and relied upon the used tenants to act outside 'The Law'. In one of the cases 'the tenants were used' to institute alleged legitimate court proceedings against the landlady and her agent; the legal boffins in the instance dared allege wrongful eviction, within five months of the Court of Appeal ruling, the Law Report we publish above. The legal boffins, as parasites, indulged themselves, irrespective of the fact that the dishonest and thieving debtors had been assisted, IMPROPERLY, (by the participating in constructive frauds council staff) to disappear. The disappearance and flight from the CREATED LIABILITIES AND DEBTS just three days after the offenders were served with a Default Summons. Thousands of pounds of unpaid rents arising out of alleged failures by Council staff to process and to remit Housing Benefit to the used tenants. The tenants failing for months to remit rent because, allegedly, their Housing Benefit claim had not been processed; and the dishonest within the confines of Haringey Council, confirming the allegations by the used, for constructive frauds, tenants. All care of public servants administering the CIUKU enterprises.

Council staff and officers parties to the disappearing acts of the dishonest tenants, to an undeclared destination, in breach of Sections of the Theft Acts. Council staff moving the dishonest tenants to a council property, as soon as the tenants were served with the warranted Default Summons. Over £4000 in unpaid rents BECAUSE THEIR HOUSING BENEFIT, ALLEGEDLY, HAD NOT BEEN PROCESSED, BY THE COUNCIL STAFF, FOR OVER FOUR MONTHS. And the Council staff and officers simply confirming the alleged failures and defaults. The tenants assaulted the managing agent of the property because he took he took legitimate steps to protect the rights, in law, of his principal. The tenants causing, also, criminal damages to properties; they inflicted serious life threatening injuries, and they caused permanent physical damage and disability to the assaulted agent. The parasitic legal boffins looking forward to their field days in court, care of constructively engineered fraudulent activities and the police party to fraudulent misrepresentations INCLUDING ATTEMPTS TO PASS FALSE INSTRUMENTS AS legitimate, sound and acceptable evidence in support of the misrepresentations; professional criminals at work in CIUKU enterprises.

DISHONESTY and LIES; deceptions promoted and resting on alleged regulations and non process of the Housing Benefit Applications because of any one of a myriad of excuses that council staff and used tenants  concoct(ed) as they went / go along. Their activities in contravention of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights.

We publish below a letter received from a member of staff / officer operating out of Haringey Council. The author's area of operations was 'tenant relations'. No doubt, COUNCIL TENANTS, not private landlord and tenant business. The author took it upon himself to use his office in order to promote and offer 'invisible services to third parties' through use of council paper and facilities. He was leaving telephone messages for the agent of the private landlord to contact him. He was asked to write of his personal interest and or concerns in private rented accommodation, because he was NOT dealing with council tenancy business, such as his public duties and office covered! He obliged and wrote assertively and naively, as he did: "... without the sanction of the court..." thereby exhibiting reliance on the abusers of public office, such as we were caused to challenge umpteen times. A typical example covered in the affidavit we publish below; another covered in the Appeal, we also publish below. Institutionalised, rampant fraud on Mr and Mrs Average who are and remain none the wiser care of the condescending media barons.

NOTE:   Consider the above facts; a council 'employee getting involved in matters that had nothing to do with him, except, the possible offer and use of his office, for other purposes than his appointment/retainer 'covered'.  Cross relate that situation to the introduction of the Environmental Health Service in the attempts to convert misappropriated and diverted Housing Benefit Funds in the case covered in the Appeal published below. Court cases and Appeals following failures to remit rents due to the owners of properties; in the Appeal case the property occupied by imported tenants; such tenants systematically used and in use in Haringey, as in other areas in the land of milk and honey; the milk and honey provided by fraudsters and abusers of public office in CORRUPT BRITAIN as covered in the Daily Mail investigation and report.

Upon receipt of the letter the agent simply telephoned and ADVISED the abuser of public office to go to the nearest public library;  to look up 'The Times' Law Report, and to cease interfering in the affairs and the rights of private landlords. The author was specifically told to cease dreaming up concocted evictions 'without the sanction of the relevant county court'.  He was informed that the young lady he was alluding to:  (a) had given notice to her landlady, (b) SHE HAD IN FACT MOVED OUT TAKING WITH HER MOST OF HER PRIVATE belongings, (c) she in fact handed over the property and (d) the young lady was indebted well in excess of £1000 to her landlady. He was further told that the fact the landlady had not issued a Default Summons rested on the hard luck story of the young lady; it appeared to be a re-run of the circumstances under which the niece of our founder committed suicide; a grossly indifferent and selfish father whose priorities were his personal grandiose plans and life-style at the expense of many others. We point out our guidelines and principle: "In a true Democracy no one has the right to indulge in whatever rights he assumes for personal gratification / gain / whatever at the expense of and or the violations of the rights of MANY OTHERS".   Sadly in the United Kingdom any individual is encouraged to act as he or she feels like; individuals acting in breach of Parliament's Laws, and the violations of the rights of others, generate work for theatrical production opportunities for the Law  Enforcement Agencies, the members of which thus have their cat and mouse field days as in 'The Police Summons the Victim'* case is qualified and in 'The Breeding Grounds'* case was contemplated and attempted by the young policeman who asserted, as an SS officer in Nazi occupied Europe, "You want his address? Get your solicitor to write to me at the police station".   (Note: copy of the Appeal set down in The Breeding Grounds case can be secured from <camila@human-rights.demon.co.uk> include 'request copy' in the subject line specifying the case for a response).

The explicit and succinct Appeal, published below, covers material that 'members of the self perpetuating cancerous growth industry', in control of OUR Justice System, habitually and systematically indulge in. Their circles never challenging the obvious. We did and do.

Read first the last paragraph (J) on page 18; then recognise why our founder's conclusions in 1972/75 and why the references to CIUKU! All the while we, the citizens, meet the costs of the theatrical productions through taxes, as contemplated and indulged into and evinced through the content of the Appeal.

NOTE the fact that copy of the Appeal was submitted to the Lord Chancellor's office and to the administrators of the loan facilities recoverable through theatrical productions as directed by second rate directors and as enacted by third rate actors. The 'administrators' none other than the Legal Aid Board, the managers of Public funds and 'the facilities' at the beck and call of the dishonest, the deceitful and THE CORRUPTERS OF OUR SOCIETY; in a nutshell, the promoters of "The Cancerous Growth Industry" (words in quotes copyright).

CONSIDER, also, the affidavit lodged at the very court in the matter of the other Housing Benefits 'abuse of the court's (pardon, relevant 'county court's) facilities by another Local Authority and the picture becomes clearer. We could of course publish ALL documented evidence at our disposal and it may well be that we may be forced to do so before the offenders recognise that their attempts to take us down the paths they set in motion many years ago, with and through 'their mischief making partners' in constructive frauds and crimes are not our chosen avenues.

We add and point out that the staff and officers of 'the relevant county court' DID strike out the COUNTERCLAIM in the other case we refer to in our pages. Another Local Authority, in that instance, was to benefit from 'suppression and attempted burial of 'the rights in law' of the targeted and intended victim'. Those liberties gave grounds to another Appeal, which we could publish along with all other warranted communications AND THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE, attached to that case. It is partially covered through one of the submitted affidavits, that we publish in our pages.