Year five of the horrendous, sheer utter hell nightmare.
The year of:
Being even more trapped in the
'hellhole' i.e. the flat
The continuation of my being followed
/ observed on a 24 / 7 basis - with more overt
harassment and attempts to intimidate, scare
The continuation of the development
of the website working on it 40+ hours
per week - and eventually the launch
on 19 September
Getting another firm of lawyers
(Portner and Jaskel) to "bite the dust"
The continuation of the battle
with the Institute of Chartered Accountants in
England and Wales (ICAEW) which eventually resulted
in the expected 'no malpractice' verdict
More 'get lost' from one of Lord
Falconer's department; this time, the Land
But. against of all that - events
have taken place which, I 'think' will
sensitise people to my case. Namely, a
government that has come under attack in
the media on all fronts, which include
identification / claims of corruption.
I'll have to wait and see... and pray!
Wednesday 4 January 2006
I am convinced that I continue
to be followed on a daily basis. So, at lunch
time today, I decide to again put it to the test. I
go to Blackfriars tube station (consequently
unusual for me to do this at lunch time, suggesting
I am going somewhere). I stay in the corner,
in between the ticket office and the automatic
ticket dispenser (as though I might be waiting
for somebody), but out of the way so that I will
not inconvenience anybody. There is nothing 'suspicious'
for the first 4-5 minutes.
After that a man arrives, c.
1.90m, Caucasian, mid to late 30s,
glasses, wearing a black leather jacket,
black trousers and black sporty shoes. He spends
over a minute reading a notice on one
of the boards next to which I am standing.
He then goes to the automatic ticket dispenser.
He looks at it for nearly one minute, making
a face like he cannot figure things out.
He then goes to have a look at the rail & underground
map which is a few meters away. He comes back
again to have a look at the ticket dispenser,
still with an expression as though he cannot
understand. (He could easily have gone to the
ticket office if he required assistance. There
is not a queue).
He then goes to the pamphlet holder which is
about 1.5 meter to the right of the automatic
ticket dispenser. He takes a leaflet and looks
at it for 2-3 minutes. He repeats the same thing
with another leaflet, and another one, and another.
During this time he occasionally looks in my
direction, but not at me. I believe he does this
because his attention has been caught by people
arriving in the station.
After c. 10 - 12 minutes of this, I go
through the automatic barriers, down
the stairs in order to get to the platform .
Another man, late 30s, blond, wearing
a dark blue-greyish, padded
a few steps behind me as I walk down the
steps to the platform. As I am pacing on
the platform, keeping him in my line of vision,
he goes to the kiosk to buy a newspaper.
At this point, I leave the platform and
go back up to go out of the station. The
man who had been looking at the leaflets
is still there. I come out of the station
through a side exit. I then run across
the street. When I am on the other side,
I turn around.
The blond man with the dark blouson
has also come out of the station and
is walking on the pavement.
am certainly left in no doubt that
I am being followed.
While these two men were of 'type
2' i.e. appear to have more experience
of doing this type of thing than 'type
1' (e.g. the two men on Christmas
day), I still
tricked them! (I
need to get a few laughs where
Sunday 15 January 2006
I definitely continue to be followed on a daily basis. Today I am due to meet with my Cousin in Canterbury . I walk from the 'hellhole' i.e. the flat to Victoria National Express coach station, changing direction twice on my way there (to confuse the 'minders'). As they are residential streets, it should reduce the incidence of CCTV cameras. I queue for a ticket but I am told that I have missed the 10h30. I nonetheless buy a ticket thinking I might take the 11h30 bus instead. I go into a corner, which is in a recess, in the same area to call my Cousin. I am therefore out of view when people come into the ticket hall. Quite a few people arrive.
my 'internal radar' is activated
by one man, short grey hair,
mid-late forties, c. 1.88m, wearing
a navy blue, thigh high, padded,
all-weather jacket. My 'internal
radar' goes on 'alert'.
Like a significant
number of men who have been following
me since Summer 2005, he looks
as though he could be a cop.
(Of course, he might
not be. I am just reporting
my impressions).(*) There is something
about him that makes it fairly
obvious that he has not come in
the ticket hall to buy a ticket.
(*) Subsequent note - In light of events in subsequent years with Kensington, Chelsea and Notting Hill police in subsequent years, including my being dogged, hounded and persecuted by the police and related parties: I conclude that this man was from the 'local brigade'.
He gives me a hard look as he goes by and continues walking for a few steps. He then turns round and again looks at me with the same stern, hard facial expression. I return the compliment. He yet again turns around and walks to the end of the ticket hall, thereby walking alongside the people who are queuing. At the end, he turns right and walks back, also alongside the people who are queuing, but on the other side i.e. he walks alongside the ticket counters that are manned. As he goes passed me, he again looks at me with the same nasty look. Yet again, I return the compliment.
After c. one minute, I leave the area. Four young men who had been standing nearby, also start walking as I do.
I had spotted another man, late thirties, hair greying on the side, black leather blouson, black jeans, sporty, thick sole brown shoes, small brown holder strapped around his waist.
He had been walking around and, when I looked at him, started to look at a small leaflet that he had been holding with his hands clasped behind his back.
As I come out of the hall, he is inside close to the entrance.
15 Jan 06 - 10h42 - Victoria bus station
I go into the street, where I stop a few metres
from the entrance to observe movements.
The four young men also station themselves
about 3 metres from me. They start smoking
and occasionally look in my direction. I, likewise,
look at them. After
c. 2 minutes, they cross onto the other
pavement that is on the side of Victoria
station. They look in my direction 2-3
times. (I agree, there may not have been anything
suspicious there. I should also say that, at
times, I must be looking a bit 'odd' to other
I walk back into the hall to see if I can spot
the man with the grey hair and padded jacket.
I cannot see him. I walk out of the hall onto
the pavement and turn right to go to the bus
stop in order to get the number 11 bus as I have
decided the next bus would get me to Canterbury
too late for lunch. After about a minute, the man, wearing a black leather blouson who
had been standing inside close to the entrance
also walks out and walks away in the opposite
direction. I think he crossed the road. I was
not paying too much attention as I was looking
out for the bus. It was not the right one but
one arrived shortly afterwards.
Before it does, I notice another, late
30's, dark hair man , wearing a longish
black leather jacket. He is resting alongside
the wall of the building in a little
recess, close to the bus stop. He starts
using his mobile phone. I also take a
photograph of him. I board the bus that
has arrived and go on the top deck from where
I continue to observe the man.
looks up at me, I smile, a kind of
sneer, as one can to oneself.
He looks back down. He then also
smiles to himself.
If he is one of the 'minders',
I assume he is thinking that I
That thought cheers me up.
I get off the bus at Westminster Bridge and
go down the tube station but in order to come
out from the exit closest to the bridge. I walk
on Westminster Bridge then go down the steps
walking alongside the river, past the London
Eye. (I am just thinking: overseas visitor to
the site, you are getting a guided tour of central
I stop to buy a sandwich and a drink
in Gabriel's Wharf and continue walking
in the direction of Blackfriars Bridge
. Hence, towards my ultimate direction: the office.
Just before the Oxo tower, there is a little
garden area. I sit on a bench that is at the
back of the area, about 25-30 metres away from
the river. I open the drink I have just
bought and stay there for a little while.
I notice a man ,
walking alongside the river, in the direction
of Blackfriars Bridge . He is relatively
short, very short hair / nearly bold (I
cannot quite determine from where I am),
possibly late 30s. (He looks the same type
as e.g. the second man on Christmas day; the
man on 16 July 2005 i.e. ' type 1' ).
He looks in my direction at least 2-3 times
as he walks along. (I should say that for
somebody strolling alongside the river, the river
side view vs. where I am is a lot more attractive
and interesting). I lose sight of him as
he walks away. After about 5 minutes he
is back i.e. has turned around. He again
looks in my direction as he is walking along.
The second time he does this, I wave in his direction
as I am now getting fairly convinced that he
is interested in what I am doing. (I am the only
person in the little garden area). He continues
walking, while looking in my direction
two more times.
up and exit the garden from the back,
turning left i.e. end-up walking
at the back of the Oxo Tower and
other buildings that are alongside
It is a small street and is practically
As I have walked for about 45
metres, I turn around and who
do I see?
Yes, the relatively short
man of a few minutes
ago. At the time that I look
at him, he was about to turn
right and has turned around.
I wave in his direction. (Might
as well help him find me again!)
I continue walking in the direction of Blackfriars
Bridge and hid in a recess in case he walks by.
He does not. However, I note two cyclists going
in the direction of Blackfriars Bridge .
minded, reasonable visitor to the
site: I think you will agree that,
from what I am reporting in this
Diary, I am being followed - and
it appears to be by a small army.
Who is footing the bill?
I wonder for how long this is
going to go on.
What the objective is and how
and when will it end?
Given the 'type 2' profile that has emerged since August 2005, (and bearing in mind the bombing in the London underground in July 2005), I wonder if I was reported to the police for 'suspicious acting' : I have not opened the blinds in the flat since November 2004; I leave the flat by 8h30 at the latest and tend to return past midnight, spending the time in the office - and do this seven days a week (except weekends when I leave the flat a bit later). IF I am right, the 'acrobatics' in which I have engaged in the last few months on my way to and from work in order to annoy the 'minders' will have further added to the suspicions.
I have been discussing this with family and friends. Again, emphasising IF this is indeed what has happened, another trigger, potentially 'more likely', might be the fact that, in 1998, I spent the Christmas holiday in Yemen. It was an organised tour.
(Subsequent note: As a conversation I had with somebody in Nov 12, led me to suspect that Her Majesty's police / related services 'might' be cooking some kind of 'story' involving this trip, I am now adding the travel company, Travelbags': 20.12.98 Flight details ; 20.12.08 Trip dossier. While, as demonstrated amply by my experience, these documents will not stop the police from lying, including under statements of truth (same experience by other people) - they provide supporting evidence to what I report).
Visitor to the site, you may be aware that, in Yemen , the carrying of guns in full day light is as common as wearing shoes. (I have a photograph of a notice at the entrance of a hotel in which our group stayed that states: "Please leave your gun outside" ). The driver in the lead car always had a gun. One day, while we were in a remote area, I had a photograph taken with the gun resting on my shoulder.
During our trip, some English tourists were kidnapped. (It was a question of c.15 minutes as they had just overtaken us while we had stopped in a village i.e. potentially, it could have been our group). Tragically, some were killed. On our return to the UK , all the members of my group were contacted by Scotland Yard and asked to supply all the photographs we had taken, as well as the negatives. I did so, of course including the photograph on which I was holding the gun i.e. as shown here.
it be that this photograph was recently
dug out of files as a result of the
heightened security measures? On
the other hand, it would surely be
realised that if I had something
to hide, I would certainly not have
had this photograph taken in the
Furthermore, had I done
this, if I had something to hide,
I certainly would not have given
the photograph to Scotland Yard
(and the negatives i.e. showing
all the other photographs taken on
Does any of the above explain why I
am being followed? I have
no idea . However, somehow,
I do not think so. Somebody with
two brain cells, while concluding that
something is evidently taking up a lot
of my time, could not arrive at the conclusion
that I am masterminding a terrorist attack.
(All I do on a seven -day basis is 'hellhole' to office, back to 'hellhole').
What I believe is that I am being followed
because of the fight I am putting up since
2002 - and
the very damning evidence I have accumulated
against various parties in the process. IF,
and it is a BIG IF, my feeling is correct
that some of 'my minders' are connected with
the police, then, the cost to date must
be very substantial.
discussing this with friends and
family - saying that it would be
madness taken to the extreme...
...I give them the example of Kensington
in 2003, was widely reported
in the media as having spent
Pounds 5-7 million (US$12.4-8.8
million) of taxpayers' money
investigating one of its own.
The net result of this
massive expenditure was an admission
" [the Officer]...may
even have been owed Pounds
The following are extracts from two of the many
press articles at the time.
Times , 16 September 2003
"Police tried to destroy me, says cleared
officer - A FOUR-YEAR corruption investigation
into a top-ranking police officer collapsed
yesterday, leaving taxpayers with a bill of
up to Pounds 5 million (US$8.8
"Superintendent Ali Dizaei.was the focus
of the biggest investigation of a policeman,
involving 100 officers, MI5, the Inland
Revenue and police in the United States and
Canada . He was trailed, bugged
and filmed "
"The officer had been accused of being a
drugtaker, a threat to national security and
a friend of drug traffickers and money launderers.
But the marathon inquiry ended in ignominy
for the Metropolitan Police when the
only remaining actual charge , fiddling
Pounds 270 (US$480) mileage
expenses, was dropped "
"Dr Dizaei [said] .I find it astonishing
and extraordinary that taxpayers' hard-earned
funds could be abused in this way."
"His defence described the investigation
as having "Orwellian proportions".
One undercover officer joined his gym hoping
to entrap him over drugs. Police spent
Pounds 15,000 (US$26,500) renting
a flat in Kensington as
part of the officer's cover story"
"Surveillance teams followed Dr Dizaei for
91 days. Police recorded 3,500 telephone calls
and monitored 250 hours of conversation . CCTV
cameras watched him all over London .
his claims to a married man's allowance
and even went to his dry cleaner to see if
he got a discount "
"The jury cleared him in two hours"
"Charges that Dr Dizaei had fiddled mileage
expenses were dropped at the Old Bailey
yesterday, two weeks before a second
trial was due. The CPS had realised that
it could probably claim that only Pounds
270 (US$480) might
have been fiddled. It also admitted
that Dr Dizaei... may even
have been owed Pounds 400 (US$700) "
Guardian , 20 March 2004
".By the time he was tried last year, all
charges had been dropped, bar two: perverting
the course of justice (over where his car had
been parked) and misconduct in public office
(relating to a pounds 270 (US$480) expenses
After an estimated pounds 7 million (US$12.4
million) of public money had
been spent on the investigation, he was acquitted
on both counts at two Old Bailey trials"
".the prosecution was forced to admit that, rather
than overclaiming pounds 270 (US$480) from
the Black Police Association (BPA), Dizaei
was owed around pounds 400 (US$700) "
"Dizaei [said] "Put yourself in
my shoes for a minute. Imagine there were 44
people you worked with who got up
every morning for three years ,
with all the executive power at their disposal,
all the money they wanted.." The 44 people
he refers to are the officers who formed Operation
Helios, the team created to investigate him
"At his trial last year, documents disclosed
to the defence revealed the lengths to which
Helios officers were prepared to go to find
something of which they could accuse Dizaei."
"Fly to south of France to
obtain statements from a
concert-goer re sale of concert
"Trace and take statement from
every taxi driver who has given defendant
a receipt since 1998."
This is how far
Kensington police et. al. are
prepared to go - at the taxpayers'
ote at end July 2006 -
Whatever the true reasons that motivated the
above, as reported in the press, it simply does
not make any sense for the police to have me
under 24hr surveillance for, so far, a whole
IF I was maliciously reported to the police
as engaging in some activity construed as a potential
threat to national security, it surely would
not take that long to conclude that this was
not the case.
What would they have been
reporting for a whole year? Well,
all that they would have been able to
report is: spends her life in the office,
including holidays, and gives us the
run around on her way to and back from there.
Occasionally, sees the same handful of people
(against which the police cannot have anything.
Some of these people are members of C.A.R.L. ).
(Because I am in full time employment, I can
only develop the site in the evenings,
at weekends and during my annual leave.
So obviously, I have no time for doing
anything else. I am sure that anybody who
sees the content of the site will
have no difficulty believing that it has taken
over 2,000 hours to develop. On top of
which, I have also had to learn using
some software packages in order to do it.
In addition, I have also had some 'battles'
going on during that period that have
taken up a lot of my time e.g. the ICAEW;
the 10 February 2006
so-called 'notice of first refusal'
(also covered below under 18 February);
the Land Registry (see 28 March 2006,
as well as towards the end of the
section on Lord
Falconer of Thoroton)).
SO: the most 'logical' explanation
for my suspicions that some of the 'minders'
are connected with the police is that they
are ex. policemen employed by the private sector. The
company is making a fortune! Maybe
I should ask it for a commission? (Joke!)
Third week January 2006
my post from the PO Box and found
an invoice from
Russell Jones , dated 9 January
2006, this time stating a
"Brought forward balance" of £5,625 (US$9,900) .
Yet again, no explanation
Hence, what is the amount currently
hanging over my head? £15,500
(US$27,300) (?) £14,500 (US$25,600)
(?) £5,625 (US$9,900) (?),
or all three combined, making a
total of £35,625 (US$63,000)?
ther components of the correspondence
are BOGUS / FRAUDULENT. See
below the 18 February 2006 entry for detail, as
well as Pridie Brewster
Saturday 21 January and Sunday 22 January 2006
I spent the weekend on the south coast
with two of my cousins. I believe we
One man in particular who gave me a nasty
look on the 2-3 occasions I looked at
him. (It might have something to do with
the fact that for the last two weeks
or so when I spot a 'might
be' I sing 'let the dogs loose' and
/ or let the [scum] [Note] loose' as I go
past. Well, it will only offend those
who feel it could apply to them).
It also seemed to me that there was at least
a couple (the man was
tall; the woman considerably
shorter, short hair died in
a strong red/aubergine colour). I also
couple that seemed
interested in our movements. They were
looking at a house that had a 'for sale' sign,
as well as looking in my direction 2-3 times. They
went into what, on the face of it, was
an involved discussion in relation to the house.
it came across to me as a 'show'.
On my return on Sunday, I also spotted other
Monday 23 January 2006
On leaving the block, as I walk towards the
end of Basil Street , my 'internal
radar' switches on as I spot a man stationary on
the pavement. He is of 'type 2' i.e. 'appears'
to me as though he could be a cop .
Of course, as I have stated in earlier instances, he
might not be. I am just reporting my
impressions. At least, unlike the others, he
does not have that arrogant, defiant, superior,
There is a bucket and mop / something to clean
windows next to him i.e. as
though he is a window cleaner. However, his body language suggests
otherwise to me. He is as connected to these
items as I am i.e. not at all. I decide to walk
up to him to ask him for the time. As he sees
me walking in his direction he seems to me to
be getting slightly ill-at-ease. When I ask him
for the time, he tries to suppress a little smile.
When I get to the bus stop to catch the #9 bus,
I spot another man,
stationary on the other pavement, quite
a distance up from the bus stop. Tall,
thin, wearing a woolen hat, dressed in
workout type clothes. He is looking in
my direction every 10-15 seconds. When
the bus arrives, I wave in his direction.
Might as well say goodbye!
I get some good news when I get to the office
as I find an email from a friend who attached
a copy of an article published in the Property
section of the Daily
Telegraph of Saturday 21st .
I missed it! It talks about my case and
that of other leaseholders. (The journalist
had phoned me a while back. I thought the newspaper
had dropped the idea).
The good news is not my being mentioned (it
is now the fourth time that
my case is covered in the press, and the impact
has been: ' ZERO')
(hence providing further support to my
claim that 'there is absolutely nothing
on this island to help me'), but the fact
that the whole of the first page shows
the photograph of a man in chains with
padlocks. The caption, in large bold letters
"It's a feudal form of property
ownership and new laws do little to protect
us. Everywhere leasehold has us tied in chains" .
Well done Daily Telegraph! If
only this could be picked-up as a media-wide
It is now 22h30. I wish I could stay in the
office all night. I dread going back to
the 'hellhole'. However, best pack-up
and go as I got up very early this morning.
Rest of week beginning 23 January 2006
More of the same thing: I definitely
continue to be observed / followed. On
leaving the block to go to work in the
morning, I again saw men, stationary
on the pavement (one man
immediately across the block on the other
pavement; another one on the corner with
Hans Crescent )
(who was there two days running) looking
at me with insistence as if to say: "Look
we are! We are watching you!" The
one on the corner in particular, had
this nasty, arrogant and superior hard
look (same type as on e.g. 15 January
2006 - the man who went round the ticket
really glad I am giving them a hard
time, provoking them to the extent
that it leads them to adopt this
Their male ego cannot cope with
a woman giving them the run around.
How unbelievably stupid! Well,
I suppose that if they had the
brain to do something intellectually
challenging they would not be standing
endlessly on pavements taking root
On the first day, I had stopped across the one
on the corner, resting my left hand on my hip
and looked from one to the other (they were both
looking at me) while shaking my head suggesting "you
pathetic, sad people! Contempt inducing scum! "
Maybe the best policy would be to pretend I
don't see them. But it makes me very
angry to have such an invasion of my privacy.
By doing this, under
the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, every single time they commit a criminal
offence against me. They are also
breaching my Human Rights under Article
8 of the European Convention on Human
Rights - Respect
to private life.
I am being watched, spied on and monitored as
though I am a criminal. I HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG. I AM NOT A CRIMINAL. I AM THE VICTIM.
Years ago, when I read George Orwell '1984',
I thought: "This is just fiction" . Not
Apparently, there are more CCTV cameras per
head of population on this island than
anywhere else in the world. Quite a few
people I have discussed this with, hold
the view that, contrary to the claim, these
cameras are not for the benefit of the
'common man and woman' in the street. (As
an example, see Knightsbridge tube station
(in a wealthy part of town) for the ridiculous
number of CCTV cameras. You would think
that it houses the crown jewels. Definitely
a case of 'Big brother' is watching you
During February 2006
I still continue to be followed / observed and
having a bit of fun with it by challenging the 'minders'.
I am not capturing events because it takes a
long time to explain. However just the following
26 February 2006, or
more precisely Monday at it was
c. 00:10 a.m. I again saw the man
I had seen on Saturday
September 2005 at 23h45.
This time he was sitting in a
car across the same bus stop on
Fleet Street. It was the same car
I crossed the road to note the
make of the car, as well as look
at the number plate which,
I realised, I had not noted quite
correctly on the previous occasion.
It is an unusual number
of five letters and
no number. The first two letters,
which start with 'SI' are
The make of the car
is a Subaru estate,
(NB: I saw
him again on Saturday 18 March 2006 and on Monday 24
April 2006 at 00h15 a.m.).
Within 30 seconds of my being behind the car,
a woman of Far East origin came running out the
building along which the car was parked and hurriedly
jumped in the car. She was not wearing a coat.
It was quite cold that night. They departed immediately.
On Tuesday 28 / Wednesday
1 March , I opted to do one of my
little detours on my way to work. It
08h40. I walked alongside
the back of Harrods to go to Brompton Road
. On the corner, with Hans Road, there is a
Barclays bank. It has two automatic cash dispensers
on the Brompton Road side. A man was
standing idly in front of one of them. Early
40s, c. 1.77m hair, cut short ; he
was wearing a blouson.
I saw that he was looking in my direction and
continued to do so as I went past. There
was something about him that made me stop
a few metres afterwards to observe what
he would do. He
kept looking in my direction. I did to - while,
in the process, relating to a friend on
my mobile phone what was taking place
and laughing. The man was
definitely looking uncomfortable, not knowing
what to do.
A woman arrived wanting to use the cash dispenser.
He spoke to her. I assumed from his gesture,
the movement of her head and the fact that she
used the other cash dispenser that he had told
her that the one in front of which he was standing
was not working.
kept looking at him, he turned ending
up facing the glass window of the
He must have seen a bank employee
inside, as he made a highly
exaggerated gesture in pointing
towards the cash dispenser. The
way he pointed at the cash dispenser,
you would think that a bomb was
about to explode.
He then run like a demented individual
to the door of the bank on the
corner. As he looked in my direction,
I continued laughing, as the 'show'
was rather amusing. And
it was! I then left.
Saturday 18 February 2006 - Collecting my post
As I was about to enter the sorting office, my 'internal radar' kicked into action leading me to spot a man about 30 metres down on the opposite pavement. He was tall, slim, in his 50's, wearing a long, dark blue overcoat.
He was stationary and looking at me, exuding negativity. I felt that his interest was in me and opted to wave in his direction while aiming to communicate: 'Yes[ scum ] [Note], I am collecting my post'. Actually, what I really felt is that he was not one of 'the [ scum ] [Note]', but one of the Ladsky et. al. parties. Judging by the follow-on events, looks as though my 'internal radar' was on target.
This prior knowledge relates to events with
the then Elderly
Resident (74 years old).
In November 2001, some residents had approached
our local Citizen Advice Bureau, over the
service charges for Jefferson House. Nucleus
suggested we appoint an arbitrator (as
clause in the lease - Clause 2(2)(g) ). (Full copy of my lease)
Because the Elderly Resident paid the initial £250
(US$450) application fee to appoint an arbitrator,
his name featured on the application document.
As we subsequently discovered that the arbitrator
would be charging £130 (US$230)an hour
for this service, we did not proceed with the
Understandably, this poor Elderly Resident was
in a terrible state.
As he was not paying the sum, in a letter dated 28
January 2002 , Portner
and Jaskel, demanded payment
of £1,337 (US$2,400), stating:
we are in receipt of the aforementioned
sum [£1,337.50] by 4.00 p.m.
on Thursday 31 January
next (i.e. within
three days of writing the letter) proceedings
shall be issued against you to
recover without further notice.
Should our client company be obliged
to commence proceedings in addition
to the costs we will seek interest
on the above sum at the rate of
8% per annum until payment"
less than a month, the Elderly
Resident received a claim
from Central London County Court
for £1,532 (US$2,700)
February 2002 . This
claim was filed by Portner
This claim amounted to bullying and intimidation as it was totally unjustified. The Elderly Resident
ended-up paying because his solicitor told him
that his fees would be as much as the sum demanded. (NB!!!)
Hence: the Business
model had, yet again worked as landlord
was - unjustifiably - £1,532 better off.
('Some good' did come out of this because, on
the claim, Steel Services stated an address
in the British Virgin Islands. It led
me to follow this up a few months later
and to discover that Steel Services had
off the BVI registry for non-payment
of the licence fee" .
The second 'bonus' was that it describes Steel
Services as the 'freeholder'. See section Owners
identity for detail)
10 February 2006 "notice" appeared
to offer a golden opportunity
for PAY-BACK to Portner and Jaskel
- and its client - for what they
had done to the Elderly Resident .
I WAS RIGHT! And I had
great fun doing it.
(Funny how rogue solicitors appear
to overlook the potential 'boomerang
effect'. They are blinded by their unbelievable arrogance and grossly inflated sense of superiority)
Two other things added to my suspicions.
The first one was the "offer" price
of £120,000 (US$211,600). Indeed, it is
fascinating to see how the price of a "headlease" for
a block of flats in Knightsbridge has tumbled
over the last six years - especially when compared
with average UK property prices.
(PDF of: graph
1 ; graph
one and two of the Land Registry title
for Steel Services were not included
with the so-called "Notice"
I remembered what happened with the December
2000 "Notice" when I and other leaseholders were sent on a wild goose chase, wasting
our time and money for nothing as the "notice" was
pulled from 'under our nose' - while a change
of ownership nonetheless took place . See
Notices by landlord for
It led me to obtain from the Land Registry all
the titles for Jefferson House . This cost
me c. £200 (US$350), as well
as numerous hours mapping out the ownership. (Judging from the evidence left on the Land Registry online database in February 2006, Mr Ladsky had been spending quite a bit of time building his multi-level maze - as explained at the end of section Owners identity )
It required that I also use copy of titles I
had obtained over the previous years. My resulting
summary confirmed that my
suspicions were totally justified (see also Freehold
ownership , Headlessors and Owners
Indeed, highlighting what some people might
describe as "conjuring
up sociopathic character traits, including
the belief of being 'above
the laws of the land', as well as malice
I discovered that JUST TEN DAYS before
Mr Daniel Broughton, Portner
sent the "notice" on behalf of Steel
Services' i.e. Mr Ladsky et. al., its client had disposed
of the title to Lavagna Enterprises Ltd. (It might be more accurate to say "seven weeks previously", as the first page of the Land Registry document states "15 December 2005")
A 'Section 5 Notice' is an
important legal document.
Consequently, a solicitor is expected to
ensure the accuracy of its contents.
It was abundantly clear to me that what
had happened was the result
of collusion by Portner and Jaskel - rather
than just gross incompetence:
one of the title withheld by Portner and
Jaskel state that the 'airspace
of Jefferson House' was removed from the title. The 'airspace' has
the penthouse flat as lessee . Hence,
the headlessee i.e. Steel Services,
no longer has control of the last floor
of Jefferson House .
Judging from the date of the mortgage
obtained from HSBC, point six, on page three
which states 31 January 2006, the copy of the
title was obtained just prior to Mr Broughton
sending the "Notice" .
Yet, the description of the "disposal" in
February 2006 "notice" is a
carbon copy of previous notices e.g. 13
December 2000 when Steel Services's
headlease covered the whole block.
Considering: (1) the
extortionate service charge demands (confirmed
by the Leasehold
Valuation Tribunal in its 17 June 2003 report, ref: LVT/SC/007/120/02 report (ref #992 on the LVT database) ; (2) the
filing of a - false
- claim against 11 leaseholders (representing
14 flats) in West
London County Court on 29
November 2002 (ref. WL 203537); (3) the
recent further 'carving
out' of Jefferson House, etc., etc.,
I suspect that the current ownership
profile of the flats is unlikely
to meet the requirement of the Landlord
and Tenant Act 1987 (Part 1, S.1
(2) ) for the issue of a S.5 Notice.
Indeed, it 'seems'
to me that Mr Ladsky has succeeded
in making the majority of leaseholders leave the block. (See below for
my explanation on the use of 'seems')
Consequently, I 'suspect' that this 'exercise'
was undertaken solely for 'my benefit', for the fun of it and out of vengeance. I had
every intention of catching them at their own
game. How far would they go with it?
Well, including the "notice",
Mr Broughton made the SAME CLAIM ON THREE
In my first reply to Mr Broughton of 3
March 2006 I wrote:
"My understanding of this is that the "Notice",
refers to the building, as it stands now, in
its entirety i.e. the whole of Jefferson House.
As you can see, no potential for confusion in
the way I expressed it. I knew the "notice" was
bogus so, I set up my 'snare' very carefully.
Although his 6
March 2006 was affirmative, the address
that he stated was different (he quoted one
of the addresses for the freehold - further
proving that he had all the relevant documents
in his possession), in my follow-up letter 11
March 2006 I asked him to confirm the
correct address. He replied on 14
March 2006 confirming that the address
was that captured in the "notice" .
Hence: Mr Broughton, Portner and Jaskel,
confirmed that the "Notice" relates "to
the building, as it stands now, in its entirety
i.e. the whole of Jefferson House" .
They wanted to have fun at my expense. BAD
MOVE! I was going to turn the table on them
making their game backfire and blow-up in their
face in a big way. 'I' was going to have the
In my 30
March 2006 letter to Mr Broughton, I wrote:
"It follows that the "disposal" being offered
in the "Notice" for £120,000 (US$211,600) is
the Title for Lavagna Enterprises Limited,
as it owns - as of 31 January 2006 (i.e. barely
10 days before you sent the "Notice"):
one Title covering all the floors of Jefferson
House, except the last floor and the roof
one Title covering the airspace of Jefferson
Ho use which includes the Title for the penthouse
flat, as well as associated parking space.
As you omitted to include pages one and
two of the Title for Steel Services when you
sent me the "Notice", I assume that you have,
likewise, omitted to include the other above-mentioned
Titles. Please, confirm"
I 'think' this letter
probably caused the equivalent
of a major earthquake on arrival.
In his reply of 3
April 2006 , Mr Broughton wrote:
"The disposal being offered, as per the
content of the notice, is in respect of the
interest held in the property by Steel Services
Ltd and not any interest in the property that
may be held by Lavagna Enterprises Ltd "
He also wrote:
"I would advise pages 1 and 2 of the title
documents were deliberately omitted as
our client is not required to provide this
information. All other relevant information
has been provided"
My reply of 30
April 2006 (1.1MB) addresses these comments,
as well as other points, including - my
non-lawyer - assessment of Mr Broughton
and his client's breaches of statutes
(see below 28 March 2006, as well Notices
by landlord ) which led
me to conclude with the following:
conclusion, in relation to your
final comment in your 3
April 2006 letter:
"I can be of no further assistance
to you and would recommend you
seek independent legal advice."
I return the advice and suggest
that you - and your client - seek
To write this letter cost
me many hours of desk research on various statutes, as well as the
Solicitors code of conduct. I probably sift through
over 400 pages, which I then reduced to 200 pages,
Given the profile of my 'target audience' I
had to be 500% sure of what I was writing.
The letter also cost me many hours. But,
this very substantial investment
was worth it.
My overall feeling was: another one
bites the dust!
Mr Broughton's 3 May 2006 reply (at the back
of my 30
April 2006 (1.1MB)) was
"Whilst your letter is irrelevant
in places, misguided in others and incorrect
parts you are of course free to pursue whatever
course you so wish should you feel further
action is required"
How gracious of him to give me the permission!
Note that Mr Broughton does not reply
to any of the contents of my 30 April 2006
I WONDER WHY? ... considering
(to use a leaseholder's expression about
his own landlord) that his client
to have turned intimidatory litigation
into an industry"
(Even girlfriends can end-up in "...a court
battle over a floor-length sheepskin
coat and two paintings" (Reference to
Mr Andrew Ladsky in an article in
Times ) (back-up printscreen )
my very extensive first-hand experience
with the Law Society ,
in relation to Piper
Smith Basham and Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor , there is no point
filing a complaint against this firm as
it would ignore the evidence and
conclude that there is no malpractice.
For the same reason: no point
contemplating the possibility of
then escalating my complaint to
Services Ombudsman .
outcome of the disposal by Steel
Services is that it has further
imprisoned me in the flat - as major covenants
in my lease CANNOT be performed
by 'the landlord'.
(See below 28
March 2006, as well
by landlord for detail)
These events further demonstrate the
unbelievable viciousness, evilness, arrogance and utter contempt of the laws of the
land by Mr Andrew Ladsky et. al. and
The worst part of it is that they do it because
they know that - on this island
- there is absolutely nothing to stop them.
(If there was the risk of sanction, they
would be far less likely to do it).
Not only does the system give them carte blanche
to do exactly as they please - it actually actively
helps them in their actions.
of this can be seen in the below entry
March 2006 in relation to the Land
Registry when I approached it for
assistance upon discovering that the recent
further carving out of Jefferson House resulted
in 'Steel Services' no longer being able to perform
major covenants in my lease.
The other pay-off from the so-called "notice"
As I mentioned earlier on, this episode with
the "notice" has cost me many hours
of my life - as well as considerable other costs.
However, it has proved to be very useful as it
induced me to conduct a thorough search
on the Land Registry - an action which,
very clearly, Messrs Ladsky and Broughton were
not expecting me to take. (Probably on grounds
of cost). And, if they thought that I might do
it, my guess is that they did not expect that
I would be able to map out the ownership of the
block due to the layers / interlinking between
some of the titles.
I had not done a search on the Land Registry
since April 2004 as, while it seems to me that
many of the leaseholders have left the block,
I know for a fact that Land Registry records
do not necessarily reflect the true position.
(Some time ago, when I flagged this up while
visiting the main Land Registry office
in London, I received the reply that thousands
of changes were taking place every day and that,
consequently, the Land Registry could not police
the registrations. When I asked whether there
were sanctions for not communicating changes
in ownership, I received a 'no' in reply and
was told that the system relies essentially on
solicitors communicating the information.
From my latest searches on all the titles for
Jefferson House, I suspect that change
of ownership has taken place but it has not been
reflected in the titles . Hence the
comment in my 30
April 2006 (1.1MB) reply to Portner and
Jaskel that I "wonder whether I was the
sole recipient of this latest "notice" )
Aside from leading me to discover that I
am now in a 'bigger mess' than
ever , the pay-off of this search
on the Land Registry is that I can use it in
One that springs to mind immediately is the
9 January 2006 invoice from Martin
Russell Jones , stating "Brought forward balance" of £5,625 (US$9,900) - with
no explanation whatsoever.
In particular, the fact that this invoice includes
the sum of £815 (US$1,435) which is described
as "25 Dec 2005 - 23 June 2006 - Half yearly
service charge in advance".
With this invoice, was also enclosed (among
others), a document headed " Steel
Services estimated expenditure for the year
ended 2006 " from which the sum of £815
has somehow been calculated. (I cannot figure
out how the sum was arrived at).
The 'so-called' "Apportionments" notes
at the bottom of the document state that "Schedule
1" refers to "All flats" , while "Schedule
2" states "Flats 1 to 35 only" .
This is FRAUDULENT given that
Steel Services no longer has control of the whole
In addition, as a result of the 'major' works,
three new flats were added:
18A, 33A and 35A.
(The proprietor of the lease on these three new
flats is Lavagna Enterprises Limited).
The outcome is summarised in this
document . For detail see Headlessors and Owners identity
Oxford English dictionary
definition of fraud: "Wrongful
or criminal deception intended to
result in financial or personal gain"
(See also 'Breach'
these claims of "Steel
Services estimated expenditure" - on
which a demand
for payment from me is
based - are FRAUDULENT...
they do not reflect the fact
that a significant part of the
expenditure must be assigned
to the penthouse flat - over
which Steel Services has NO CONTROL
as it is now in the hands of
The document " Steel
Services estimated expenditure for the year
ended 2006 " does not provide any
explanation as to the meaning of the "Apportionments" for "Schedule
1 and 2"
Nor does it contain any statement on the changes
and additions to the block. Very clearly,
these changes and additions have a major impact
on the lessees' share of the costs.
I was going to use this in the context of my
complaint to the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales against the accountant for Jefferson
House, Pridie Brewster . (See entry, 'Beginning
of May 2006 for detail)
to the lesson to Mr Ladsky et.
al. and their equally corrupt (*)
Beware of what you do
to others, as it can come back
and KICK YOU 'REAL HARD'
Tuesday 7 March 2006
The 'minders' continue to be in tow .
This morning I opted to walk alongside
the back of Harrods, crossed the Brompton
Road and, instead of turning right into
Cheval Place which I have done a few times
recently, for the purpose of confusing
as well as establish whether I was being
followed, I continued in the direction of South
Kensington. Having come to the end of the frontage
of the Nat West bank, before going down
the few steps, I decided to 'plant'
myself there - and observe.
There was a man a few metres
behind me. He was in his late 20s, c.1.80m,
shifty looking, wearing a training type top with
a hood - which he was wearing.
He went to one of the cash dispensers, but did
not use it. A bank employee arrived. The man
went to talk to him. Judging from the bank employee's
body language, he most probably asked him when
the bank would open. (An usual question for a
local to ask. It was c. 8h40). I continued to
was about to cross the road, he
turned round in my direction. Having crossed
the road, he went in a dry cleaner
shop where there was at least one
customer. However, the man only stayed
in for about 30 seconds.
As he came out, he again
looked in my direction .
He then walked for a few metres.
Yet again, he looked in my direction .
(We were about 50 metres apart).
At that point, I waved in his
direction. As I did this, he
pulled his hood further forward
on his face and crossed
the road back again i.e. coming
back on the side of the road from
which he had previously crossed
Hence, he had crossed
the road to do what? Nothing! In
his very noticeable interest
in me? He then continued
straight ahead in an alley alongside
At that point, I started to walk in that direction.
Within a few metres there is a street on
the right, going alongside a little square.
As I was about to cross the road, a man passed
in front of me. I have seen him at least
2-3 times previously . Early
40s', c. 1.75m, grey hair, cut very short, wearing
a three-quarter length black coat. He was
smoking. As he went closely past me, I
noted that the look on his face conveyed anger.
He continued in the street alongside the square.
I headed towards the next turning on the
I continued 'my circuit' walking to the Albert
Hall from where I took a bus to go to work. Before
taking the bus, I noticed 1-2 'possible' but,
Week commencing 13 March 2006
I continue to be followed
on a daily basis.
This includes whatever time I leave the office
at night. Hence,I continue to take the 'minders'
for a walk on my convoluted 'circuits'.
Friday 17 March 2006 at c. 0h15
St , I concluded that a man,
in his 40s, grey hair, cut very
short, wearing a black coat - I
had seen before - was
definitely interested in my movements.
I was on the phone relating to a friend
what was taking place. He
was playing the same game I have been
playing over recent months: crossing
Jermyn St , back tracking, crossing the street
again, making more U turns, crossing the
I ended up being on the same pavement
as he was, as he was walking towards
me he had a nasty, hard look on his
face. When he came to my height I
like a [reject from the sewer] [ Note] , looks like a [reject from the sewer] [ Note] ,
got to be a [reject from the sewer] [ Note]"
I have been saying this for a
while when I conclude that somebody
is interested in my movements.
To me, that's what they
are: [reject from the sewer] [ Note]. (Although
it is insulting to [cannot replace] [ Note]) . He
Saturday 18 March 2006 - 23h30
I left the office around 23h30. As
I arrived on Fleet St , I spotted the car I
saw on Sunday 26 February 2006,
as well as on Saturday 10 September 2005 i.e.
the cream colour Subaru estate with a
five-letter number plate starting with
walked the few metres to the bus
stop, I saw the man I
had previously seen drive the car.
He was on the pavement along which
the car was parked c. 15 metres
further up (direction Aldwych).
He was wearing a padded
thigh length, cream colour jacket
and woolen hat. As previously,
he wore glasses .
It seems to me that he had been
stationary and that he had started
to walk from the time I arrived
on Fleet St . (He could
not have stopped to do anything
as everything was closed).
He was looking
at me as he was
walking towards the car which,
for the last few metres, he did
by walking on the street. Hence,
I was bound to see him. He entered
the car and drove off.
Monday 20 March 2006 - 08h30
On leaving the block at c. 08h30, once I had
walked a few metres in the direction of
Hans Crescent , I noticed a woman standing
in front of the first entrance door to
Harrods. She was standing very close to
one of the doors and therefore in the entrance
looked in her 40s, blond, long hair,
badly cut. About 1.68m in height, she
wore a cream colour, waist length leather
jacket and trousers. I would describe her
overall look as 'ordinary' (rather than
sophisticated). She had a handbag as well
as a carrying case of the type used for
I turned right into Hans Crescent in the direction
of the tube station. I was walking slowly for
the purpose of being able to observe her in the
shop window of the patisserie shop that is on
the corner with Basil St and Hans Crescent ,
as well as observe other movements.
As I was
doing this, I saw her cross the street
and walk in my direction. On seeing this I opted
to stop and look at the menu displayed on the
patisserie's shop window. She did the same, standing
barely 40 cm to my right. It was quite
obvious that, like me, she was not reading the
menu. Although still possible to read it, we
were standing about 60cm away from it.
I remained 'planted' there. I
could feel that she was looking at me
I did not move other than position my
bag in a more comfortable position. I
had made-up my mind that I would stay
on the spot until she left. About two
and a half minutes went by. (This is
a long time). She then left, crossing the street
back in the direction from which she had come
but, instead of going back to stand in the
Harrods door, she continued walking, going
into the street that is at the back of Harrods
i.e. the continuation of Basil Street.
this as further evidence in support
of my claim that I continue being
observed and followed.
What was this woman doing standing
in front the Harrods door 1.5 hours
before it was due to open?
Why, from standing there, did
she walk across to have a look
at the menu - mimicking what I
Why did she stand there for that
length of time - at a distance
that is more than the average person
would be standing at in order to
look at a menu?
Why did she then crossed back
the road and walked off?
My view is that because I live
a few metres away, and was on my
way to my work, she did not expect
me to stop on the pavement to look
at the menu. Like
the other [despicable scum ] [Note] who have been
following me, they are simply not
prepared to react to the unexpected.
Their abhorrent, criminal paymasters
ought to be giving them a better
Tuesday 21 March 2006 - 08h35
On leaving the block to go to work at c. 08h35,
I turned right into Basil Street and walked all
the way to the corner with Sloane Street . I
then crossed the road. Once on the other pavement,
I went back down Basil Street and turned right
in the alley alongside the fire station.
Once on Brompton, having walked a few paces
in the direction of Harrods, I noticed a
man close to the pedestrian crossing.
He was positioned facing in my direction i.e.
not as the average person would position themselves
while waiting to cross. Hence, he appeared to
me to be loitering around. As there was no traffic
on my side, and the traffic on the other side
of the road was stationary, I run across the
road. As I did this, I could see from the corner
of my eye that the man also
started to cross the road.
Once on Knightsbridge Green ,
I opted to walk to the mobile phone shop so that
I would be able to watch him in the reflection
of the glass. Within about 30 seconds he
had also walked to the shop and stood c. 2 metres
to my right.
He was about 1.88m, in his 30s. He
looked as though he could be of North
African origin. Pot marked face . He
wore a pull over, thin fabric, dark blue anorak
with a hood which he had pulled over his head
and had fastened across his chin. (It was not
raining on that day. The temperature was c. 4-5
degrees centigrade). He appeared to me more interested
in me more than in the shop. Through my body
language, I also communicated that, likewise,
I was not interested in the shop. After about
one minute, he turned around facing in the direction
of Harrods, looking at me in the process, and
walked behind me.
him. He only took
a few paces and then stopped, while
facing in the Harrods direction.
Considering what had happened,
at that point I said "smells
like a [reject from the sewer] [Note], looks like a [reject from the sewer] [Note] , got
to be a [reject from the sewer] [Note]" . He did not
I walked away in the direction
of the alley and took the first
street on the left where I stayed
for c. one minute to see if he
would come by. He did not. When
I retraced my steps in order to
see whether he was still there,
I could not see him. He had left
in the direction of Harrods.
I know that this man's interest was in me.
From being idle when I had arrived on the pavement:
why did he start to cross once I had
started to do it? Why did he come and
plant himself next to me in front of the
shop window while observing me? Why did
he walk away for c. 4 metres and then stop? Why,
having done what he had done, did he -
only subsequently - walk off in the direction
Wednesday 22 March 2006 - 01h15
I left the office after midnight i.e. at the
end of Tuesday 21 March. I took the
bus and got off at the first stop in Regent
Street . From there I turned into Vigo
St and continued on Burlington leading
to Old Bond St / New
Bond St .
Something was bothering me that led me to stop
on the other pavement on New Bond St. (As you
can imagine, at that time of night the streets
were deserted). It was a car, parked
alongside with its lights on. I
was on the phone. I stayed in front of a shop
on New Bond St .
After 2-3 minutes I went back on Burlington
. I remained on the phone while positioning myself
alongside a shop. A man, who had come from the
direction of Vigo St , went by on the opposite
pavement, and turned right into New Bond St .
about 2 minutes, another
man, in his early 40s, moustache,
wearing an all weather jacket, dark
grey on the upper part, and lighter
grey below, with red stripes on the
inner part of the sleeves + along
the side, was coming from
the direction I had come i.e. from
the Vigo St end. (And therefore from
the same direction as the other man)
He was walking on the other pavement, slowly
and was looking at me intermittently. I was still
on the phone. Once he had reached the end of
the street i.e. on the corner with Old Bond St
, he turned round. He again walked slowly and,
as he was doing this, was looking at me intermittently.
At the height with Cork St he remained stationary
on the pavement, still looking
He stayed there for c. two minutes. He
then crossed Burlington and went into Cork
St . I opted to walk to the corner of Bravington
and Cork St . He was stationary
on the opposite pavement a few metres
down Cork St . I continued talking on the
phone and went back to
where I had positioned myself on Burlington
After about one minute, he reappeared out of
Cork St , crossed Burlington and walked in the
direction of Vigo St . This time, he did this
at a normal pace. However, after
about 15 metres, he again turned back and hence started to walk
back in my direction. He again
stopped on the pavement i.e. the opposite pavement from where
I was. I remained where I was. After about two
minutes, he again crossed Burlington and went
into Cork St .
As he was doing this, the car I had seen parked
on New Bond St with its lights on, passed in
front of me and turned into Cork St . I
thought that it might come and pick up the man.
I walked to the corner of Cork St . The
car had indeed stopped about 80m down Cork
St to pick-up somebody who appeared to look like
the man who had walked down Burlington and turned
right into New Bond St . The other man
i.e. with the grey jacket was on the other pavement
and talking to a man. By then it was c. 01h45.
I decided to leave.
minded, reasonable visitor to the
site, make what you will of this.
This is what took place.
this be construed as a display
of what I have been doing over
the last few months i.e. my
convoluted routes and frequent
U turns? I think
so ( as happened
as well on Friday 17 March 2005).
I am very glad it is leading them
to act in this way. I am obviously
getting to them.
Their male ego cannot
handle a woman giving them the
run around - and their stupidity
leads them to show it! How
Sunday 26 March 2006 - 11h00
I left the flat around 11h00 and walked alongside
the back of Harrods. I then turned left
into Hans Square , taking the exit that
leads on Pont Street . I crossed the street
and continued on Pavilion Road . (A route
I used to take to go to Sloane Sq tube
station). At that point, I
made a U turn. Once on Pont Street , I
walked in the direction of Sloane Street
. I was on the phone. I stopped on the
corner for the purpose of 'observation'.
I noted a man who
had come from Sloane Street, crossed Pont
Street in a diagonal in the direction of
Pavilion Road i.e. where I had been two
I turned right on Sloane Street and went to
the nearby bus stop. I stayed there for about
five minutes debating what I was going to do
next. In case I was being followed, to annoy
the [morally depraved, lowlife] [ Note ] ', I decided to cross Sloane Street
and turned right into Pont Street . I
took the second street on the right, Cadogan
Lane , which is quiet. I was walking slowly as
I was still on the phone.
I have also previously taken this route to go
to Sloane Square tube station. However, when
I reached Clive Place/Sloane Sq I opted to turn
left in the direction of Victoria . After
about 20 metres, I crossed Clive Place and went
into Bourne Street . This is a very quiet,
walked for about 50 metres my 'internal
radar' led me to turn round and to
discover that the man I had
seen c. 15 minutes previously was
about 30 metres behind me. He
was walking quite fast. I took a
He went past me and,
because of the speed at which he
was walking, within about one minute
he was already well ahead of me.
If this man's intention had been to use this
route, why did he take a route ( Pavilion
Road ) which took him further away (although,
it does run parallel to Sloane Street ). (By
the time he was in Bourne St , he was still empty
handed). Also, considering the pace at which
he was walking - and mine - if the intention
had been to go there, he would have gone down
Bourne Street well ahead of me. It led me to conclude that
there was a high probability that his interest
was in me.
Good! Another one caught
in the act! And another
photograph to add to the growing collection.
Despicable, criminal scum!
(As stated previously, EVERY ONE of
these individuals is committing a criminal
offence against me under the Protection
from Harassment Act 1997 - as well as
breaching my Human Rights under Article
8 of the European Convention on Human
Rights - Respect to private
life - contained in the Human Rights
28 March 2006 - The 'get lost' from the Land
As explained earlier on under the 18
February 2006 entry (as well as under Notices
by landlord ), the outcome of 'Steel
Services' i.e. Mr Ladsky et. al. selling,
to Lavagna Enterprises , the 'airspace'
of Jefferson House which has
the penthouse flat as lessee means that 'Steel
Services', no longer has control of
the last floor of Jefferson House as
it is now in the hands of Lavagna Enterprises .
Consequently, it means that Steel Services
can no longer perform some of the major covenants in my
lease which, under Clause 5 states:
"The lessor hereby covenants with
"5 (1) to maintain repair..."
"5 (1) (a) the roofs...chimney stacks
"5 (1) (b).water pipes electric cables
and wires and supply lines.upon the
"5 (1) (c) the boiler and heating and
hot water apparatus..."
"5 (1)(d) the passenger lifts lift shafts
"5 (2)(4) "To insure and keep insured
the building.and in case of destruction
of or damage to the building or any
part thereof so as to make the same unfit
for habitation and use. to lay out all monies
received in respect of such insurance...
in rebuilding and reinstating the same.."
A friend had seen in the Estates Gazette the
case of Kintyre
Ltd v Romeomarch Property Management Ltd in
which the Land Registry
Adjudicator had dismissed the application to
register the lease, because:
"The roof space was required for the proper
management of the roof."
My friend and I concluded that the same situation
had arisen at Jefferson House.
When he suggested that I write to the
Land Registry my immediate reply
was: it is going to be, yet again,
a complete and utter waste of my time and
that this time would be more usefully
spent on continuing the development of the
He strongly disagreed, saying "Com'on! Not
this time! The Kintyre case is exactly
the same situation. They'll have to take
which I replied: "I bet
you anything that the reply is going
to be a 'get lost '" (I
I thought, "Oh well, it will be more evidence
against 'the system' that I will be able to
add to the site" .
After writing several drafts, I finalised my
letter to the Land Registry on 28
March 2006 , in which I pointed out that
"Acquisition of the headlease Title NGL
373 333 by Lavagna Enterprises, a superior
headlessor first registered by the Land Registry
on 31 January 2006, under Title BGL 56 642,
has rendered the headlease materially defective"
I explained that the outcome of the above transactions
between Steel Services, Lavagna Enterprises
and Jefferson House Limited had led to Steel Services
no longer having control of the roof - as it
is now in the hands of a superior headlessor,
Lavagna Enterprises. Consequently, Steel Services
can no longer perform the above mentioned covenants
in my lease.
I therefore requested that the lease granted
to Lavagna Enterprises be revoked.
In support of my request, I highlighted the
case of Kintyre
Ltd v Romeomarch Property Management Ltd pointing
out that the Land Registry Adjudicator had
dismissed the application to register the lease,
because: "The roof space was required for
the proper management of the roof."
I consider the initial reply of 4
April 2006 from the Land Registry as
a blatantly obvious
"Get lost, I am not going to do
anything against a sacrosanct landlord' '
Among others, it states:
I do not have details of the Adjudicator
case referred to in your letter
and am unable to comment further
on that decision"
"I regret that the Registry
is unable to simply revoke the
lease and title of BGL 56642"
"The Registry is not
able to provide legal advice
and I would suggest that you
seek independent legal advice
in respect of your concerns"
The favourite reply from a
government department: "Get
As the Land Registry is comprised under Lord
Falconer of Thoroton's department, the
Department for Constitutional Affairs, in light
of my previous experience with some of his department's
divisions ( West
London County Court , the Legal
Services Ombudsman - and the Court Service), this
reply came as no surprise .
So, yet again, I found myself
in the situation of needing to undertake
a considerable amount of desk research
in order to determine my statutory rights,
as well as the remit of a government department
in order to counteract the pushback.
In this instance, it meant going through, among
others, the Land Registration
with my newly found knowledge,
I then - yet again with a government
department - ended-up needing to
put my punching gloves on.
Extracts from my 18
April 2006 reply to the
(In relation to "not having
detail of the case" )
"I read this as an admission
that your Office does not have
the capability to implement the
requirements comprised under
the Land Registration Act 2002.
Section 73 - Objections:
(1) ".anyone may object to
an application to the registrar"
(7) "If it is not possible
to dispose by agreement of an
objection.the registrar must
refer the matter to the adjudicator"
I followed this by stating that, "given
the situation" I was enclosing a copy
of the Kintyre case, as well as copy of pages
from the Adjudicator website detailing the
Adjudicator's role and contact details.
As to the suggestion that I "seek legal
advice" , I replied:
1. Your Office granted the title - I did
2. Consequently, your Office created the
resultant situation of, among others, my headlessor,
Steel Services, being unable to perform highly
material covenants in my lease - not I.
3. Therefore, it is up to your Office - not
I - to undo what has been done.
4. Consequently, I suggest you - rather
than I - seek legal advice.
Evidently, my letter was
escalated one 'level
up the chain of command' as somebody else
replied on 25
April 2006... and the outcome was the same 'GET
LOST!' on the grounds that the situation
was different from the Kintyre case.
I told my friend:
I told you when you suggested I write to the
Land Registry? This has, yet again, cost me
many hours of my very precious little spare
time - for what outcome? 'GET
LOST! SORT OUT THE MESS YOURSELF!'"
Needless to say that I did not waste any more
of my time replying to this letter.
However, on the upside, it has added to the
body of evidence against 'the system' that there
is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THERE TO HELP ME .
So, not a complete waste of time after
all as it further demonstrates...
luck' to the leaseholders with
limited financial means and no
influential connections who end-up
in a property owned by these criminals as, the more they want to fight
for their so-called 'rights', the
greater the assistance provided
by 'the system' to these evil individuals
to keep the leaseholders under
'their thumbs', free to use and
THIS is the United 'Kingdom' in the
Islands only a few kilometres from
the coast of mainland Europe yet, still
in the dark ages... and actively endorsing
Can also be expressed as: a
country where a significant part of
the wealth was built on slavery - and
continues to be built on slavery.
Friday 7 April 2006 - 01:00 a.m. Hosing windows
At one o'clock in the morning there was a repeat of
what took place on Tuesday
4:55 a.m. and on Tuesday
2005 at 5:30
man with a hosepipe spent several
minutes 'watering the plants' in front
of my windows - resulting
in gallons of water falling in front of
my windows. (Just as well that Thames
Water has introduced a hosepipe
It was 'very
selective' watering as I did not
see him move to the plants in front of
the next flat.
Considering the time at which this took place
it can described as the continuation
of the on-going harassment and intimidation.
I assume the trigger to
be the fact that I caught Mr Ladsky et.
al. and their solicitors, Portner and Jaskel, at
their own game - detailed under
18 February 2006.
Wednesday 19 April 2006 - midnight
Aside from one occasion last week, over the
last three weeks, I had the impression that I
did not have the 'minders' (or [beneath contempt, morally depraved, lowlife ] [Note] as I have
come to call them) in tow. While this might have
been the case, they were back in force last night.
I left the office around 23h25 when I decided
to take the tube (underground) to get back
to the 'hellhole'. On my way to Blackfriars
tube station, one man caught
my attention because as I had turned in a street,
he turned into a side street (which I tend to
take to go to the station). I went into the same
street. He was loitering around on
the pavement and looking shifty. He was
short, in his mid-30s, nondescript.
I crossed the street in his direction.
At that point, he walked back down the
way he had come - consequently,
having done nothing. I observed him until
he reached the corner of the street and
continued towards the station.
On my way there, I had noticed another man,
mid-20s, c.1.83m , wearing white,
trainer type, baggy trousers, worn out
dirty white trainers, unbuttoned shirt
and an unbuttoned, dark blue overcoat (equally
as doubtful as the shirt as to its state
As I was about to go down the steps to the station,
he overtook me and walked down the steps.
He had a newspaper tucked in one of the overcoat
pockets. Clearly, his attire signaled that
he was not an office worker. My 'internal radar'
got on 'alert'.
I let him gain some distance on me. When
I arrived on the platform he was there, sitting.
As I went passed him, I got even stronger negative
vibes. I went to the end of the platform leading
me to board a different carriage.
By the time the train arrived at Sloane Sq,
I had forgotten about him. As I turned right
upon getting out of the station, I saw that he
was ahead of me. As I was about to do, he crossed
the road and ended up in Sed
St. I was
about 5 metres behind him. Half way up
the relatively short street, he crossed onto
the other pavement. My 'internal radar'
switched on 'alert' as, while he had until then
been walking at a normal pace, he
was slowing down as if to let me gain some distance on him.
I could also feel that he
was looking at me. I
likewise slowed down being intent on always having
him in the corner of my eye. He crossed
Sloane Terrace and stopped
on the other pavement. He
observed me cross the street. When on the pavement, I
also stopped and was about 8 metres away from
him. I stopped because I did not want to walk
off knowing that he was behind me.
He then started to walk in
my direction, at
which point I psyched myself up ready to fight.
(For well over a year, I have been using my rucksack,
carrying it in front of me rather than on my
back so that both my hands are free. Also, to
ensure that it cannot be taken away from me). As
he came within less than a metre of me, he went
behind me. I had moved slightly aside to let
him go past.
then stopped c. 1.5 metres from
me, glaring at me. I asked him what his problem
He replied that he did not have
a problem. I asked what he was
doing, saying "are
you following me?" "No" was
the reply. I again asked "What's
your problem?" Same reply.
As he walked back a few metres
he asked why I had said that. I
explained that in addition to his
behaviour, he had got on and off
the same tube stations. He replied
that they were his stations as
He then glared at me. I held his
gaze and said "you
can look at me as much as you want,
you are not frightening me". "I
am not trying to" was the
reply. I told him "Well proceed
then" . He remained
there. Again I said "proceed" .
He moved off 2-3 metres further along the pavement
and, from there, he asked
me why I was staying there. I replied "none of your business" . He
again asked, to which I repeated the same
I then said "tell Mr
Ladsky that what I do is none of his business". He
came closer to me to ask me to repeat. At which
point I said "tell your
paymasters that I do what I want". At this point he walked
off in the direction of Sloane Street
. I remained where I was to observe him. He
turned round to look at me as he made a right
turn into Sloane St.
I stayed where I was for about two minutes in
case he came back. I did not see him.
Given what took place, including the same trip
on the underground, I concluded
that his interest was very obviously in
me. True, he was
ahead, rather than behind me on leaving
the station. And I could have gone in another
direction. However, from where he was, he could
have observed my movements. Also, he could hear
my footsteps. By then it was midnight, and the
square was relatively quiet. The route
through Sed St is one that I frequently take
when arriving at Sloane Sq.
In addition, if he was not
interested in me, why...
...did he slow
down in Sed St and was looking at
crossed Sloane Terrace, why did he
stop on the pavement to look at me
as I was crossing the street? From
the time of entering Sed St, a 'normal'
passer-by would have just continued walking
How come that he walked away when I
your paymasters that I do what I want" ?
This was an admission
that, indeed, he was being paid to follow
me. (Anybody else
would have challenged my comment).
In addition, a 'normal' male passer-by going
about his business would likely have been conscious
of the situation i.e. that I, a woman on my own,
in an isolated street, at midnight, would have
a heightened awareness of other passer-by. Indeed,
on many occasions in this situation, men have
tended to walk away from me clearly intending
to reassure me.
By contrast, this man took advantage
of the situation - thereby behaving like his
abhorrent, evil, morally depraved paymasters:
harassing me - a woman on my own, in
an environment where there would not
be witnesses (after midnight, in a deserted
criminal filth! (Under
the Protection from Harassment Act
1997 this amounts to committing a criminal
people are the scum of the earth,
rejects from the sewer.
I then went back down Sed St , turned right
and crossed to the other side of Sloane St.
As I was walking towards the bus stop I noticed
a man at the bus stop who was
looking in my direction. As I neared the
bus stop, one arrived. The man was in his early
40s, short. He appeared to be
of South Asian origin (he reminded
me of somebody from Indonesia ).
(Last week, one morning on my way to work,
a woman in her 20's- early 30's, who I concluded
was showing particular interest in my movements,
seemed to me to also be of Indonesian origin).
The man boarded the bus. I walked in behind
him. Like me, he got off at the next stop at
the top of Sloane Street . Again my 'internal
radar' switched on. I became particularly conscious
of him as he looked very shifty
and ill at ease.
I consequently kept him in my line of vision.
Having walked a few metres from the bus stop,
in the direction of the top of Sloane Street
, he stopped on the pavement. He was practically
on the kerb, his back turned to me. I opted to
stop behind him, positioning myself close to
the nearest building. (Something my experience
of a few minutes ago had reminded me I should
do to ensure I have control of 'my space'). (We
were only a few metres from the bus stop. Hence,
potentially I could have come off the bus in
order to get another one).
After about 30 seconds he turned round ending-up
looking at me. (I concluded that he had been
expecting me to have walked past him by then).
At that point I returned a sneer. It
appeared to have unsettled him as he proceeded to walk
up to the corner with Basil St - a distance of
about 15 metres. When he reached the corner,
he turned round to look at me. At that point
I laughed loudly.
turned away and started to run
like a demented individual in
the direction of the top of Sloane
He run all the way until he reached
I did not bother to find out what
he was going to do next. I turned
into Basil St, heading to the 'hell
The only explanation I can come
up with to explain his behaviour
is that: his interest was
in me; he could not understand
how I had been able to determine
this. If he thought of me as a
(Unfortunately, my 'sort of' psychic powers
do not extend to figuring out the winning
lottery numbers. I wish they did! At least,
radar' alerts me to danger. Apparently
this ability tends to be more developed
in people who have had a difficult childhood.
There is always an upside to everything...
something I always aim to look for, especially
since the start, in 2002, of my horrendous,
very traumatic nightmare).
When I came in the block I made a rude sign
towards the camera hidden behind the globe
at the back of the entrance. I think I
accompanied this by equally rude language - which
I repeated once in the flat as I am convinced
that my flat is bugged. (See My Diary - January
/ February 2004)
Monday 24 April 2006 - 00:15 a.m.
I left the office to go to the bus stop on Fleet
St . As I arrived on the corner with Fleet St
, I noted a white Mercedes parked on the other
side. A man, alone, was sitting in the driver's
seat. I noted the number plate which is composed
of six letters, starting with 'AII' .
He drove off after c. two minutes.
just before he did this, the man with
the cream colour Subaru
estate ( number
plate starting with 'SI' )
arrived from the direction of Aldwych.
(This makes it the fourth
time that I see this car at this
time of night: 10
September 2005, 27 February
2006 and 18 March 2006).
He turned right in the street
from which I had come from i.e.
the street where my office is located.
I took the bus. As it went past
the next street on the left, Whitefriars
Court , I saw the Subaru. From
the bus, I could see that he turned
right on Fleet St . Hence,
he had gone full circle.
Wednesday 26 April 2006
I attended a meeting, "The Social
Sector Leaseholders' Local Elections
2006 Rally" , in Bethnal Green
( East London ). Over 200 people were
in attendance. Among others, they included
members of the London
Leaseholders' Network , as well as
some C.A.R.L. members
as we had agreed to come to give
them moral support but, also to gain
insights as to the issues that they
Panel members included representatives from
the main parties, as well as the Respect party. A
police van was parked on the side of the building;
a hint that the police was expecting trouble.
I soon realised why.
The horror stories I heard during this rally
reinforced my resolve to do all I can to play
my part in achieving the abolition of the appalling,
feudal leasehold system in this country that
benefits the pockets of a minority at the expense
of the majority.
shocked me beyond belief was to hear
that a local authority had
used forfeiture legislation against
an 84 year old man.
Apparently, the local council
expected the man to pay well in
excess of £10,000 (US$18,000)
in service charges.
As he could not, it forfeited
his lease i.e. took his home away.
('Legally', it can do that. See
definition) No wonder New Labour has kept forfeiture.
Another leaseholder, who was a speaker, explained
that the outcome of going through the council's
accounts had highlighted an overcharge
to local leaseholders of c. £1.3 million (US$2.3
million). It 'seemed' to refer to accounts over
a 12-month period.
Other leaseholders talked of service charges
of £30,000 (US$53,000) or more. (Subsequent note: see My Diary 22 Nov 08 for demands up to £50,000). Bear
in mind that many of the social sector leaseholders
are people who tend to be on relatively low income.
In other words, many do not have a hope of being
able to pay. Consequently, as the poor 84 year
old man, they face the prospect of losing their
(Subsequent note: Meanwhile the 'noble' peers and 'honourable' MPs are feathering their nest at the taxpayer's expense - including demanding payment of a £2,600 home entertainment system, claiming it as "natural justice")
have ended-up as leaseholders is
the outcome of the 'right-to-buy'
policy introduced by the Conservative
party (under Mrs Thatcher) .
As was explained during the meeting,
when many of these people bought
the lease, they were not informed
about the intended massive expenditure
required to bring properties up
to a proper state of repair.
(Numerous leaseholders explained
this as being the outcome of massive
incompetence and mismanagement
by local councils of their housing
stocks). More recent government
policy on 'decent homes' is adding
to the massive service charges.
It is absolutely sickening to see what it is
taking place when, by contrast, the
government (current and past) has
been squandering billions of pounds of taxpayers'
money due to gross incompetence
it appears to have squandered well
billion (US$26 billion) as
a result of failures
in IT implementation projects within
various government departments;
billion pounds wasted on
military aircrafts (e.g. Chinook
helicopters) that cannot fly in
adverse weather conditions, tanks
(Challenger) that cannot function
in sandy environments, etc. etc.
Further evidence of this was reported by The Independent, on 15 December 2006, "Anger as Whitehall spends £7bn on private consultants" (backup extracts )
"Government departments have spent £7.2bn on consultants in three years, but appear not to have a clear idea of what value they got for their money, according to the first authoritative survey by the official public spending watchdog"
What reply did I get when, at the end of the
meeting, I expressed my shock at what I
had heard to a Labour council's
that's what being a leaseholder means!" In
other words, a response of total dismissal
- in line with my experience since 2002: 'the
two finger' government.
Note at 8 May 2006 - I can now add another number
found in the 7 May 2006 issue of The
Mail on Sunday (page 49), headed, "Grounded
RAF's new £50m warplane plagued by technical
problems after less than a month in service - Catalogue
of mishaps: One in four of the 1,500mph Eurofighters
are out of action" . The article
"The Eurofighter project has been plagued
by technical problems for years, resulting
in extra costs to taxpayers of at least £20billion" (US$35bn)
£20billion of taxpayer money down
the drain! Against
that you see an 84 year old man thrown
out of his home because he cannot pay
a bill - much
of which appears to be the result of
his local council's crass inaptitude.
Consider this appalling waste as well
against charities pleading for funds, such
as those dedicated to the care of children
with cancer, the blinds, the invalids, etc.
How can this be?
I should rejoice at the fact that 'New Labour'
has been practically kicked-out of this council
as a result of the local elections. However,
my first-hand experience with my local council,
Kensington & Chelsea , dominated by the other
main party, the Conservatives, means that I am
not holding my breath. Like so many people say
nowadays: "they are all the same!" (Subsequent note: CONFIRMED - see My Diary Jan 09 ; Feb 09)
Thursday 27 / Friday 28 April 2006 - 00h10
On my return from the office after midnight
I saw that the temporary cardboard protection had
been removed from a large area of the entrance
corridor. In My Diary, under
the entry for 27
June 2005, I explained that
as the new, cheap floorboards have been nailed
directly on the joists with no insulation whatsoever
(see photographs in this pack ,
as well as Photo
gallery for additional evidence)
the level of noise is going to be unbearable.
I was right.
...as you can imagine, the noise
carries extremely well, wide and
far... and even more at night.
The floor in the entrance corridor
can be described as excellent
for tap dancing .
No point sleeping in my bed as it is just below
the entrance corridor. I therefore reintegrated
the sofa (as I had done in March 2005 due to
the noise made intentionally, late at night,
in the entrance, and again in July 2005).
On my way back to the flat, in Cadogan
Square , I had noticed a man who, I felt, was
interested in my movements. (My 'internal
radar' switched on). He was resting
against a car parked alongside the pavement, eating an
attire looked very ordinary. I continued
walking the remaining c. 100 metres to Pont Street
. Once I had crossed the street, I stayed on
the pavement to observe whether
he would drive up. He did. I noted the number
plate. As I was
observing him, another man went quietly behind
I had a feeling that a 'surprise' might be waiting
for me and that this/these man/men were the lookout
to warn of my arrival. (Hence, a repeat of Monday
8 August 2005 when I found a leak on my return
to the flat).
Anticipating that I might be subjected in the
middle of the night to a lot of noise in the
entrance corridor, I switched
from my work clothes to jeans and sweater, and
placed everything ready to storm out of the flat
if required, including placing my rucksack next
to the pillow. (Being
ready entails having the digital camera and the
rest of the paraphernalia I have been carrying
around me on a daily basis for c. the last three
years). Hence, I slept all
dressed up. Nothing
On leaving the block I again tested the acoustics
by pacing around in the corridor: as good
as they were a few hours previously. It
also led me to notice that a free-standing African
art artifact had been placed in the entrance.
Maybe 'the mob' is preparing the block
in order to sell it. This will prove 'interesting'
Friday 28 April 2006
The start of a bank holiday weekend. As I am
yet again going to spend my holiday in the office
I decide to treat myself to
staying in the next door hotel. I am in bad need of a good
night sleep in a safe and secure environment. If
Mr Ladsky et. al. are planning on a session of 'tap
dancing' in the entrance corridor in the middle
of the night, they will have wasted their time.
After a 12 hour blissful sleep, I decide to
stay another night in the hotel.
Saturday 29 April 2006 - Finishing the reply to Portner and Jaskel
I am in the office by 11h30 feeling a lot better.
It has renewed my energy as I 'attack' the draft
reply to Portner and Jaskel I had started to
develop c. three weeks ago and in which I dipped
in and out over that period.
If Mr Ladsky et. al. are having me followed for the purpose of determining whether I see
a lawyer, thereby offering them with the potential
to come to 'an arrangement', they are really
I spent the whole day working on the letter
to Portner. I am pleased with the
As I hand it out
at the post office counter tomorrow,
my thought for Portner and Jaskel will be "With
my compliments and those of the Elderly
Resident you bullied and tried to intimidate - you scum! " See
entry for Saturday 18
February 2006 for further detail.
I leave the office by 22h30 and head back to
the hotel. Bliss!
Sunday 30 April 2006
I wish I could stay in the hotel tonight as
well, but that would be a bit too extravagant. So,
back to the 'hellhole' tonight.
Beginning of May 2006 - Dealings with the ICAEW
There is another battle I have not referred
to in My Diary so far. YES, ANOTHER ONE!
(As you can see from the summary under
Library section, I have had a total of 28
battles since 2002). Absolutely
everywhere I have turned to has led me
to go into battle.
This one is the battle I have been having with
the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England
and Wales (ICAEW) for nearly one year. I am capturing
it now because I am in the process of drafting
my fifth letter to the ICAEW - and view it as
my last one.
It started by my copying Pridie
accountants for Jefferson House, on my 30
March 2005 to Ms Hathaway, Martin
Russell Jones , highlighting the fact that the accounts
do not reflect the 17
June 2003 determination
by the tribunal, and that they are in breach
of the terms
of my lease.
It led Pridie Brewster to
reply in its 15
April 2005 letter
not made aware of the Leasehold
Valuation Tribunal determination
of 17 June 2003 at the time that we were
preparing our certificate"
In my 17
April 2005 reply, I wrote "I assumed
this was the most probable explanation - hence
my approach" , and supplied a pack of
48 enclosures as supporting evidence. Compiling
this pack turned out to be very costly both,
in time and in postage cost.
As I had forgotten to mention to Pridie Brewster
that I had a Consent
Order from 'Steel Services' exempting
me from Steel Services' Leasehold Valuation
Tribunal costs, I sent another letter, dated 9
May 2005 .
Three months later, I had not even received
an acknowledgement from Pridie Brewster. It led
to write to the ICAEW on 19
July 2005 requesting its assistance.
Russell Jones and its client
method of operating, I was concerned about Pridie
Brewster's position with its professional body.
Hence, on 2
August 2005 , I sent another letter to
the ICAEW emphasising that I did believe the
As things turned out, my 'good Samaritan' action
proved to have been a waste of time: like
the rest of the other 'so called' English regulatory
... the ICAEW revealed itself to
be a trade association that was not going
the hand that feeds it'
In typical, English 'self-regulatory body'
style, in its 4
August 2005 reply, the ICAEW took on
an adversarial tone, ignored the content
of my correspondence, and threw everything
back at me.
I replied on 1
style continued in the 6
September 2005 reply...
...now confirming to me that I
was dealing with a 'little
dictator' with a grossly inflated
sense of self-importance...
...as well as an inability to
In particular, it is worth noting in
his letter that:
ICAEW will be the judge of whether
or not consumers' reasons for not
responding evidently - immediately
- to its correspondence, are "reasonable"
the ICAEW expects consumers to
ask for 'permission' to not respond
within what it perceives as a "reasonable" time
ICAEW expects consumers to be psychic
i.e. know that the ICAEW has written
them a letter - while they are
not around to take delivery.
Also, according to the ICAEW, the time period
between 4 August and 23 August amounts to 26
days. Yes, this is the professional association
for 'Chartered Accountants'!
It has to be said that the rest of the letter
only serves to further undermine the confidence
in accountants (e.g. Enron).
(Mercifully - in
spite of their association - there are
many highly competent accountants with the utmost
level of professionalism and integrity)
In February 2006, as a result of sharing my
experience with Mr Nigel Wilkins , Chair of C.A.R.L. (Campaign
for the Abolition of Residential Leasehold) who
has written numerous letters to the ICAEW "exposing
the failure of ICAEW members" (see copies
of the Leaseholder on the C.A.R.L. website) he
identified a letter he had received
from the ICAEW, dated 12
January 1999 , in which the caseworker
"...in the event that a Court
(or a relevant tribunal) decided
that expenditure was not sufficiently
supported, and an Institute member
firm had reported otherwise, that would
give rise to disciplinary considerations "
I 'sat' on this letter for a while debating
whether I should, yet again, write to the ICAEW
and hence add to the 50+ hours of my life it,
and its member, had already cost me.
I needed to 'pin down' the ICAEW. It meant that,
as with all the other 'so called' English regulatory
bodies, I had to very clearly, given the experience
so far, 'suffocate' the ICAEW with evidence such
that it would not be able to wriggle out of my
It led me to, among others, conduct extensive
research on the definition of certified and audited
accounts, code and guidance to accountants, etc. I
needed 'to bury' the ICAEW with iron-tight proof
in support of my complaint.
After working on a draft for several days which,
again, required going back to previous documents,
as well as going though my numerous files, I
finalised my letter on 7
March 2006 , addressing it to the 'little
dictator'. I restated what I had captured in
my previous correspondence and his replies,
as well as drew attention to additional evidence.
I received the 13
April 2006 reply, I
wanted to scream, and scream:
the ICAEW had - once again - blatantly
ignored the content of my letter
and its supporting evidence - including
its letter of 12 January 1999
to Mr Wilkins.
time, I opted to put on the 'punching
gloves' in my reply of 17
To do this required that I go
through all of the previous correspondence
capturing, point by point, what
I had written and the reply I had
received - and yet again, re-emphasising
the glaringly obvious.
This made it my fifth letter to the
ICAEW ( 19
July 2005 , 2
August 2005 , 1
September 2005 , 7
March 2005 ) - and I saw it as
my last one, thinking that my time
would be more usefully spent on continuing
to develop my website to expose my
Unbelievably, the 24
May 2006 reply suggests that the ICAEW 'might'
be taking action. While it is certainly an
improvement over the previous responses, I
am opting to launch the website with this section
on it - for the following reasons:
The attitude of the ICAEW until
this last letter. As the Chinese saying
goes: 'A leopard
does not change its spots'
Hence, as with the other 'so called'
regulatory bodies, 'the game' will be to engage
me in many more hours of endless, pointless letter
writing over a period which, according to the
caseworker's letter of 24 May 2006 ".may
take.in excess of a year where the case is complex
and strongly contested" ( I
view this as an attempt to dissuade me from pursuing
The thinking behind this is that the greater
the number of letters I am made to write, the
greater the likelihood of my giving up on my
as already demonstrated, I
will be bullied into responding by
using the threat of "closing
down the file" if I do
not reply within a timescale determined
as 'acceptable' by the ICAEW.
If I cannot reply immediately,
this will require yet, more letter
writing as, evidently, the ICAEW
expects me to
ask 'cap in hand' for its permission' to
take longer to reply than it
expects...and hope that the 'almighty'
considers my reason for requesting
a delay as 'reasonable'
These letters will be in addition to needing
to write letters relating to other matters. For
example, in my letters of 17
May 2006 and 6
June 2006 , I requested that correspondence
be sent to my PO Box. The caseworker
nonetheless addressed her two subsequent
letters of 24
May 2006 and 8
June 2006 to my home address.
In addition, in her 8 June 2006 letter, she
states that she enclosed "...a copy of a
letter sent to the firm requesting further information." She
did not enclose the letter. Outcome: I
now need to write her a letter pointing
During this one year+ I will be sent
from 'pillar to post' as the 'end game' is
to return a verdict of 'no malpractice' (as
happened with the Law Society in relation to
Basham and CKFT , and with the
Bar Council in relation to Mr
Gallagher ) - in
the process, throwing everything back at me
and ignoring critical evidence (as already
Hence, after 1 year+ the outcome will be: I
will still be left with accounts for
Jefferson House that are bogus and, consequently,
on which the service charges demanded of me
This, fair minded, reasonable visitor
to the site, is the meaning of 'regulation'
on this island.
Meanwhile, the ICAEW and its member
have so far cost me in excess of 70 hours of
(See 12 July 2006, as
well as 30 August 2006 for the final
Friday 12 May 2006 - 07h45 - Another Ladsky scum
On leaving Jefferson House at 07h45, I turned left and, after a few metres, crossed over onto the other pavement ending up alongside the patisserie on the corner with Basil St and Hans Crescent. I noticed a woman who was stationary on the pavement close to the patisserie. (A repeat of Monday 20 March 2006). My 'internal radar' went on alert. There was something about her. She looked uneasy, shifty.
I went past her and stopped c. 4 metres up from her. I could feel that she was looking at me. She looked ill at ease, hesitant. Through my body language I communicated that I was going to stay put.
She pretended to look at the menu in the window, looking at it for c. 10 seconds. She then looked at me. I remained still. About two minutes went by during which she looked sideways in my direction 2-3 times.
At that point, she walked in the direction of the station. As my intention had been to take the tube, I followed her. She was walking very slowly such that I would be likely to overtake her. I played 'the game' for a few metres then overtook her going through the ticket barriers before she did.
Before going down the escalator, I turned round and saw that she was behind me. I went on the platform direction north. As explained previously, I sometime do this and, when the train arrives in the opposite direction, I go through the passageway at the last minute and jump on the train.
After about a minute, I could not see her on the platform. I therefore went through the passageway on the other platform and there she was: stationary, about three metres into the corridor that leads to the platform. I concluded from this that it was in order to give her the possibility to go on either of the platforms.
When she saw me, she started walking further down into the corridor. At this point I took a photograph. By then she was fairly close to me and said "what do you want from me?" to which I replied "You sad person!"
12 May 06 - 07h51 - Knightsbridge tube station
I then walked back to other platform and jumped on the train that had just arrived.
Comparing this with other situations when people are going about their business, I can definitely say that this was not the case. Considering the time that had elapsed, why was she still at the beginning of the corridor? Why was she stationary? There is absolutely nothing to look at - except white tiles.
Tuesday 16 May 2006 - 08h43
16 May 2006, 08h46 - Man, Trevor Place
On leaving Jefferson House at 08h35, I opted to do a little circuit to test whether I would be followed. Sure enough, I was.
I continued into Basil St alongside the back of Harrods. I then turned right into Hans Road , crossed Brompton Road and went into Montpellier St . I turned right at the top of Montpellier Sq - instead of turning left in Trevor place which I would do in order to get to the bus stop on Knightsbridge (A4), I turned right (hence going back in the direction of Brompton Road). Half way down the street, I crossed onto the other pavement and started to walk back up. I stopped about 10 metres down from the intersection i.e. Montpellier Sq and Trevor Place to observe whether anybody was coming
Within 30 seconds, a man arrived on the north side pavement of Montpellier Square - hence, from the direction from which I had arrived. As can be seen in the photographs, he was short-medium height c. 1.70m, early 30s, overweight, wearing white trainer trousers, dark blue blouson with two white lines on the upper part of the sleeves, a large, white marking on the back of the blouson with a name I did not note; light blue plimsolls with a white border around at the base. He seemed to me to be of Middle Eastern origin, perhaps Greek / Jewish.
As he was about to continue left into Trevor place, he noticed me. He turned his head round away from me for 2-3 seconds and again back to look at me, quiet intently. He did not expect to see me where I was. My 'internal radar' had switched on the minute I saw him.
As he did this for the second time, I made a rude gesture in his direction. By then, I had started to walk in the same direction as he was. He turned his head away from me for 3-4 seconds during which time he had taken another 2-3 steps. Evidently, his ego could not take this from a woman. He crossed the street in my direction coming within 1.5m of me - which led to the following exchange :
Him: "Why did you do that to me?"
Me: "Why are you looking at me like that? Why don't you just walk along? "
Him:"I live here and I look at what I want"
Me: "Oh really? Walk along then"
Him: "You are one of these mad women who. "
I could not make out what he said as, by then, he was walking back onto the other pavement. (Please note that on 19 April 2005, on my return from the office at 22h00, Andrew Ladsky was in the main entrance, talking to a woman.
He told me "You are mad" and to "go and see a psychiatrist".
Looks as though this is how Andrew Ladsky portrays me to his bunch of [ morally depraved , despicable, beneath contempt, scum ] [Note] (Subsequent note: Yep! Definitely how he portrays me to other people, including my employer- see My Diary 15 May 2008)
I continued walking in the same direction. As soon as the man had reached the other pavement (on which he had been) he started to talk on his mobile phone while he continued walking saying, in a very loud voice
"There is this woman, she is dressed all in black, she is mad, she has."
I did not hear what he said as, at the time I shouted across the street
"Yeah, come on! Report back to Ladsky! Report back to Ladsky!"
(1-2 passers-by witnessed this) Whereas, while he was talking loudly, his face remained straight ahead, as I was saying this he turned his face totally away from me. At the same time, he lowered his voice to such an extent that he looked as though he was whispering into the mobile phone.
He continued walking in the direction of Knightsbridge. I did to.
He was behaving like a trapped animal: pacing on the corner of Trevor Place and Knightsbridge, talking on his mobile phone. By then I was half way across the pedestrian crossing. I stood in the middle of it to observe him and switched my camera on. He was looking at me. I took a photograph.
By the time I did this, he had turned around by 45 degrees and was facing the way... he had come from! (Another photograph added to the growing collection). I finished crossing the street and headed towards the bus stop.
It is blatantly obvious that this man was following me.
Nobody going about their business would have behaved in this manner. Either they would have ignored me, or might have come and ask me what my problem was. They would then have continued on their way, perhaps thinking of me as a lunatic.
In addition, consider that IF a man has a burning need to immediately report to somebody that a woman has made a rude gesture at him, why start by giving the description of the woman? Surely, this is not the main event. It is clear that this man was reporting that he had identified me, and he did this using the description he had been given "she is dressed all in black."
His comment "she is mad" was likewise, a regurgitation of what he had been told - and very clearly, the source was Andrew Ladsky.
- Why did he immediately drop his voice after I shouted to him "Yeah, come on! Report back to Ladsky, report back to Ladsky!" ?
- Why did he then stay on the corner of Trevor Place and Knightsbridge pacing around like a trapped animal? Clearly, he was getting instructions as to what he should be doing next.
Oh well, good to start the day with a good laugh! Despicable, abhorrent, criminal scum! (Under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, it amounts to committing a criminal offence against me - as this is a continuation of the mentally deranged Ladsky having me followed.
While I viewed the event on 19 April 2005 as Ladsky implicating himself as being at least one of the parties behind my being followed and harassed, this event further confirms the link.
(This is in addition to another event: the malicious leak in my bathroom on 18 August 2005. Confirmation that it was caused maliciously is supported by the fact that Martin Russell Jones gave itself ONE WEEK "to investigate". (It was preceded, ten days previously by a leak in my bedroom - which I also view as a malicious act.
And, of course, to all of these, must be added my experience with:
It is not surprising that criminals show complete and utter contempt for
they see that they provide no help whatsoever
to the victims of crime. In other words: the
authorities give the green light to the
criminals to do exactly as they please - as evidenced by the conduct of Kensington & Chelsea Police.
For the same reason, the
victims also end-up with the same complete
and utter contempt for the system. I know I
As I wrote in my 6
April 2005 letter to Michael
leader of the Conservative party
Party views that there is increasingly lack
of respect to society. I agree with you. Where
does the blame lay Mr Howard?
Four years ago, 'I
had' respect for society, government and the
Where do you think I stand
now considering the treatment
I have received from the above mentioned
breeds contempt and lack
of respect breeds lack of respect"
One of my contacts said: "This society
is heading towards meltdown" I
agree with him.
Note at early Aug 06 -
The 'meltdown' is gaining speed. See
the extracts from the press articles captured
in the latter part of 1 August 2006 entry
Note at Dec 10 - An Indy journalist concluded in an article : "Britannia as she was burns, burns, down". I agree with her.
Saturday 27 May 2006 - 01h15 a.m.
And the harassment and attempts
at trying to intimidate me continue.
I left the office
after 1 a.m. As I was by the bus stop,
I noticed a dark blue, Fiat people carrier I
had seen previously. (This type of car
is used by some mini-cab drivers) ('mini-cab' as opposed
to 'black cabs'). The driver was of African
origin, in his 30s. The number
plate starts with 'LM05'.
Going in the direction of Aldwych, he initially
drove past me at a slow speed, like curb-crawling.
About 80m up, he made a U-turn and looked as
though he was about to park. He did not. He
continued driving again at a very slow speed. Having
gone past me, he made another U-turn and,
driving in curb-crawling style, ended-up
stopping in front of me.
He remained there for about 4-5 minutes, mobile
phone in hand. As buses were coming, he curb-crawled
further up for about 60 metres and stopped. It
took another 10 minutes for the bus I wanted
to arrive. He remained in the same place
during that time. As I boarded
the bus, he drove off. He turned
into Chancery Lane .
My guess is that his interest was in me. Given
the sequence of events, he could not have been
a driver waiting for a passenger in Fleet Street.
He certainly was not looking to find a street
number / name of building. Furthermore, by turning
into Chancery Lane - which is a one-way street
- he will have ended up a long distance away
from Fleet Street. Also, why, having spent a
good 10 minutes parked further up from the bus
stop, did he leave precisely at the time that
I boarded the bus?
I started off this entry by stating that I had
seen this car previously. Before going
into the detail, there is something I have not
already captured in My Diary. It is the fact
that I have frequently noticed upon leaving
the office (over many months) that an Addison Lee people carrier
is parked in the street that is at the
end of the street in which my office is located. Practically
every time, the car has departed within
seconds of my coming out of the office.
About 2-3 weeks ago, I returned
to the flat using the underground to Sloane Square
. It must have been around 23h45. Walking
up Sloane Street , as I was about to cross Ellis
St I saw a people carrier. It was stopped in
the middle of the street, close to the junction
with Sloane Street but not in a position as if
the driver was looking for traffic before making
a manoeuvre. The car was too far away for that.
The driver was of African
origin, late 20s-early 30s and looked
at me quiet intently.
My 'internal radar' switched on. As he was showing
so much interest in me, I decided to do the same
to him. I went around the car, noted the number
plate and the make. I then proceeded to walk
on the other pavement. The driver was still looking
I turned right into Sloane Street . As I arrived
at the next street, Cadogan Place , I saw a car
parked about 25 metres down, with its lights
on. As with many other events captured in this
diary, I cannot explain why but my 'internal
radar' prompted me to walk in the direction of
the car. I stopped about 7 metres before reaching
the car and noted the make and the number plate. The driver
was a man, of African origin, late-20s-early
I then continued walking on the pavement, past
the car. After I had walked 3-4 metres past the
car, the driver flashed his
ignored him and continued walking alongside the
width of the square and then alongside its length,
on Cadogan Place, until I reached the Carlton
Tower. While I had been walking, the man had
driven past me. When I reached the top
of the square, I turned left in the direction
of Sloane Street . About two-thirds of the way
down I saw the car parked alongside
the pavement on which I was walking.
I then had no doubt that
his interest was in me. As I went past the car, I made a rude gesture.
I then crossed the street a few metres up from
the car. As I was about half-way across the street,
the driver flashed the lights
I turned around and made a rude gesture accompanied
by 'un-lady like' language.
When I came in the block, I also made a rude
gesture in the direction of the hidden camera.
What despicable scum ! Ladsky's [
morally depraved , despicable , beneath contempt, scum ] [Note] as I am now calling them. These
are the 'type 1' scum ] [Note].
It is my impression that
'type 2' i.e. the type I
believe to be connected with the police / ex.
policemen , has
disappeared from 'the scene' since the
end of March 2006 . If so, they will
have spent seven months following
me around. Yet again, I emphasise that
I have NO EVIDENCE of a connection with
the police .
I am just reporting my impressions. Hence,
I may be wrong... and I very much hope
that I am.
Under the Sunday 15 January 2006 entry, I wrote
that I was wondering whether I might have been
reported to the police for suspicious acting.
maybe after seven months the 'penny
has finally dropped' that those who reported
me - rather than I - are the threats .
Note at 20 June 2006: NO, 'the
penny has NOT dropped'.
Friday 16 June 2006
While I have the satisfaction of having 'hit
back hard' at 'the enemy' in recent weeks, I
nonetheless have days when I feel utter
despair, days when I have to make a very
big effort to fight back the tears that are
so often close to overflowing.
I am spending in the region
of 40 hours per week on project nightmare - on
top of my working week. 've got to finish
it. I must launch the site. Dealing
with the 10 February 2006 "notice" from
Portner and Jaskel, the Land
the ICAEW has significantly eaten into
my website development time. I anticipated
that I would be finished by now. Getting
there but, still some way to go.
IT IS SO DEMORALISING.
of my horrendous, nightmare struggle,
soon going into year five, makes
me think that what I am doing
must be the equivalent of climbing
Mount Everest .
However, in this case, I am doing
it ALL BY MYSELF .
There is not anybody close to
me to give me support, to spur
me on, to come to my rescue as
I am about to lose my grip, to
guide me so that I can continue
The majority of the feedback is: 'stop,
get out of there, you won't make
it. You are fighting the system
and they are all corrupt'.
Consequently, I have essentially stopped talking
about 'project nightmare' 'with meaning' - a
long time ago to all but a very few people.
Also, I do not see why I should take
on the role of the fugitive i.e. act as though
I am in the wrong, I am the criminal.
It seems that the penny drops when I reply: "Do
you want to buy my flat?" "Also,
will you write me a cheque for all that I have
lost?" But, what's the point? The
net effect is that it wastes my precious
energy, as well as demoralises me even
Not being able to share what I am REALLY going
through, means that I must draw on my internal
strength to, among others, help me keep up 'a
front'. 'Off-site' I sometime allow the tears
of despair to flow... which I then stop by summing
up anger. (Actually, I don't even have somewhere
I can really cry!)
The support I get is all at 'base camp' - from
which they cannot see, nor feel what I am going
through. I sometime try to explain the terrible
loneliness on this horrendous journey, the 'desolation
of the landscape' from the feeling of utter abandonment
and isolation, the tremendous on-going internal
strength that it requires to keep going in the
face of the constant rejection and pushback wherever
I have turned to for assistance - not to mention
the ongoing harassment and fear for my safety
- but it is impossible for anybody to comprehend.
You have to go through it yourself to REALLY
If I let go from where I am, I will
go down the precipice.
website is my last hope - and I am
close to finishing it, I am therefore getting
close to the top of ' Mount Everest'.
I don't know what I will find
when I get there.
But I know how I will feel: UNBELIEVABLY
PROUD OF MYSELF.
This, on its own, is worth the
still being in the valley with
no self-esteem, full of self-loathing
and preparing for the 'final
because, at my age, I do not
have the option of being able
to build back significant savings
and I am not prepared to live
in abject poverty in my old age.
I have known days of not
eating as a child because there
was no money to buy food. I would
rather die than experience this
kind of poverty again.
Maybe once I reach the top, I
will have to consider this 'final
step' but at least I will be able
to say: I have done ABSOLUTELY
EVERYTHING I COULD... as I have
gone to the utter limits.
And if I am
reduced to taking this 'final
the big deal? I
do not want to live in a world
which, after doing all of what
I have done, is still not prepared
to take action to ensure I get
justice and redress.
To quote Che Guevara "I
would rather die standing up,
than live life on my knees"
One of my cousins has also made me realise that
my 'war' has gone beyond my case when she
recently asked me: "If
you won several million pounds on the
lottery now, would you still continue
Without any hesitation, I replied "YES"
At the risk of sounding 'self-important', (which
is certainly not the intention), I
feel that I have a moral duty to use my now very
well documented experience to expose what is
going on in the leasehold sector in its widest
sense (i.e. including
the surrounding infrastructure of courts and
tribunals, lawyers, managing agents, etc.).
- an 84 year-old man lose his
flat as a result of the forfeiture
- an 83 year-old woman being dragged
through the courts for non-payment
of her service charges -
I KNOW I HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.
So, I am going to continue
the climb... no matter what...
...ALL THE WAY TO THE
...and after that?
literally: 'GOD ONLY KNOWS'
Saturday 17 June 2006 - 23h54 - Another scum tracking me. This one I assume to have been sent by Ladsky
On leaving the office, I went through some back streets and alleys in order to reach Fleet St at a point closer to Aldwych to take a bus. (In case a[ scum ] [Note] was parked near my 'usual' bus stop).
I was thus on the left hand side pavement. About 30 metres from reaching the law courts, I noticed a man, on the other pavement, walking in the same direction as me, at a slow pace. He was about 1.85m, late 20s/early 30s, wearing a white T-shirt with 2 lines of text, in black, on the front of the T-shirt. The end of the first line terminated with 'RAM ME' and the second line with '13' followed by a space and a letter followed by the letter 'M'.
My 'internal radar' got on 'alert' leading me to observe him from the corner of my eye and to notice that he was looking in my direction on 2-3 occasions. There was something about him I did not like. I therefore decided to stop to see what he was going to do next.
By then he was close to the alley (Bell Yard) alongside the law courts. This is a particularly dark alley, with a telephone booth about 3 metres up from the start of the entrance. He walked down the alley, past the telephone booth, and for a further c. 2 metres. At that point, he stopped and turned round.
I was still planted there looking in his direction.
He was very clearly at a loss as to what he should be doing next.
17 Jun 06 - 23h54 - By Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London
No, he was not behaving as though he was looking for his way, as he was not looking at anything in particular.
He was just loitering around, looking shifty.
He walked back down to Fleet Street, and then crossed the street in my direction. I had switched on my camera (which I always carry on a chain around my neck) the minute I saw him leaving the other pavement. As he was about 2.5 metres from me, I took a photograph. This led him to turn back and to walk back towards the other pavement. He did not say anything to me.
Seeing him that close, led me to conclude that he was of Middle-Eastern origin, quite possibly Jewish. The stubbles on his face indicated that he had not shaved at least since early on that day.
Having captured 'the evidence', I went in the nearby 24 hr grocery store in which I spent about 3-4 minutes.
When I came out, I saw that the man was about 80m further up, or c. 25-30 metres past the law courts. He still looked as though he was loitering around.
Instead of going to my other 'usual' bus stop (half way up Aldwych) I opted to go to the nearest one, immediately after the turning. A bus arrived within 30 seconds. I jumped on it and sat in such a way that my head would barely be seen from outside the bus.
My conclusion: this man was not only interested in my movements, he was about to approach me as well and did not expect my taking a photograph which led him to turn away, back on the other pavement.
Apart from 2-3 occasions which I am not sure about, over the previous days I had the impression that the 'type 1'[ scum ] [Note] were off my back. Clearly not ('Type 2' 'appear' to me to still be off-the-scene)
Note at 20 June: No, 'type 2' are still on my back.
Tuesday 20 June 2006 - 08h08 and 09h17 - More scum tracking me
I had a dentist appointment, locally, at 08h15. I left the flat in plenty of time in case I had 'a [scum ] [Note] in tow' so that I could give him/her a bit of a run around.
As I walked down Hans Crescent , I turned back on two occasions to see who was behind me. My 'internal radar' 'locked' on one man in particular. He was about 25m behind me. Short, light blue shirt, dark beige trousers, brown suede-like trainers, red and black rucksack. He wore a baseball like type cap. He appeared to be in his mid 30's.
The appearance and the body language reminded of many of the [scum ] [Note] who, I believe, have been following me around e.g. 15 January 2006 when I was by the river; the driver on 25 December 2005. Yet, at the same time I could not decide whether he was a 'type 1' or 'type 2'.
20 Jun 06 - 09h17 - Motcomb St
To help me verify 'my information', instead of turning right on Sloane St (as I should have done), I turned left and walked up for about 25 metres. At that point, I crossed Sloane Street . 'That man' had reached Sloane Street and had turned right. He was about 8 metres from the corner with Hans Crescent . I walked in the same direction while looking in his direction.
After about one minute, he turned round, and then walked back into Hans Crescent.
At that point, I ran across the street into Hans Crescent and, after a few metres, took a photograph.
As I was coming out of the dentist after c. 09h10, I saw a man positioned on the other pavement, facing in my direction and, at the same time, who started to cross the street, in the process taking a cigarette out of a pack. About 1.70m in height, he was in his late / early 30's, unpleasant, nasty looking 'I am a tough guy' type of body language, with a very arrogant, smug air about him.
He conjured up to me a 'type 2' i.e. somebody connected with the police / previously connected with the police. As I have stated in other such instances: "Of course, I may be wrong. I am just capturing my impressions".
Blondish hair, cut very short. He wore a 'whitish' T-Shirt, with dark blue sleeves, elbow length. The number '28' was written in large, dark blue letters on the front of the T-shirt. His trousers were dark blue. He wore white trainers.
The instant I saw him, my 'internal radar' switched on. I therefore back-tracked in the entrance by about one metre, pretending to search for something in my bag, in order to test whether my 'internal information' was correct: if the man was going about his business, by the time I had finished rummaging in my bag, he would be some distance away.
As I came out after about one minute, he was still only a few metres away - being held up by a lorry that was reversing into a courtyard. I opted to stop on the pavement to observe what he would do once the pavement was free.
He remained exactly where he was.
A man, who was in the process of closing the gates after the lorry, looked at him with a puzzled look i.e. wondering what prevented him from continuing on his way.
My assumption is that he was waiting for me to go past him.
At that point, I switched on my camera and, after about 30 seconds, crossed the street onto the other pavement. By the time I came to his height, the man had positioned himself against the gates that had just been closed and was looking at me. At that point, I took a photograph.
Having got 'my evidence', I continued on my way, in the process doing a little circuit that led me, among others, to take a different bus to the office.
Like a number of my other photographs, by the evening, I had sent it to various people outside of the UK (in case something happens to me and because I do not trust the British police to take the 'appropriate' action)
(Subsequent note: HOW RIGHT I WAS!) - and until I can give them the latest update of all my development documents with the c. 850 PDF documents, plus the c. 200 photographs. (Today's technology is wonderful: all of these on a tiny little memory card, or CD-ROM!)
22 June 2006
This morning I had a doctor's appointment. At
08h50, I took the underground from Knightsbridge
and got off at Piccadilly Circus in order to
take the Bakerloo line. However, rather follow
the direction to the Bakerloo line, from the
Piccadilly line platform, I opted to go through
the 'Way out'. From the corridor, I then
took a short cut to the Bakerloo line.
Instead of going on the platform, I remained
in the passage way at the height of the junction
with the platform. After about 1.5 minutes, a
man, c. 1.60m, mid-30s, of Indian / possibly
Sri Lankan origin, dressed in very ordinary clothes,
came and positioned himself barely half a metre
away from me i.e. on the platform, immediately
round the corner from where I was.
My 'internal radar switched on'. Although I
had not looked at the platform, it seemed
to me to be quite deserted. This closeness
to me was not what most people would do. He
was looking at a newspaper.
A train arrived. I walked towards it and positioned
myself in such a way as to indicate that I was
intending on taking this train. The man also
walked to the train, positioning himself about
.5m from a door one down from where I was (same
carriage). There were quite a lot of people coming
out. After about 7 seconds, I walked away in
the direction of the back of the platform meandering
my way across people.
The man was still in the same position. More
people were still coming out of the carriage.
The platform was very busy, with people coming
out of the train leading them to walk about 4-5
abreast. I walked alongside them, against
the wall and, after about 5 seconds, darted across
them to get on the train. The doors were about
to close as I did this. The man made a move to
get on the train but he did not have enough time
to do this.
Given what took place, I know that this
man was following me.
Had he been 'just a commuter', he would have
gone into the carriage in fact, before I could
have done as fewer people used the door by which
he was standing.
I am not sure whether this man was a 'type 1'
or 'type 2'.
Saturday 1 July 2006 - My three-year ongoing
battle with the Royal Mail
In May 2003, I reported in My Diary that I had
set-up a PO Box to ensure I receive my mail.
To this entry, I added a note covering 2005 and
2006, saying that the service proved to be particularly
unreliable leading me to file several complaints,
eventually to the CEO.
I was not going to include my battle with the
Royal Mail, mainly because the replies acknowledge
the content of my letters i.e. have been read,
as well as communicate genuine empathy, understanding
and determination to address the issue. A
first for me - on all counts - not only
from a public sector department, but also from
anybody I have approached since the start of
However, the unreliability of the service is
continuing and is causing me a lot of anxiety.
This week, I found three letters delivered to
the block: two were left in the entrance; one
was put through the letter box in my flat. It
led me to write my
third letter to the CEO. The reply was
again very apologetic - and I can tell that
it is sincere. Let's hope that with
the measures I am told have been put in place
all of my mail will be kept in the PO Box.
Note in August 2006: Well, whatever has been
done is not enough as some of my post still
keeps being delivered to the block.
Another subsequent note : it got a lot worse in October 2006 and in November 2006 (2 November ) - leading me to contact Postwatch (Doc library # 5.8)
Saturday 8 July 2006 - midday - Electricity
to my flat cut-off
As I spotted 'something' on my way back to the
flat at c. 2h45 a.m., I opted to do one of my
little 'circuits' leading me to arrive at the
flat around 4 a.m. I like that time as daylight
starts appearing, making me feel more secure. Sure
enough, I slept more or less straight through
After I had put the kettle on, had a coffee
and did some hand washing in the kitchen, as
I went to the (windowless) bathroom, I discovered
that the electricity had been cut off. The lights
were still on in the corridor. Hence, it was
not a general power cut - only in my
flat . A long time ago, when there had
been a problem with a fuse, it had led it to
pop out. This has not happened today.
While I will try to determine whether it is
caused by a malfunction, my suspicion
is that the electricity supply to my flat has
been intentionally cut-off.
Last year, I mentioned this possibility in My
Diary. Conscious of this, I am well equipped:
candles, head light and torch.
Funnily enough, what kept me working until nearly
3 a.m. this morning, was an analysis
of the electricity consumption Martin
Russell Jones claim I have been using
during the period 17 January 2006 to
2 June 2006. As
you can see from my analysis, I believe
that it is a rip-off . Hence, continuation
of the on-going rip off on electricity
charges (see Martin
Russell Jones '(47) An on-going 'rip-off'
with electricity charges' - as well as
my Witness Statement, towards the end)
I certainly have no intention of paying it.
As you can also see from my analysis, if
need be, I can survive in the flat without
electricity. In case my flat is bugged, I communicated this
in no uncertain terms before I left the flat,
as well as with a rude hand gesture towards the
spy camera in the entrance, on my way out. No
doubt, I am going to be further 'punished' for
Sunday 9 July 2006 - 04h30 a.m.
This is the time at which I came back to the
flat. I wish I did not have to go back to that
hellhole. I feel so anxious given past events
with the police .
I was expecting the electricity to still be
cut off. To my surprise, the electricity
was back on in my flat . Hence,
without my needing to do anything .
What will it be next? Cutting off the
water supply to my flat?
A few days later: my fridge has stopped working.
I do not know whether the failure has been caused
by the on-going switching on and off of the electricity
supply to my flat. (On several days, when I came
back, I saw from my electric alarm clock that
the electricity had been cut-off prior to my
return). It does not matter. I
have stopped buying food to leave in the
flat a long time ago. Hence, I do not need the
w/c 3 July 2006 - And another invoice, this
time for £8,621 (US$15,200)
This electricity invoice was hand-delivered
to my flat this week, with another invoice
which states a "brought
forward balance" of £8,621 (US$15,200) . As
with the prior invoices received in January 2006, and in October 2004 and November 2004 (none of
which I have paid): no explanation
as to the composition of the sum.
It represents an additional £2,995 (US$5,281)
relative to 9
January 2006 i.e. 5.5 months previously.
FOR WHAT??? Revenge for my 17
May 2006 letter to the Institute of Chartered
Accountants, and its follow-up of 24
May 2006 to Pridie Brewster? (See section
Brewster for detail)
If this is meant to be the half yearly service
charge, it is nearly FOUR TIMES the
amount contained in the fraudulent "estimate
of expenditure" for the period 25 Dec
06 - 23 Jun 06 where it is stated as £814.62
(Among others, this "estimated expenditure" is FRAUDULENT as,
since 31 January 2006, a superior headlessor, Lavagna
Enterprises Limited has been added, and
controls the last floor. (See Owners
identity and Pridie
Brewster for detail))
My half yearly service charge BEFORE the:
(1) the addition of FOUR NEW FLATS, including
a penthouse flat that spans the whole length
and width of the top floor; (2) the complete
overhaul of Jefferson House as £680 (US$1,200)
What is the amount 'deemed' by Mr Ladsky
et. al. to be currently hanging over
my head? £15,500 (US$27,300)(?), £14,500 (US$25,600)(?), £5,625 (US$9,900)(?), £8,621 (US$15,200)(?)
or all four combined i.e. £44,246 (US$78,000)?
What else is going to be dropped on
me 'with the compliments of Mr Ladsky et. al.
and their aides'? What will they
think of tomorrow? Sending me an invoice for £20,000
(US$35,000)? And what about the day after tomorrow?
Will they wake up thinking that it would 'be
fun' to send me an invoice for £30,000
(US$53,000)? £40,000 (US$70,500)? £50,000
Wednesday 12 July 2006 - ICAEW
I was not going to waste anymore of my time
with the ICAEW (see 'Beginning of May 2006 - Dealings
with the ICAEW). However, not wanting to have
any regrets later on, saying "maybe I should
have" , I am opting to use up some of my
time to provide the ICAEW with additional background
Since my 6
June 2006 letter, I have received an acknowledgement ,
followed by another
letter to inform me that the caseworker
was due to go to Pridie Brewster's office
on 19 July. I took this opportunity to provide
the caseworker with yet, more
background information , including
the above invoice of £8,621 (US$15,200).
As previously, I provided copy of documents
as supporting evidence.
To me, the evidence I have supplied to the ICAEW
and its member would suggest that the Fraud Squad
should be called in. However, that's MY logic!
I have received an acknowledgement dated 18
July 2006 . addressed to my PO Box = one
objective inally achieved!
(See beginning of September for the final reply
from the ICAEW)
During July 2006
continue to be followed by the
[morally depraved , despicable, beneath contempt, scum and lowlife] [Note] ...
...and it seems to be
on a daily basis
The cost must now be running in
the hundreds of thousands...
...considering also that, as I
am out of the flat for 15+ hours
per day, two shifts are required,
and they need to be substantial
as, most days, I continue to treat
them to my 'little circuits': changing
direction, means of transport,
stopping dead in my tracks and
turning round to observe what is
behind me, etc.
I am not capturing events as I
want to get on with the site, but
I do take the occasional photograph
20 July 2006 - 23h56
Yes, I continue to be under 24 / 7 surveillance.
Just before midnight, as I was getting close
to the bus stop on Ludgate Hill, near the corner
of New Bridge st, my 'internal radar' locked
onto a man: in his 50s, overweight, maybe
of Jewish / Greek origin , dressed in
dark blue polo shirt, dark trousers, sport type
As I looked in his direction, he started
to behave like a lost [scum ] [Note], not
sure as to what he should be doing. He was
looking in my direction, in a shifty way, every
5-10 seconds while pacing up and down within
a c. three-metre area. Seeing his behaviour,
led me to switch on my camera and to take a
Some cars, including a taxi, stopped due to
the traffic light. He spoke to the taxi
driver. However, once the taxi had departed, he
remained where he was, looking clearly
at a loss as to what his next move should
be. He continued pacing while still looking
at me - and
away, and so forth. After about two minutes,
he turned round and went back down to
Ludgate Circus, turning left onto Bridge
St . As he did this, he again
looked in my direction.
Another one who has obviously missed
out on some training! Criminal scum! (A
'criminal' - like the others - under the
from Harassment Act 1997)
Tuesday 25 July 2006 - after 1 a.m.
On my way back to the 'hellhole', I took
the bus and instead of getting off at one
of my 'frequent' stops on Piccadilly, I
got off one stop earlier, at Trafalgar sq. This
got the 'troops' off-guard - at
least three men, close to the corner Regent
st and Pall Mall.
I planted myself in their line of vision for
several minutes in Walter Place as I was talking
on my mobile. They were pacing on the pavement,
looking in my direction. One of them was in his
late 20s-early 30s. The other two were in their
The younger one in particular was pacing on
the pavement coming to the corner with
Pall Mall . On one occasion, as he went back-up
Regent St , he went out of my view into
a door recess (which entailed walking up about
4 steps). However, it was clear that the conversation
was continuing with the other man who was closest
to him on the pavement. The one on the
pavement was looking in my direction.
Having seen 'the show', I continued walking
on Pall Mall for a few meters in the direction
of St James St and then crossed the street.
At that point, I stopped, resting against one
the buildings' railing. But
the show continued:
the younger man had again walked back on the
corner of Regent St and Pall Mall and was looking
in my direction. By then, we were about 50 metres
man went past me, looking at me quite intently. I think that from the look on my face,
he knew what I was thinking.
I then continued towards the direction of the
hellhole, improvising on my route, as
well as making quite a few stops, just
to keep the [ rejects from the sewer; beneath contempt, lowlife] [Note] occupied.
I assume that troops being on duty in the early
hours of the morning (2 a.m.) must be more
More drain on the piggy bank.
Wednesday 26 July 2006 - c. 21h15
the office 'early' for me. In the
grocery store, by Sloane Square, man,
English origin, blond, early 30s,
c.1.83m came into the shop very shortly
after me. He
spent ALL of the c.12 minutes I was
in the store to 'study' the text
on 1-2 soup containers (he was also
talking on his mobile phone at the
same time) - eventually coming out
of the store, 15 seconds after me...
I had positioned myself in a slight
recess, at the end of the frontage
of the shop. As he went by I engaged
in my little song ('smells
like a [reject from the sewer] [ Note] , looks like a [reject from the sewer] [ Note], got
to be a [reject from the sewer] [ Note]') (He did
not look at me as I said this)
(On leaving the block in the morning
I had also done one of my 'little
Thursday 27 July 2006 - 08h10
08h10, on leaving the block: as they
don't know which way I am going to
go, the [morally depraved , evil scum ] [Note] are positioned
in the streets around the block.
(My strategy is working!)
To ensure they had something interesting
to report to their paymasters,
I treated them to one of my circuits
(going down one way, turning back
half way, going back where I had
was a small army around! Some
of which also got the benefit
of my little song 'smells
like a [a reject from the sewer ] [Note] , looks like a [a reject from the sewer ] [Note],
got' to be a [a reject from the sewer ] [Note]. I also
took a photograph: Caucasian
male, early 30s, tattoos on his
left forearm and,
it seems, his right
polo shirt, gym like trousers,
trainers. He was resting against
the rail on the pavement by Harrods,
tube exit side.
Caucasian, overweight, in
his 40s, who
had come from the back of
Harrods, walking behind me
on Brompton Rd, had
also made a U-turn
when I did. He was looking
at me. He looked to me like he
could be a 'cop' (As
I have said on numerous occasions
previously: there are my
I may be wrong)
I left the office around 23h00. After doing
a little circuit to confuse 'the troops',
I ended-up walking alongside the river
up to Westminster, continued to Victoria
station and decided to walk all the way
back. The troops were out
in force: all shapes and sizes.
Close to the flat, I was standing in a recess
along the frontage of a bank. A woman
who had been walking behind me for a while,
at the same very leisurely pace went by. As
one car with a male driver went
passed her, he hooted.
(He had not seen me) Without going into details:
I assumed he was one of the troops signaling
As I reached Sloane Street, the woman had gone
down Sloane St for about 60m - at the height
of the bus stop and was about to get into a taxi. (It
could not have been the case that she had given
up waiting for the bus because she was in a hurry
considering: (1) the pace at which she
had been walking; (2) if she wanted a taxi, several
went by from the time she went past me).
A man, possibly late 20s,
early 30s, wearing
a white shirt, was close to her i.e. at the bus
stop. I stepped off the pavement to show
that I was observing events. The man was looking
in my direction. As I was doing this, a
man, short, unpleasant looking (out of a Hitchcock's
movie) , wearing a suit and carrying
a battered briefcase had positioned himself on
the corner of Cadogan Place and Sloane Street
i.e. a few metres from me.
I crossed Sloane Street and observed him from
the other pavement. He walked towards the direction
of Sloane Square for a few metres. He then stopped,
positioning himself alongside the railing of
the garden while facing it. After about
30 seconds, he lit up a cigarette. He then continued
walking in the direction of Sloane Square . The
man in the white shirt continued looking
in my direction.
I headed towards the hellhole.
w/c 24 July 2006
I cannot remember the day, I think it was Tuesday
25 July, or maybe Thursday 27 July, when I arrived
in the flat I found a letter that has been pushed
through my letter box. There was no stamp on
the envelop i.e. it had been hand-delivered. It
contained an invoice from Martin Russell Jones,
June 2006 i.e. five weeks previously .
Under w/c 3 July 2006, I recorded that I had
received an invoice stating a " Brought
forward balance" of £8,621 (US$15,200).
To this was added an electricity charge of £44.34.
By comparison this latest invoice does not
include the electricity charge. Also some
of the "brought forward balance" has
Another piece of evidence against Martin
Sunday 30 July 2006 - from 12h30
the flat around 12h30 pm, I did a
little circuit in the local area
to determine whether I was being
followed. I identified
a [scum ] [Note]: female, mid-late
20s, short, blond hair in a ponytail,
sports trousers and trainers. By
then I had come out of Hans Crescent
and had turned right on Sloane St
. She was behind me and looking
so obvious to me that I could not
fail to notice her.
Having walked for about 20 metres in a purposeful
way i.e. as though I was really intending
to go in the direction of Sloane Sq, I made a
sharp 45 degree turn and crossed Sloane St onto
the other pavement. Having walked for about 5
metres, I stopped and turned to see where she
was in the process of crossing the road. She
saw that I was looking in her direction.
She stopped alongside a shop window as though
she was looking in but, her body language communicated
that her attention was in my direction.
I remained where I was. As she went past me
I said "Oh so confused!" (I missed
the opportunity: I should have said 'Ladsky's
[scum ] [Note]). She looked at me and asked whether
I was talking to her. I replied no, that I was
not. She continued in the direction of
the top of Sloane Street. I followed her, walking
about 10 metres behind. At some point,
I could no longer see the woman. I assumed she
had turned right into the street that leads to
Lowndes Square. I could not see her.
I know, reading this as an outsider, I would
say "that does not come across to me as somebody
following you" . All I can say is that,
I know from my 'internal radar' that this woman
was following me. And I have come to trust my 'internal
radar' even more since the start of project nightmare.
I then walked across Hyde Park in the direction
of Marble Arch. Two-thirds of the way up I turned
left and walked quite a distance in the direction
of Lancaster Gate. I then went out of the park
and back tracked my way towards Edgware Rd through
the back streets. My destination was the Lebanese
juice bar and shop on Edgware Rd to which I have
been going over the last 3-4 weekends.
I was having my drink in the juice
bar, standing up, fairly close to
the entrance I saw a man walk
past. He immediately triggered my 'internal
He was about 1.80m, English
origin, very short, blond hair.
His face was fat and red, the
colour that some people with
very white skin get from going
in the sun and being unable to
tan properly. He had an extremely
arrogant, smug air about him; the
type of look that some people
adopt to counteract a massive
chip on their shoulder.
My 'internal radar' switched on and, as he looked
at me, it brought a sneer on my face (at the
time I was drinking my juice by means of a straw). He
continued on his way but, his ego could not cope
with what I had done, as he walked back
past the juice bar a few seconds later desperately
trying to get my attention. I purposely
did not look at him. He was really behaving like
a [fool] [Note]. After a few seconds of his idiotic
behaviour, he went out of my view, having gone
back in the direction of Marble Arch.
Once I finished my drink, I did the second part
of my last three weekends' ritual: going to the
Lebanese grocery store on the corner to buy some
food to take with me to the office.
As I was being served at the counter two
men arrived. One was tall
c. 1.87m, the other very short by
comparison. I know I have seen the
tall one before. I think he was in
the driver seat of the cream coloured
BMW when I came out of the hotel
on Sunday 28 August 2005.
I also 'think' (not sure) that it was
the same man I saw on 5 August 2005 at
the bus stop on Sloane Street. Consequently,
radar' switched on. Although, to be more
precise, it had switched on a few seconds
earlier, which led me to look at them.
What further activated 'my radar' is that the
short one was looking at me from behind
the tall one as if he was studying me. That
was enough confirmation for me. When I left
the shop I started my little song 'smells
like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note] , looks like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note].'
I crossed the road, heading towards Marble Arch.
After a few metres, I noticed that the man
who had backtracked when I was in the juice
on the other side of a telephone box, as
though he was trying to hide from me.
He stayed like that until I reached the
At that point he started
to walk in a straight line towards to
me. I was ready: I
gave him the benefit of my little song 'smells
like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note], looks like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note]' as I continued
walking. I continued to the bus stop from
which I took a bus to the office.
have absolutely no doubt in my
mind that I am being followed.
It is equally obvious to me that
a lot of resources are being used
to do this - which means that a
lot of money is being spent, considering
as well the length of time that
this has been going on.
Who is paying for this?
(Subsequent note - Answer: in part the taxpayer)
Fair minded, reasonable visitor to the site,
as an outsider - and depending on what you have
already looked at on this site - you may be thinking
that I have become paranoid.
In my defence, I draw your attention to other
instances in My Diary of what I consider
as evidence of my being followed e.g.; 16
July 2005 ; 5
August 2005 ; 26
August 2005 ; 25
December 2005 ; 4 January
2006; 15 January 2006; 19
16 May 2006 - and
the two instances for which I have a witness:
1 June 2005
The events I have reported in My Diary are what I have observed i.e. what I saw with my eyes.
I swear to this over my Grand-Mother's grave - the person I have most loved in my life.
Admittedly, some people might give a different interpretation to some of the events.
However, when looked at in their totality, I believe that any fair minded, reasonable person
would likewise agree that I am definitely being
followed / observed.
I also draw your attention to the following
black on white evidence example: TWO AND
A HALF YEARS BEFORE the works started,
February 2002 , I wrote to Joan Hathaway,
Russell Jones, that I "believe that
the proposed appointment of these companies
is connected with the planning application.to
build a penthouse flat"
When I persisted with this, it
was followed by repeated denials: 26
March 2002 , 30
August 2002 , 13
December 2002 and 4
March 2003 . You only have to look
at the banner for the site, of which
the photographs are reproduced below,
to see that I was right.
To remind you, fair minded, reasonable visitor
to the site: what is the root cause of all of
Ladsky et. al. and their aides deciding
that I (and other leaseholders) would
be made to pay for this: the construction of a penthouse apartment, addition of three other apartments and related works - for which WE
ARE NOT LIABLE.
This pack (2.3MB) and this pack (1.1MB) provide 'black on white' evidence that this was the plan. As to the pay-off, it is evidenced by the block sale of flats in the latter part of 2006, beginning of 2007 which, of course, are in addition to the sale of the penthouse flat BGL 54 458 for £3.9 million (US$6.9 million) in December 2005, etc.
...and the 'corrupt' (at best, in the sense
depraved" ) system giving them its full
And now 'the system' is in panic mode
(?) . It has hardly ever come across
somebody like me and is very worried about
the 'boomerang' effect of all the black on
white evidence I have accumulated over the
years against the various parties. This is
the only explanation I can come up with.
NO, no other reason. I am NOT a criminal
and do not engage in any criminal act -
not even leaving litter in the street. I
have done nothing wrong. I am an ordinary,
law abiding individual who works for
a living, declares all of her income and consequently
pays all the taxes that she is due to
pay - WHO IS THE VICTIM OF ORGANIZED CRIME.
Although I have limited financial means (very
seriously depleted as a result of this
very traumatic, horrendous nightmare) and
no influential connections, it
does not follow that I will let myself be trampled
on by corrupt people in an equally corrupt
environment. When I
wrote to the then leader of the Conservative
party "I will fight like a demon to the
very end. If my flat is going to lead me to
draw the last breath out of my body.
So be it" - I meant it.
It takes a super-human effort to keep
myself afloat. I force myself to
laugh and sing to counteract the tears that
are constantly on the brink of overflowing
and to stop myself from fast rolling down the
abyss. I guess you could say that I
am practising Neuro-Linguistic Programming
(NLP): if you keep on feeding positive thoughts
to your mind, you end-up feeling positive.
This is what I aim for - in spite of the horrendous
conditions under which I am living.
Today, in The
Independent newspaper, I was reading the
diary of a lady in Beirut . My heart went out
to her as I fully understood what she was going
She lives in
fear of being killed: so do I. (Some people try to reassure
me by saying that "if 'they' wanted to kill
you, 'they' would have done it a long time ago" .
Well, maybe, maybe not - as, if 'they' do, it
seems to me they won't have much to worry about
from the British police)
Her life is
in ruin: so is mine.
She had plans
to do things which she can no longer do: same thing for me. She says that nobody consulted her on interfering
with her life, going about her business: ditto
She sees people
around her dying: I
too in a way see that, but it is not physical
death. It is done through a torture process
aimed at breaking the spirit.
In addition to myself, I think for example of Maria,
the elderly lady who is trapped in
her flat because of her tyrant landlord. He
has been dragging her through the courts
several times, and countless other events
making her daily life a misery. Like
me, Maria is a fighter and she keeps
high spirited. But this is not the life
that a charming, caring, intelligent,
talented and kind person like her deserves
in her retirement.
She has done nothing wrong. (She was
a teacher all her life). She has the right to
have peaceful enjoyment of her home, but she
does not. Meanwhile, the spineless and
/ or corrupt system just sits back and watches,
not lifting a little finger . aside
from throwing her a few crumbs every so often
e.g. the police calling on her to "check" that "she
is ok" . Yep! This is the extent of the
assistance. (Actually, as she lives on the border
with two boroughs, to be more precise it is only
one of the two police stations that does this.
I understand that the other one could not give
At least, the lady in Beirut has fighters
on her side. Here, in England, neither
I, nor Maria, have anybody to protect us from
the terrorist like tactics of corrupt landlords and their aides.
Tuesday 1 August 2006 - 00h30 am
On my return to the hellhole, as I started
to walk along the side of Harrods, on Hans
Crescent , I noticed that a cream colour car
(which I subsequently determined was a Mercedes )
was parked on the corner of Hans Crescent
and Basil Street i.e. on the right
hand side when going down Hans Crescent,
coming from Brompton Road . It caught my attention
as its lights were on. I
was on the phone and taking my time to
walk down towards Basil St . When I was
about 10 metres from the junction with Basil
St , I started to cross in the direction of the
exactly the same time, the car
started to move , slowly. It
looked as though it was going to
come to where I was (which
is a dead end), as it was
coming in my direction in a straight
line. (As the streets
were totally deserted, most drivers
would have started to turn the
car well before that, taking a
Seeing this manoeuvre led me to
think that I would run, back onto
the pavement i.e. my brain
interpreted the information received
through my eyes that I was in danger.
(Oddly enough, in my previous entry
yesterday I mentioned the possibility
of my being murdered. My 'little
As it came very close to the start of the dead
end, it turned right to go into Basil Street
. There were four men in the
car, bulky looking.
The one who was in the front passenger seat turned
round to look in my direction. He was
laughing, in a mocking, smug, arrogant way .
Because of where I was (about a third of the
way across the street) and the fact that the
car kept on moving, to do this he had to turn
round a good 45 degrees. There was nobody else
where I was. Hence, he was definitely
looking at me.
He looked to me as though he was the
man I saw on Edgware Road last Sunday (30 July
2006) .The one who went past the juice
bar where I was having a drink, back-tracked
and walked past again looking at me intently
in order to catch my gaze and, ten minutes
later, came from behind the telephone box as
I was walking on the pavement in the direction
of Marble Arch.
I guess he did not like my singing 'smells
like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note], looks like a [a reject from the sewer] [Note], got to
be a [a reject from the sewer] [Note]'. How
funny that he needs to have THREE OTHER
MEN with him - in a car - to take his
revenge by trying to scare me - a
woman, on her own, on foot, in a deserted street,
in the early hours of the morning.
Pathetic, spineless, criminal, corrupt,
And the same can be said about their
from Harassment Act 1997, it is
a crime to harass people, and it also
breaches Article 8 of
the European Convention on Human Rights,
comprised under the Human
Rights Act 1998, "Right
to respect for private life"
I wonder how they would feel if the same thing
was done to their mother, wife or girlfriend,
daughter, aunt, niece, grand mother. Actually,
considering their behaviour, it would not surprise
me to hear that they would take part in doing
the same thing to them.
Wednesday 2 August 2006 - from 22h00
When I got off from the bus at Piccadilly I
went in the music store . Within
two minutes I had [morally depraved, despicable scum ] [Note] on my back. I
spent about 20 minutes going round, browsing,
and eventually buying a CD and a DVD.
I then took the number 14 bus. A man,
in his 50s, who boarded the bus came
to sit next to me on the other side of
the aisle. He was short, skin colour suggesting from
India / Pakistan . His
clothes, and in particular jacket,
suggested made in the Middle East . He
was looking at me every so often.
As the bus reached my 'more usual' stop, the
man put his left foot in the alleyway
in order to come out of his seat. I
did not move. He put his foot
back where it was and looked at me. I
was laughing inside.
As we neared the next stop, I got up to see
what he would do. He did not move but was looking
My 'internal radar' had also led me to spot another
man, in his late 50s/early 60s, c.1.80m, huge
pot belly stretching his shirt so
much that it was a miracle that the buttons
had not popped out, pot marked face,
with a big, fat nose (reminded me
of the nose I have seen on some alcoholics).
He wore glasses.
He got off the bus before me. I decided to stay
at the bus stop as though I was waiting for a
bus. The man looked at a bit of a loss.
I think he realised from the time that we came
off the bus that I had spotted him.
He walked to the end of the pavement about 10
metres away and stayed there, his back turned
to me. He then walked back in my direction a
bit, then back to the edge of the pavement. By
then I was standing in a doorway that is at the
back of the bus shelter in order to have a good
view of the 'show'. I also started to relate
events to a friend on my mobile phone.
My guess is that, considering what took place
subsequently, the man had sent a message, while
he had his back turned to me. He walked back,
passing in front of me and stopped at the beginning
of the bus shelter, on the edge of the pavement.
After more pacing up and down the length of the
bus shelter, he positioned himself practically
out of my view (I could see his feet) alongside
the external face of the bus shelter, at the
other end, and hence, on the edge of the pavement
where he remained.
Caucasian, in his
had arrived, who
positioned himself alongside the
Then another two men,
in their late 20s arrived.
They were accompanied by a woman
of Far East origin, also
in her late 20s.
They stayed by the edge of the
pavement in line with the man who
was positioned alongside the grocery
store. They all looked
at me at different times and hence,
turned round to do so.
After about 3-4 minutes, a taxi
stopped close to where
they were. Hence, about 8-9 metres
from where I was. There were
at least three people in the
taxi. (1-2 of the passengers
stayed in and the taxi departed).
One of those who came out of the
taxi was a man, tall, about
1.90m, English origin, light colour
hair. He was in his early 40s.
He looked at me practically from
the time he came out of the taxi. Some
non-verbal exchange took place
between him and the people standing
on the pavement.
The man walked in my direction while looking
at me and continued to do so as he went
past me. His facial expression and body
language communicated anger
and frustration oozing out of him.
He looked to me as though
he could be a cop. I was laughing as I
was relating this to my friend, partly to add
to the annoyance of the 'troops'.
was so funny to see that pile up
and the foot soldiers at a loss
as to what they should be doing
I guess they will nonetheless
collect their pieces of silver
from their abhorrent, corrupt paymasters.
After all, they had encircled
Having gone past me, the 'leader of the mob'
i.e. the tall blond man continued walking in
the direction of South Kensington . He then stopped
about 30m down and was talking on a mobile phone.
The two men and the woman walked the two metres
to the bus shelter. The woman sat and looked
at me several times. A bus arrived which
the man who was positioned alongside the grocery
I had seen enough. I started to walk in the
direction of Knightsbridge, not bothering to
turn back to see what the troops were going to
do next. I guess, lick their
wounds and plan the approach for tomorrow. I turned into Beauchamp
Place and opted to stop by my favourite Lebanese
restaurant where I had a bite to eat - and at
last saw some friendly faces welcoming me with
headed to the hellhole i.e. the
flat wondering what 'punishment'
I would suffer for making
the mob look like the imbeciles,
low lifes, criminal scum that
they all are.
Will, as happened last night, a car be driven straight at me pretending that it is going to run me over? Might it actually run me over tonight?
Will the code be changed for my fob key, thereby preventing me from getting access to the block? (see 22 July 05)
If I can get in, who will be looking at me through the spy camera placed by the door to the entrance, as well as at the end of the entrance corridor?
Will somebody be waiting for me in the corridor between the front door and the door to my apartment?
Will I find the door to my apartment smashed in and the apartment ransacked? (Subsequent note: see My Diary 17 Jan 14 and 3 Feb 14)
Will the electricity have been cut-off when I try to switch on the light as I come into the apartment? (see 8 July 06 and 9 July 06) (Subsequent: 8 Mar 09)
Will I find one or more leaks in my apartment, other disaster? (see 11 Mar 02 , 8 Aug 05 and 18 Aug 05)
(Subsequent note: Many others since to be added to the list: Persecution # 1(4)(16) - including 'a grand show', at midnight, on 18 July 14. An added consequence is that, since July 09, I have been washing myself in the kitchen sink).
Might the door to my apartment / windows be smashed in during the night for the purpose of killing me? Might I get murdered? I don't know, but this thought is on my mind every day.
(Subsequent note: on 15 Jun 09 I received a death threat: "Enjoy your life. You don't have long to live"; on 14 Jun 14 it was implied. And on 3 Feb 14, a letter that referred to "a landlord smashing in the door of one of his tenants"
Further, 'courtesy' of my "security lock provider, Banham", the Ladsky mafia has been provided with a key to my aparment since at least Dec 13: 17 Jan 14)
(Consider the consequence of this: what would you find it necessary to take with you every time you leave your apartment? How many bags might you end-up carrying with you all the time?)
Should I believe 'a leaseholder' who phoned me at work at the beginning of January / February 2004 telling me "Don't worry, they won't kill you" ? (see My Diary Jan-Feb 2004 for detail)
Might I be woken-up by water dripping / gushing on my bed / somewhere else in the apartment? (see My Diary 8 Aug 05 ; 18 Aug 05 and 11 March 02) - leading me to sleep on the sofa instead, and eventually reintegrate my bed, having taken the precaution of covering it with a plastic sheet.
(Subsequent note: will I be woken-up in the middle of the night by some evil, sadistic, vicious scum: (1)- banging on my windows? (22 Feb 13) ; (2)- hosing my windows? (many times))
Will I make it through the night? Will I wake-up later on to another day... of hell? (Subsequent note: as I reported under para.171 of my 19.07.11 Home Office Witness Statement: Queen's Bench # 6(1))
Every single time when I come back to the apartment, the minute I get in, I do a thorough inspection, including looking at all the ceilings and the walls, in case a hole was made from the apartments on either side of mine / the corridor, while I was away. I check the windows to ensure that none have been broken. (NB: By the of the following year, in 2007, I had (Banham!) grills fitted on all the windows).
Once I have determined that everything 'appears' to be alright, I then double-lock the door. Because I worry that something might be pushed through my letter box during the night (e.g. a petrol bomb) (I don't know! It has happened to other people), every night I place the ironing board against the door hoping that, if it happens, the noise of the ironing board falling will wake me up. (Agreed: not much use if it is a petrol bomb!)
At that point, I switch off the light in the entrance and do everything else in the dark in case I am somehow being observed. I stress that I very much doubt this - although my apartment is definitely bugged (Persecution # 3.5). However, it makes me feel more comfortable. As I leave the kitchen blind open, the light from the street is sufficient to see my way around at least in parts of the flat. (NB: All of this of application in 2006 and 2007).
Only then do I undress in order to change into casual trousers and top - in which I sleep - in order to be ready to storm out of the apartment if required during the night. (I started to do this in 2006). For this purpose, I also place my rucksack next to my pillow. Also next to my bed is a long kitchen knife in case I get attacked. (I know, it could be used to attack me but...)
(Question: look at the page on Kensington, Chelsea & Notting Hill police: do you think that the police would come to my aid?)
(Subsequent note: re. my having a kitchen knife next to my bed: note that the local police mafia subsequently captured it in its so-called "2007 crime report" against me, and 'explained it' by describing me as "being extremely paranoid".
Satanic monsters! Not only do they deny you your right to protection, they very actively assist the criminals in taking action against you (police sections overview ; Overview # 17) - and then, they turn against you the fact that you are taking steps to protect yourself...
...- by categorising you as "suffering from mental issues [and therefore needing'] to contact social services"! What absolute, utter vermin).
At least, I now have the comfort of knowing that I have at long last finished the development of all the sections for my website (I started in April 2005 and have worked on it for at least 35 hours per week since then). I have given my latest updates, including all the supporting documents in electronic format to various people.
So, if I do not wake-up to see the next day, I hope that those who have my story will, as agreed, give it to foreign Human Rights groups, press agencies and media, as well as the French authorities.
took on the British nationality as a
sign of commitment to this country. After
what has happened to me on this island
since 2002 (Case summary), I view myself
first and foremost as a French national -
which, legally, I still am).
All of the above are questions and thoughts
that pass through my mind every single day on my return to the apartment, with now,
the addition of the first one - as well as
the actions I take once in the apartment.
YES, I AM LIVING IN THE MIDDLE OF LONDON
, CAPITAL OF THE UNITED KINGDOM , IN
THE YEAR 2006.
I have ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE to turn to
for protection, for enforcing my statutory
rights, including Human Rights, to the
peaceful enjoyment of my apartment, as well as privacy.
with various government departments, including Kensington & Chelsea police and the courts make this ABUNDANTLY CLEAR -see snapshots of the outcome of my 'cries for help' and complaints; see also the experience of some whistleblowers: like me, they end-up being persecuted for 'daring' to speak out, including being labelled as mentally deranged.
This is the true face of the leasehold
system and supporting infrastructure
in England - in the 21st century.
This week there was a press article about an elderly
lady, said to be a very keen gardener
and to have won prizes for her gardening. She
has had her garden destroyed and ornaments
stolen on an ongoing basis. The article quoted
around 200 incidents. She said she had initially
reported them to the police who did nothing
other than issue her with a crime report number
The article stated that she had taken steps
to protect her property by installing a CCTV
system and protection fencing.
The reason she was featured in the press is
because she put a notice in her garden - with
her photograph - saying "You want
to kill me. Go ahead". She
was reported as saying that she actually wanted
to die. Gardening was her main pleasure in life.
is what this country can reduce an elderly person
to do. No doubt, like me, she has
limited financial means and no influential
connections. So, 'not worth helping' (although good enough
to take money from in the form of taxes
to pay for those with the duty to protect her)
As a result of the 'naming and shaming' in the
press, it seems that some action is going to
hold the view that...
...England can justifiably describe
itself as a criminals
...under a government
repeatedly associated in the
press nowadays with the words
'corruption', 'sleaze', 'deceit',
'cover-up', 'whitewash', etc
Examples of articles in the British press over the last two weeks (I reformated in 2015)
The Independent, 13 July 06 - " Levy arrest lays trail that leads all the way to Blair"
"Lord Levy, the Labour Party's chief fundraiser, was arrested yesterday by police investigating the "cash for peerages" scandal - a humiliating blow for Tony Blair...Scotland Yard's Specialist Crime Directorate has not ruled out interviewing Mr Blair.
It has seized computer hard disks and documents from Whitehall and is pursuing investigations by recovering deleted e-mails between civil servants and party officials.
The Labour life peer, later released on bail, was not charged and denies any wrongdoing. His arrest under anti-corruption laws followed reports that he advised millionaire donors to provide loans to the Labour Party, which could be kept secret"
(Subsequent note: Of course, nothing came of it)
(NB: In its 22 Jun 08 edition, The Daily Mail reported: "We disclosed last week how, just before the loans poured in, Tony Blair's Downing Street appointments secretary William Chapman secretly won a change in the rules for nominating peers that meant Blair didn't have to sign the forms.
It meant he could not be held responsible for any dodgy loans. Last week's honours awards saw Mr Chapman made a Commander Of The Royal Victorian Order. He works for The Blair Foundation")
Daily Mail, 23 July 06 - " Why I believe David Kelly's death may have been murder, by MP"
"Dr Baker who "spent six months investigating the death of Dr Kelly, the government weapons expert." is quoted as saying that there is "More than enough cause to reopen the inquest" "Mr Baker has consistently been a thorn in the government's side" .
Also, "The MP claims Hutton (who led the inquiry) was personally selected for the job by Tony Blair's close friend Charles Falconer, the Lord Chancellor" and that Lord Hutton " had a history of making pro-Government decisions as a judge "
The Guardian, 24 July 06 - " The stain of sleaze
"It's groundhog day - but this time the groundhogs are fighting back. Sir Alistair Graham thinks that Tony Blair has made "a major error of judgment" and seems fatally "lukewarm" about standards in public life."
Sir Philip Mawer thinks John Prescott was out of order as an MP on that wild west jaunt, and probably still more culpable as a minister of the crown. This is not just sleazy business as usual...
Yet, when the first test of this new "system" arrives, Tony Blair calls for no one and listens to nobody. Big John is innocent , OK. That's the end of story, delivered with an insouciant shrug. Yo heave-ho!"
Daily Mail, 31 July 06 - "Prescott faces police corruption probe "
"The new police investigation will consider whether Mr Prescott broke the terms of the Prevention of Corruption Acts of 1906 and 1916 by accepting an invitation to stay at [ ] ranch last year."
"Mr Blair this weekend defended his decision to leave Mr Prescott in charge when he takes his holiday."
"In the end I found no evidence of impropriety in relation to the stay at the ranch."
"A spokeswoman for Mr Prescott said: 'Any suggestion there's anything devious about it is an outrage""
The Independent, 28 July 06 - " Corruption in Britain? Surely not"
"Some 700 immigration officials were accused of taking money from would-be British settlers last year'."
"...a detective is alleged to have sold information to a suspect's father keen to thwart the Stephen Lawrence investigation'.
"The lazily and incessantly reiterated claim that Britain , alone among her peers, is miraculously immunised against the various sorts of corruption that plagues less noble lands is one of the wonders of the age"
Several newspapers during July 2006 reported that the Metropolitan Police looks increasingly likely to be prosecuted only under heath and safety laws for the fatal shooting of Mr Jean Charles de Menezes - but "no officers are expected to face criminal charges"
(Subsequent note: Sure enough! This was the verdict in February 2009)
Etc., etc., etc.
reader wrote to one of the newspapers
this week, "this government
is destroying the country". I
agree with this person.
In fact, a few weeks ago I was
thinking that 1997, the year 'New
Labour' was elected, was ' the
year when the outlaws rode into
town and started to ransack the
It is so, so sad to see what is happening. The
people of this country deserve a lot better.
On the plus side, I hope that these media reports
will somehow help my case.
I am grateful that we have a relatively free
press. Without it, only people like me
who find themselves at the receiving end
of 'the system' would be able to see it for
what it is - leading them to feel like a lonely
voice - as I did for a long time. Now, public
opinion is such that, whoever I talk to about
any aspect of my case (tribunal, courts, police,
etc.), in every instance I get the reply "They
are all corrupt!"
(Subsequent note - :Add to that the revelations about the legislators, the peers and MPs in 2009-10 (My Diary Jan 09 ; Feb 09+) + the Lockerbie bomber deal (My Diary 2009 Intro-Medical # 2) + the fear, smear and persecution campaign against whistleblowers - and other evidence against the Government and the State (MPs-home))
Some also say: "That's the same everywhere" i.e.
in other countries. I always give the same reply:
Yes, but two or more wrongs do not make a right
- and will never make a right. Consequently,
it does not justify accepting what is going on,
and that if we all take this attitude it will
only get worse.
What will this society be like in 10 years time?
In 20 years time if nobody does anything? People
who have children must surely be very concerned
What is happening is not the result of an act
of nature. It is done by people and people can
be stopped. Who are ALL these people in government? They
are our employees because we - taxpayers
- pay their salary. As their employer we need
to assert our authority.
It is not enough to
cast a vote at the time of elections
and then 'let them get on with it'. How many employers
in the private sector would hand over a £500+
billion (US$900 billion) business (the size of
the budget) to people who have never run a business
in their life and just 'let them get on with
it'? (Examples of the outcome: MPs-Home)
Yes, we have Members of Parliament in the House
of Commons who are meant to be representing us,
the 'common people'. However, when I hear on
the radio / see on TV what goes in the House
of Commons, it conjures up Punch and Judy ('marionettes'
in French). It is like a children's playground:
they come across as spending more time competing
against each other as to who will come up with
the wittiest retort. Those who do not indulge
in this game, preferring to speak their mind, 'calling
a spade a spade', get thrown out (e.g. Dennis
Skinner, an MP from the north of England ).
No wonder the top of the ladder behaves as it
Saturday 5 August 2006
[Morally depraved, beneath contempt, scum] [Note] on my back from the
time I left the flat at 14h00
(I came back this morning at 03h00
a.m. By then, I had been out of
the flat since 08h00 the previous
morning. How much does it cost
to have [this] bunch of [people] [Note] on duty for 19 hours? I hope it
costs a fortune!)
I was being followed when I went
into Harrods to buy some food to
take with me to the office.
When I came out, in Montpellier
Sq, there was a confused
[fool] [Note] , male,
Caucasian, late 20s, relatively
short, at a loss as to what
he should be doing next when he
realised that I had spotted him.
I took a photograph of him. As
I went past him, I said "Ladsky's
I spotted another [scum] "[Note], female,
blond, pony tail, dressed in a
light blue track suit (same
type as the other one last Sunday,
but taller and fatter), when I
came out of Blackfriars
some of the others, displaying
an arrogant look on her face. She
too got the benefit of my saying
to her "Ladsky's
[scum] "[Note]" as she
purposely walked back close to
me having realised that I had spotted
Sunday 6 August 2006 - lunchtime
Repeat of yesterday: on leaving the flat around
lunchtime I had a small army of [morally depraved, beneath contempt, low-lifes] [Note] on my back. (I left at midday,
as I again got back to the hellhole this
morning around 4 a.m., having walked all
the way back. And yes, I had my usual 'escort'
Yes, at that time of the morning!)
Today, I again treated them to one of my 'little
circuits', going down one street, back
up, turning right, left, back up, down,
others, I spotted three
was a Mercedes, light, metallic
colour . (Maybe the Mercedes
I saw on Tuesday 1st August? I
did not get a chance to note the
number plate. Too much to look at
the time, in a relatively short space
of time, plus the fact that it was
night time and the head lights were
in my eyes).
The number plate was
a name, starting with ' TIS' (and
another two letters, which I also
captured). I have seen this car
before, including during weekdays
when I leave the block. The driver
was a man, in his 50s. He
appeared to me to be of Greek
/ Cypriot origin.
When I was in Hans Place,
I spotted him as he went round. If he
was looking for a parking space, there
were a few that were free (resident and paying).
When he went round again for at least the second
time, I waved energetically as he went by. He did
not look at me. There was no traffic around at
the time. I 'think' that, from my doing this
and considering that I was in full view, another
driver would have looked in my direction.
He did come round again.
While in the square, my 'internal radar' also
led me to spot a VW black / dark blue,
male driver in his late 30s, dark hair.
The number plate starts with LS55 (I
noted the rest of the number). I 'think'
he had already gone round the square once before.
I am not sure.
I continued my circuit to annoy the [morally depraved, beneath contempt, low-lifes] [Note] when I spotted another car, parked alongside
the pavement, at the junction with Pavilion
Rd and Pont Street . It was either a
Rover, or a Honda. I did not pay sufficient attention.
It was light, metallic grey. It departed the
minute I finished crossing Pont St in the direction
of Pavilion Rd. I went down this street for a
few metres, then back onto Pont St .
In Beauchamp Place I stopped to buy a juice,
and continued to Brompton Rd from where I took
a bus in the direction of South Kensington.
I got off the bus one stop before the station
i.e. across from the VA and walked to South Ken
I stopped about 20 metres before the station
to observe what was coming from the Knightsbridge
side. Within less than five minutes,
/ dark blue VW with the number starting
with 'LS55' went by - same driver. At
least 25 minutes had passed since I
had seen this car in Hans Place, about
1.3 km away.
I took the tube from South Ken and got off at
the last minute at Embankment i.e. two stops
before my 'normal' stop when going to the office.
I made my way through the back streets to half
way up the Strand and had a salad at a sandwich
shop. I took my time assuming that the [morally depraved, beneath contempt, low-lifes] [Note] were running around like headless chickens
trying to find me.
I then walked down to the river, walking on
the left hand side pavement of Victoria
Embankment, and headed towards Blackfriars.
I spotted one man in particular,
walking alongside the river i.e. on the
other pavement. After I had turned left
Avenue, he had crossed Victoria Embankment
as, when I turned round, as I was about
half way up Temple Avenue, I saw him
at the start of the street. (These
streets are deserted at the weekends as
there are only offices. Hence, not what
you would call a tourist spot).
It takes a long time to write this. It is now
16h00 and I'd better continue with the
site. Last night I finished the Legal section.
Now I need to go through all the 50 sections
of the site and enter the values in US$.
I have already done quite a bit.
I will then move on to the photo
weekend I spent practically all of the
time entering the file information for
each photograph. I have over 180! Every
time I typed in the description, date,
etc. I then tested Photoshop's 'photo album
for the web facility'. It worked, although
I still have some tweaking to do. I am
sure I'll figure it out.
The challenge will be to bring these photographs
in the site. I am new to Dreamweaver so,
as with everything else over the last four
years, it is a steep learning curve. (A
friend lent me a very good Dreamweaver
course on DVD. I tried to cram everything
in the space of 48 hours. I am getting
better, but some way from feeling confident).
At least, project nightmare is forcing me to
acquire new skills and web design is one
I look forward to using for fun things,
like holiday pictures. 'Fun
things'? What's that? I
have forgotten what this means. Maybe
one day I will be able to pick my life
again, do the things that 'normal people'
w/c 7 August 2006
I continue to be followed
on a 24 / 7 basis by a 'large army'. As previously, I also continue
giving them the run around and showing them that
I know that I am being observed / followed.
It has continued throughout the week, including
at the weekend, and I have continued taking the 'army
of [morally depraved, beneath contempt, low-lifes] [Note] on convoluted circuits - especially
in the early hours of the morning. (On the upside,
it helps me make-up in part for the fact that
I cannot afford the time to go to the gym).
Tuesday 8 August 2006
Today I related my story to somebody. It took
one and a half hour to give an overview of what
has been happening since 2002. On 3-4 occasions
it was a real battle to fight back the tears.
Every time I said: "No, come on, anger, come
back, come back anger" as I was clinching
my fists with all my strength.
Sure enough, it helped me fight back the tears.
However, it took so much energy out of
me, making me feel so demoralised and drained
that I could not face going back to the
hellhole. So, I booked myself in a hotel.
I cannot tell you the relief I had getting into
the room. I felt safe. I could switch the lights
on without having the feeling that I might somehow
be observed. You are going to laugh: it had been
such a long time since I felt comfortable walking
around without any clothes on.
I have tears rolling down my cheeks as I am
writing this because I simply cannot believe
that I am reduced to living under these
WHY AM I MADE TO SUFFER LIKE
THAT? I HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG. I am NOT the criminal. I AM THE VICTIM OF ORGANIZED CRIME
The worst part of it is
the feeling of total abandonment, of
having absolutely NOWHERE to turn to.
I know, there are some people in this very
ugly world who would no doubt like to swap
place with mine. So, I will stop feeling
sorry for myself. That's it; I am back in fighting
PS. I had a blissful 10 hour sleep - which was
very much needed.
Monday 14 August 2006
to collect my PO Box this morning.
There was an invoice from Martin
Russell Jones with a "Brought
forward balance" of £8,665 (US$15,200).
As can be seen, it has " Final
in red on it.
Does this mean that the
next communication will be a
court claim? It
and its client Mr Ladsky et.
al. must have been hitching to
do this since they sent me the - unwarranted - 21
October 2004 invoice stating
a "Brought forward balance" of £14,500 (US$25,600).
I certainly would not put
it past them. I guess
that the cost of employing an army of [ despicable, morally depraved , scum and low-lifes] [ Note] ' on a 17+ hour basis for this length
of time must by now be massive.
I am in the very last stages of the development
of the site but, encountering some challenges
- which I hope to sort out over the next
Wouldn't it be fun to write on the claim "struck
out" and just state in the "reason" box "leasehold-outrage.com". THAT
would be fun!
Friday 18 August 2006 - 18h50
I was due to go with a friend to see the Modigliani
exhibition at the Royal Academy . Although he
cancelled, I nonetheless opted to go by myself.
I walked from Trafalgar Sq. By 18h50, I was
in St James sq. I stayed there
for over 10 minutes, resting along the railing
to see if anything was following me. At
that time, on a Friday, the square was very empty
in terms of parking spaces.
I noticed a red car, I think
it was a Nissan with two
young Indian / Pakistani men. The number
plate starts with X62 (I noted
the rest of the number plate). When they first
went past me, the passenger looked at me. After
about three minutes, they
again went past me i.e. had gone round the square. Given the amount
of time that had elapsed since they first went
round, they had stopped somewhere / gone somewhere
else since first passing in front of me.
second time, they both looked at
About two minutes later,
and now for the third time, they
yet again went past me and yet again
looked at me. I noted that
the man in the passenger seat was
laughing as he was looking at me.
On each of
these three occasions the car was going
at a fairly high speed. Hence, they were not
lost, nor were they looking for somewhere to
This suggested to me that their interest might
have been in me.
Saturday 19 August 2006
I have been thinking that once the site is launched,
I ought to be out of the flat, as I would
fear for my life. Although, once the site
is launched, it might actually give me
more protection - as if something happens
to me it will be as though a 'visiting
card' was left on my body.
I don't know.
I keep debating whether or not I should
look for another flat temporarily. It
really angers me to have a flat - for which
I am paying a mortgage - and to have to
spend a very large part of my salary paying
rent for another flat.
Nonetheless, I went to see one at lunchtime. It
meets the main requirement as it
appears to be safe.
I told the owner a little bit about my situation - which
probably was not a good move. We shall see.
Anyway, I am back to debating whether or not
I should deplete my finances even more
substantially by renting a flat. I already
have a flat. Oh
God, oh God! How can
it be that I am reduced to contemplating this?
can it be that this is happening in the
middle of London, in the 21st century?
I have absolutely NOWHERE to turn to
I know, I keep repeating the same thing. It's
because I have been asking myself this
question - EVERY DAY - since 2002. Nearly
five years on, and I still cannot comprehend
what is happening, why it is happening,
why it is allowed to happen. I think that
maybe it's a nightmare from which I will
wake-up with an enormous sigh of relief.
But no, everything says that it is real
- and it is happening in a country located
in Europe, in the 21st century. A country
that considers itself 'civilised' - and
has signed up to the European Convention
on Human Rights. WHAT HYPOCRISY!
I was thinking that, in this country,
it is much better to be a criminal. At
least, you have organisations that worry
about your Human Rights. As an innocent
victim of crime: you have NOTHING!
Actually, better still, as
a criminal you can also receive financial
aid from the state: I
heard on the radio this week that the social
security department was found to have paid £13
million (US$23 million) to prisoners. The
money was paid into their bank account. Explanation? It
was an error and was attributed to lack
of communication between departments. (Yep!
More evidence of the shambolic state of
However, when it comes to taking money from
me in income tax, council tax, etc., the
government doesn't show any incompetence.
Funny that, isn't it?
Saturday 19 / 20 August 2006 - around midnight
And the [morally depraved , beneath contempt rejects from the sewer ] [Note]
continue be in tow - in
all kinds of modes of transport, as well as on
I went to the office where I did some of my
project nightmare filing. I then read a section
in a book on Dreamweaver's CSS. Not easy for
a novice. I am stuck with project nightmare and
have booked an external trainer for Monday. (Yet
more money that is going to be drained due to
On leaving the office, when I reached Aldwych,
at the height of the law courts, instead of continuing
on my 'usual' side of pavement, I opted to cross
the street (as I did a few days ago). The reason
is that, for a very long time now, I have had
my suspicious that I am being observed from this
side of the street (stationary car/s, people
on foot and, it seems to me, at times, cyclists).
I decided to yet, again, let them know that
It was 23h42 when
I came close to a parked people
carrier car, black/ navy blue, with
the number plate starting with LS0.
It was parked alongside the pavement
that is by the church. The driver, a
man, was of Pakistani
/ Indian / Sri Lankan man, in
was a man , walking
on the pavement on the side of the
law courts. Short, early
30s, possibly of Jewish
origin. He had the same physique
of many of the other men that I believe
have been observing / following me.
He was looking at me. The 2nd
/ 3rd time he did this, I looked
at him intently with an annoyed
expression on my face. He continued
walking the 3-4 metres to the bus
stop that is across from the church.
He sat on the bench under the bus
shelter and took his mobile out.
He was looking at me. At that point,
I had seen enough and said loudly: "Ladsky,
Ladsky, she is here!"
I then continued to note down the number of
the second car that was parked immediately behind
the people carrier car. The driver for the second
car was a male, young, of
African origin. When
I looked in the direction of the bus stop, the
man had gone.
Seeing this made me decide that I was going
to treat the [beneath contempt scum and lowlife] [Note] to one of
my 'special circuits'. I went up towards
Holborn, then left into Convent Garden
. I then backtracked to Holborn,
close to the station on the street that
goes east towards the City, and west towards
Oxford St. I stood in a shop
recess at the back of the bus stop (about
eight metres from it) to observe movements.
I stayed there for a good 20 minutes.
Within 5-7 minutes I spotted
a man, short, late 20s,
early 30s. He wore a white blouson, jeans,
white trainer-like shoes and a rucksack with
the brand name 'Diodora'.
come from the direction of Holborn
station, he went past me and walked
into the alley that ends up on Kingsway. He
came back 2-3 minutes later on and
was loitering around on the pavement.
Within a minute of him coming out
of the alley, another
He was in his early
40s, slim, c.183m, dark brown trousers.
From the way he was walking, I
initially wondered whether he might
be handicapped. He was not, as
he then walked 'normally'. He
too was loitering around on
the pavement but, within a minute
of appearing he started talking
on a mobile phone, while pacing
around, his back turned to me.
He departed in the direction of
Holborn after about two minutes.
The younger one with
the white blouson eventually went
to the bus stop where he sat down. He
took out a cigarette which he started to smoke. Several
buses went by which, it seems to me, represented
all the buses that would stop at this bus stop. I
remained where I was.
After about 6 - 8 minutes,
the man departed from the bus stop,
walking in the direction of Holborn. Hence, he
was going back there for now the third time. (Note
that, by then, the tube had stopped running.
Also, that there were plenty of taxis for hire
passing in front of the bus stop).
I stayed where I was for about another eight
minutes. He did not come back. I did
not want to go to the bus stop because I had
spotted other things to my right. A woman arrived
and stopped a number 8 bus. I run from where
I was to catch the bus. I got off at an 'unexpected'
stop on Oxford St and ended up walking
across Soho taking a series of turns eventually
arriving on Shaftsbury Av. By then,
I had given the [beneath contempt scum and lowlife] [Note] the run around
for nearly two hours. It was time to
get back to the hellhole.
Sunday 20 August 2006
There is not much I can get on with in terms
of project nightmare.
I have not cleaned the flat in one year. I know,
it sounds terrible but, the last time I did it
was on 18 August 2005 when I cleaned the bathroom.
During that night, there was a leak in the bathroom.
Anyway, as you will know from reading My Diary,
I am in the hellhole for eight hours or
less per day. I only go there to sleep
(as best as I can) and wash. And, as I only have
the lights on for as little as I can, I don't
have to look at the flat.
Needless to say that I hate living in these
conditions. I used to be so proud of that flat,
cleaning it at least once a week.
So, here I was this morning, debating: should
I or shouldn't clean this hellhole? Will
my doing this mean that I will find one or more
leaks on my return tonight? Some other
For a few days now, I have on my mind that a
fire might occur. Why? Because about
two weeks ago, on my return to the flat, I
letter from Martin Russell Jones that
had been pushed through my letter box.
I states that it requires access to "In
order to test the fire alarm system and trace
a fault that has appeared the engineers need
to gain access to your flat on Tuesday 15 August
There is no fire alarm in my flat. NOTHING
has ever been installed in my flat that is
remotely connected with a fire alarm. Hence,
why should they require to get access to my
Has the wiring for the bugging
devices gone loose? (See My Diary January
/ February 2004)
Well, in the end, I did opt to clean
the flat. At first it was very difficult.
I hate this place so much that I could not
bring myself to start. Then, I got into it,
like in the 'old days'. However, what will
I find on my return? I did say loudly,
once I finished: "Ok Ladsky, now that I
have cleaned it, what disaster are you going
I took a few video clips with my mobile phone
(while I had Radio 4 on quite loud, as a means
of providing evidence for the date), as well
as photographs - including of the ceilings. (Photo
and video equipment manufacturers must be doing
quite well out of leaseholders as I know several
who invested in a video camera simply for the
purpose of recording evidence in relation to
their landlord / managing agents).
THIS is the life of a leaseholder in the United Kingdom! What
a hellhole. What an unbelievable breach
of Human Rights.
And this country takes
the high-stand relative to other countries
accusing them of breaching Human
feel so sickened by everything,
so demoralised, so low, so close
to ending it all.
Blast! Tears are again rolling
down my face.
No damn it.
I am not going to commit
suicide for a bunch of crooks
supported by a corrupt system.
As the saying goes, 'nothing is over until it's
It ain't over yet. I am not
I look at all the evidence that I have
and I KNOW that I have a very strong case.
somebody, somewhere, somehow is
going to come and help me.
Please God, PLEASE HELP
PLEASE HELP ME!
PLEASE GOD: HELP
Got to stop. I am crying. I can't even see what
I am typing.
It's getting late (23h45) and I want to back-up
my files on the server of the Copyright company.
I want this as evidence in case there is a major
disaster in my flat. And I am meeting the trainer
at 09h45 tomorrow.
Monday 21 August 2006
Mission accomplished: I sent all of the site
content to the copyright company by about 1 a.m.
I left the office feeling relieved that all my
latest files were now resting on two+ servers
outside of the UK .
I apprehended going back to the hellhole wondering
what I would find. As it turned out, when I arrived
at c. 2 a.m., nothing had happened. It was nice
to see the flat clean. As is usually the
case, I did not sleep particularly well and was
out of the flat again by c. 08h00. I had an all
day meeting with a Dreamweaver specialist to
address a few problems.
While this was an expensive day for me (loss
of earnings, cost of this specialist + hiring
an office), it was money well spent as he was
able to sort out all my problems.
I have still got quite a lot of work to do on
the site. One task is to insert the hyperlinks
from the text to other sections. I reckon there
must be over 800. Another is to do the 8-9 photo
albums for the photo gallery. Then there are
some other relatively small bits and pieces.
So, in total, probably another 12 days or so
of work. I will then go to Paris to launch the
site - and celebrate my achievement.
Actually, the current stats
for the site are
quite amasing - considering the root cause for
590 pages of Word documents (font
765 PDF documents
have taken over 2,500 hours of my
life to create this site.
And you know what the worst part
of it is?
I have absolutely no idea
what this is going to lead to. As
has happened EVERY DAY since
2002, I simply cannot see a light
at the end of the tunnel.
Will I ever see a light
at the end of the tunnel?
When will this horrendous
and very traumatic nightmare
come to an end?
Will I ever get my life
Monday 21 August 2006 - after midnight
return to the block there was an unpleasant
looking, middle age man,
of Mediterranean origin,
with an enormous pot belly who was
standing immediately on the
corner next to the block. He
looked at me intently from the time
I took the turning from Hans Crescent
into Basil St .
(In the same way that
a man, in his mid 30s,
c. 1.80m, also of Mediterranean
origin, had looked
at me after he had
come out of the block back in
May/June this year.
He had walked away from the block
in the direction of Sloane St
for about 10 metres and had then
turned around to stare at me.
I gave him a sneer, while aiming
to communicate: "Yes,
that's me! I am the one who does
not give in to terrorist-like
He was talking on a mobile phone. As I reached
the door to the block, he walked in such
a way as to practically cut my path as though
he was daring me to walk in front of him - which
is exactly what I did!
He remained on the pavement in front of my windows
for c. another five minutes. At that point, I
heard footsteps in the corridor and the door
to the main entrance close. As I could no longer
hear him on the pavement, I assumed that it was
Tuesday 22 August 2006 - after midnight
Having spotted a few things on my way (in particular
on Old Bond St), when I arrived at the bus stop
on Piccadilly, across from the Royal Academy,
there was a woman, Caucasian, c. 1.60m,
in her 30s, shoulder length, frizzy brown hair. She
wore a calf-length coat and had two large,
bulky bags on the floor. The
whole attire led me to wonder whether she
might be a tramp. I had seen her 2-3
days previously, at the same bus stop,
around the same sort of time (i.e. after midnight) - with
exactly the same attire, including the same large
At the time, she had triggered my 'internal
radar' as, even though she did not really look
at me, it seemed to me that she was paying attention
to what I was saying on my mobile phone. All
my calls in the evening, when I am in the street,
are in French - with some English thrown
in for 'good measure' when I feel that somebody
appears to be paying attention to what I am saying. Hopefully,
it means that the abhorrent paymasters need to
find bilingual people if they want to find out
what I am saying - thereby adding, not only to
the difficulty, but especially costs.
On this second occasion, my 'internal radar'
was yet again activated as I felt she was
paying particular attention to what I was
this assumption, I ensured that she would
have something of substance to report. In
addition to referring to her by a slang
word in French (if she was an 'innocent'
person waiting for the bus and understood
French, she would not have known that I
was talking about her and hence would not
have taken offence). Also in French, I talked,
among others, of the criminal sociopaths who were having me followed, of
the [beneath contempt, scum] [Note] who had been looking at me intently
when I arrived back at the block last night, etc.
During that time a man arrived, in his
late 20s, c.1.78m, English, dressed like an
office worker - but not wearing a
jacket. Refreshingly, no smug, arrogant, 'I
am superior to you air' about him. One of the
buses that I could take arrived. I was at the
back of the bus stop, alongside a shop frontage. The
man flagged down the bus. It eventually stopped
about 3 metres from the 'normal stop'. By
the time I was making my way towards the door
at the front of the bus, it departed. Although
the man had flagged down the bus, he made no
attempt to board it.
It led me to feel that he too might be interested
in me. I therefore continued with my conversation,
throwing in quite a few things to 'spice up'
the reporting. By then the woman
had a mobile phone in her hand in which
she was texting. (Throughout that time she had
not bothered to look at any of the buses that
had arrived i.e. she was not intending to take
At one point I said to my friend, imagine the
reporting of my conversation: "She said what?
Against one of our sacrosanct landlords?" "That
the people following her are also criminal
sociopaths on the payroll of the criminals? "That
bloody French bitch!"
Another bus was on its way which I likewise could have taken. Suspecting that every word of my telephone conversation was being listened to, I said to my friend that I was going to take this bus, "It's a number 14". I was still alongside the shop frontage. The man on the pavement flagged the bus to stop. As it did so, the man turned round to look at me. I remained where I was against the shop frontage. He hesitated about boarding the bus and eventually did so.
Is this 'normal' behaviour? This, plus he had done previously, confirmed to me that he was particularly interested in me.
I moved away from where I was. The woman also
moved from the bus shelter and went in
the shop recess at the back of the bus shelter
- which was considerably darker than the area
of the bus shelter. She was texting on her phone.
A # 38 bus arrived. Although it does not go
to Knightsbridge, I opted to take it to annoy
the [beneath contempt scum and lowlife] [Note] and got off one stop after
Hyde Park Corner. I then meandered my way towards
Wednesday 23 August 2006 - after midnight
Oh dear, oh dear! I did rattle
the cage of the [morally depraved, beneath contempt scum and low-lifes] [Note] last night as 'the
army' was out in force.
off the bus on Knightsbridge and
turned left into the alley that leads
to Knightsbridge Green.
As I arrived
on the corner with Ralph St, a
man hidden in the dark recess of
the little tobacconist shop on
the corner, walked straight
at me, coming from my
had not noticed him because I had
my umbrella + was talking on my
laughed as I went by. Spineless,
When I arrived on Hans Crescent (by
then 00h45), half way down on the
Harrods side of the pavement, there
were three men. Two were together,
talking. The third one was about two metres
from them. He was talking on a mobile phone.
My 'internal radar' got activated the minute
I spotted them. I did not take a good look
at the other two.
one, in his 30s, c. 1.78m, had
the look that I have now seen many
times: ' a cop look-alike
As I went past
him I said on the phone, "Wow!
Ladsky's army of [morally depraved, beneath contempt scum and low-life] [Note] is out in force tonight!" I
then continued towards the block
- not bothering to turn back.
I know, I should ignore them, but I really resent
this invasion of my privacy.
to the site, how would you feel if you were being
subjected to this kind of treatment every single
day - any time of day?
And add to that, threatening behaviour.
To refer to them as [morally depraved, beneath contempt scum and low life] [Note] is an insult to [cannot replace] [Note]
AS WITH ALL THE OTHERS, EVERY SINGLE
ONE of these people is committing a criminal
offence against me under the Protection
from Harassment Act 1997 - as well as breaching
my Human Rights under Article 8 of the
European Convention on Human Rights - Respect
to private life
THIS MAKES THEM ALL CRIMINALS - unlike
me who has done NOTHING WRONG. I am NOT
the criminal. I AM THE VICTIM OF CRIME.
Thursday 24 August 2006
I am exhausted and do not want to go back to
the hellhole tonight. So, I have booked
myself in a hotel next to the office. This
makes it the second time in the space of c. two
weeks. Not good for the finances but... needed
for my health.
Friday 25 August 2006
I went out for dinner with a colleague to a
restaurant next to the office. Three men came
in after we did.
On leaving the restaurant , one
of the men, who was sitting, facing
my direction, looked at me intently
with a particularly arrogant air,
not taking his eyes off me until I had gone
past the height of their table. I returned
the 'compliment', holding his gaze while aiming
to communicate: "Yeah, that's me.
Take a good look!" . He was in his late
40's / early 50s, wearing
glasses , English origin .
I estimate his height around 1.80m
I did not have a good look at the other
two. They were younger. All
three conjured-up to me a 'cop look-alike'
look . (As I spend my life in the
office, I guess they must be gasping
for opportunities to be able to claim
the cost of a decent meal from their abhorrent
paymasters. If they are also waiting to be
able to charge an overseas trip... not long
I went back to the office to the office to work
on project nightmare and left very late, going
back to the hellhole with the number 9 bus,
getting off on Knightsbridge. I went down the
same alley as I did on Wednesday, wondering if
one of the scum would again be hiding in the
shadow and come straight at me as I went by.
No, no ambush. Past the bedtime of the foot soldiers!
As I arrived close to the corner Knightsbridge
Green-Brompton Road, I spotted a Rover
car, dark green, parked alongside the other pavement
of Brompton Road. By then it was 3
a.m. After I had taken a few steps on Brompton
Road, the car departed.
This is a repeat of what has happened
on several occasions in recent months: same
make, same colour and usually when I arrived
in the early hours of the morning. The car
is stationary and only departs once I am in
As on previous occasions, it went direction
West. This is the direction for Chelsea,
as well as Kensington & Chelsea police station. Why am I saying that?
Because, for a long time now, my 'little
voice' keeps telling me that some of the
people following me around are cops -
thereby contradicting my 'reasoned' assumption
that they could potentially be ex. cops employed
by the private sector.
I know, on the face of it, it does NOT
make sense - and consequently comes
across as a 'wild' assumption. Nonetheless,
I am opting to 'bravely' capture it -
while very sincerely hoping that I am
wrong. It would be an unbelievably sad
state of affairs if I turned out to be
right. No, I can't be right. It simply
does not make sense.
Sunday 27 August 2006 - 02h15 a.m.
When I came out of office, I noticed a car that
was parked immediately at the T-junction, alongside
the left handside pavement coming from New Bridge
As I started to walk the c. 20 metres to the
T-junction, a man, Caucasian, mid-30s, came
out of car and walked in the direction of New
Bridge st. He entered into a building, located
on the corner of the street, across from the
This left the one person in the car who was
in the driving seat. Male, Caucasian,
dark hair, late 30s / early 40s, probably around
1.80m, wearing a dark blue, suit jacket. I
stayed on the corner with the T junction to note
the number plate - which starts
with E00, as well as the make,
a Ford saloon .
The driver started the car, making a U-turn
in front of me, and drove in the direction of
New Bridge St.
Was there a connection with me? I don't
know. All that I can say is that
the car had been stationary (in a deserted,
office area, after 2 a.m., on a Saturday
- which happens to be a bank holiday weekend)
and had departed within a few seconds of my
coming out of the office.
I have to say that, when I first noticed the
car, it looked to me to be identical to
the car I described in my above entry as
a 'Rover, dark green'. In actual fact,
this one was a Ford,
dark blue - same saloon shape.
Considering that I was a lot closer to this
car than I had been the night before to the 'dark
green, Rover', might it be that the 'Rover'
was actually a Ford? Consequently,
that it had also been the case on the previous
occasions - as described above (when I was likewise,
generally some 50m from the car)? I don't know.
That's all I can report.
After an 8 hour sleep...
As explained a little while back in My Diary,
I prefer going back to the hellhole nearer to
the start of daylight, as I feel a lot safer.
Sure enough, I slept quite well until c. 11 a.m.
I walked through Hyde Park to get a bit of fresh
air and sunshine. Had a juice at the Lebanese
bar, bought some food at the Lebanese grocery
store and then took the bus from Marble Arch
to the office.
From the time I left the hellhole, I made a
point of not looking around to see if I could
spot [morally depraved, despicable scum and low life] [Note]. There probably were some
around as my 'internal radar' got a bit activated.
There was no repeat of Sunday 30 July 2006. Maybe
the fat, red-face-scum et. al. are having the
Well, I am not having the weekend off as I continue
importing the Word documents content into the
site, after which I insert the links between
the sections. Another slow and industrious process
as there are 50 sections and sub-sections on
the site into which I am importing 600 pages
of Word text. So, going at a snail pace
but, the main thing is that I am making progress.
It's 15h00. Best I get on with it. the end is
Tuesday 29 August 2006
Well, I saw a dark green Rover: at 02h20,
at Hyde Park Corner, parked alongside
the pavement, in front Lansborough
was on a bus. It departed after the bus
had stopped at the bus stop. I noted
the number plate. just
in case this proves useful.
Wednesday 30 August 2006 - ICAEW reply
to collect my PO Box. It contained
a letter from the Institute
of Chartered Accountants,
August 2006, with the verdict
"the ICAEW does not
believe that there is grounds
for disciplinary action against
And the main reason given was:
crucial in the decision is that the
LVT stated that tenants could willingly contribute towards the extra costs
should they wish to do so"
Brewster for further detail)
The Chinese proverb that a 'leopard does
not change its spots' has certainly proved
to be true - once again!
Like the other 'so-called' English regulatory
bodies, the ICAEW is a trade association concerned
only with protecting the interests of its members.
No wonder leaseholders are getting ripped-off
by crooked landlords and their equally crooked
aides on a massive scale.
At least, there is one benefit from this
letter: the attachments listing the
contributions by flat for 2002 and 2003.
Among others, they provide:
Confirmation that Mr Andrew
Ladsky IS Steel Services ( flat
35 , flat 5 have not paid a contribution) (NB: However, according to the ICAEW, some undetailed contributions in the 2004 year-end accounts were paid for some of the flats owned by Mr Ladsky. No contribution has been received from flat 5, nor flat 21- See Pridie Brewster # 18 ) (Owners identity # 3. 1 )
More evidence that Ms Ayesha
Salim, CKFT, lied to West
London County Court - under
a Statement of Truth - as, in her 6
August 2003 application to West London
County Court she wrote, on page 2
"Martin Russell Jones issued a revised Major
Works Apportionment setting out the revised
estimate for the works and calculation of the
percentages due from each
of the tenants at
the property. A copy of the revised estimate
and apportionment is attached to the application
The "Major Works Apportionment" she
attached shows a reduction of 24.19%
for each flat
The 2002 and 2003 "summary of contributions
to the major works fund" sent by the
ICAEW with its 29
August 2006 letter shows that 9
out the 14 flats were charged the full amount
originally demanded by Ms Hathaway,
Russell Jones in her 15
July 2002 letter.
These amounts are listed in the Particulars
of the claim accompanying the 29
November 2002 West London County Court
claim - DRAWN-UP by CKFT - for the which the Statement
of Truth was signed by Ms Joan Hathaway, Martin Russell Jones (This, combined with the fact that West London County Court proceeded with the claim - amounts to a very serious breach of CPR).
Given that Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor was the acting solicitors on
the claim filed in West
London County Court, how
does Ms Ayesha Salim reconcile her claim - under
a Statement of Truth - in her 6 August
2003 application that the "revised Major
Works Apportionment setting out the revised estimate
for the works and calculation of the percentages
due from each of the tenants at the property.." -
with the "summary of contributions to the
major works fund" produced by Pridie Brewster? (Pridie Brewster # 18)
Ms Salim KNEW what these leaseholders had been made to pay. SHE / her firm FORCED
these leaseholders to pay these amounts at 'gun
point' i.e. by issuing the FALSE claim against
Thursday 31 August 2006 - 09h47
A Vauxhall Vectra, parked
in Hans crescent. Male, Caucasian, in
his 50s, glasses. I stopped behind
him to note the number plate.
Within a few seconds, he departed
Saturday 2 September 2006 - 11h45
Throughout the week I have continued
to be followed.
On Saturday, I went to a hairdressing salon
located on New Cavendish Street fairly close
to the T junction with Marylebone High St .
As I was about to enter the salon, my instinct
told me to look towards Marylebone High
St. There I noticed a man on
the opposite pavement. He was stationary. Even
though there were quite a lot of people on Marylebone
High st, my 'internal radar' locked onto
him partly because he was looking in
my direction and partly because he had the overall
look, or maybe, I should say 'aura' of some of
the [morally depraved, despicable scum] [Note] who have been following me around - although
better dressed than quite a few.
He proceeded to start walking in the direction
of Oxford St . At that point, I run to Marylebone
High st, turned left so that I would end-up being
ahead of him. I had put my camera on. As
I did this, I crossed the road so that I would
end up in his path. He looked very ill
at ease . I took a photograph. There
were several people around him (and I) at the
time. Hence, I don't think that it could be construed
that I was taking a photograph of 'him' i.e.
my interest could have been what was around him
/ behind him.
I went back onto the other pavement. He continued
walking in the direction of Oxford st, turning
his head away from me. I also continued
in this direction at a fast pace so that I could
take other photographs of him. After about 12
metres, he stopped in front of a coffee shop
and, for 1-2 seconds looked at a poster in the
He then turned back, walking
back in the direction he had come from while
continuing to turn his head away from me. He
looked to me like he did not know what to do. Although
he was turning his head away from me, I nonetheless
took another photograph to prove that he had
Description: Caucasian, c. 1.75m in
height; overweight. In his 40s, chestnut hair,
receding hair line, bolding on the side, with
a large bold patch on the top of his head.
He wore a light blue V neck sweater, white
trousers, brown, sports-shoes with a thick
black, rubber sole.
I then proceeded to the hairdresser due to my
appointment. Hence, did not bother to observe
what he did next.
Tuesday 4 September 2006 - 01h25 - 02h45
I got to the bus stop on Fleet st by c. 01h15.
I waited for a bus for a good 10 -15 minutes.
Among the cars that went by, one was a taxi that
slowed down considerably trying to tempt me.
(Having for quite a long time now, got the impression
that some taxis appear to be particularly
interested in me, I have stopped taking
taxis from that street and the surrounding streets.
From the bus stop, I could see a man standing
on the corner of Whitefriars St and Fleet
st. He was facing in my direction.
After c. 15 minutes, I decided to walk towards
Aldwych, on the left handside pavement.
As I was getting near to the corner on which
the man was standing c. 15 metres away, he
was looking at me. He did this until
I reached the street corner and I started to
cross the street. My 'internal radar'
had got on alert well before I reached the street
He was Caucasian, in his 40s, big pot
belly, c. 1.80m. He 'seemed' to have
some Mediterranean ancestry,
as he had, among others, an olive skin.
He was wearing a horizontally stripped collar
T-shirt of several muted colours, including
dark orange. Immediately behind him,
parked half way on the pavement on
Whitefriars St was a black London cab. I
assumed that it was his taxi.
Another taxi was parked alongside
the other side of the pavement on Fleet st, by
the bank. I assumed that the passenger had asked
the taxi to stop to get cash from the cash point.
By the time I had walked another few metres, the 'passenger'
(Caucasian, English origin, in his mid 30s) of
the other taxi was crossing Fleet st, in the
direction of the man I had just seen standing
on the corner of the street. (I did not bother
to turn round to see whether the man had remained
on the street corner).
I continued on my way, while talking on my mobile
phone. Fleet st was deserted. There
was only the occasional car passing by. When
I reached the height of the beginning of the
law court, a dark red taxi stopped alongside
the pavement, a few metres ahead of
me. This triggered my 'internal radar'.
As I was getting close to it, I could see that
the driver was bending across in the direction
of the part of the dash board, in front of the
By the time I came to its height, the man's
hand was in the direction of the glove compartment.
As I related what was taking place to the person
I was talking to, I laughed as I went by. I
knew that this 'taxi driver' was interested in
me. I continued walking for c.
At that point, the taxi departed and
made a U-turn on Fleet st .
as he started to face the other direction, the
driver turned on his seat by c. 45
degrees in order to look at me while
at the same time making a face at
He had a big, repugnant
people can be so evil!
I did not bother to look at him
From the second or so that I did,
he 'appeared' to me to look like
the man I had seen on the Edgware
Road on Sunday 30 July 2006, as
well in the passenger seat of the
car I thought was going to run
me over, on Tuesday 1 August 2006
(Unfortunately, I did not think of noting the
number plate of 'the taxi')
I continued walking to Aldwych, from where I
took a bus. As it was going to Oxford
St, to annoy and confuse the [morally depraved, despicable scum and low life] [Note] I opted to stay on it until it had gone past
Bond st. I got off at that point because
of another suspicion (a man who had
boarded the bus at Piccadilly).
I then meandered my way, partly through the
back streets, to Hyde Park Corner. After waiting
for a few minutes for a bus, I opted to walk
the rest of the way to Knightsbridge.
By the time I reached the flat it was 02h45.
10 minutes of my being in the flat,
I had the...
... 'great privilege'
of somebody watering the plants
in front of my windows (YES at
02h45 a.m. in the morning!)...
...while hosing my windows
at the same time.
(So repeat of what took
place on: (1) Tuesday
September 2005 at
4:55 a.m.; (2) Tuesday
October 2005 at
5:30 a.m.; (3) Friday
2006 at 1 a.m.)
Needless to say that only
I was awarded this privilege!
Indeed, having done this for a
good 3-4 minutes, the man left.
After about two minutes, I heard
a car depart.
When the man started, I debated whether I should
go up and take a photograph. I opted not to.
I don't care. I have a 'MEGA' SURPRISE IN STORE
FOR THE CORRUPT CRIMINALS:
I am going ' home' to
Paris to launch my website
next week. and I have set-up fallback
measures in case my US ISP is made to close
it - which, I anticipate, is very likely to
(There are quite a few countries in the world
keen to disseminate black on white evidence
of breaches of Human Rights in the United Kingdom)
However, while I opted to not take a photograph,
I did take the opportunity to communicate a few
messages for the benefit of the bugging
device/s which I suspect have been placed
around my flat , including the ceiling
(see My Diary January
/ February 2004)
These included saying:
"Corrupt, criminal sociopaths. And
that goes for the cops as well" (My
reference to 'cops' as I simply cannot
get out of my mind (for many months
now) that the police is somehow involved. However,
as I have already stated on numerous
occasions in My Diary: I
have NO EVIDENCE of this) (Subsequent note: see My Diary home for my conclusion that it is the police)
I also said "I
wish the same thing is done to your mother,
your sister, your daughter, your wife, your
aunt, your grandmother. See how you would feel
While I said "I wish the same is done to." In
truth, I most certainly do not wish for another
woman to go through the unbelievable harassment
and attempts to intimidate me I am being made
At one point, I also said: "And
all of that for what? £3.9 million
for a penthouse flat + three new flats at?
Well, let's say £300k each. Hence,
we are at about £5 million. Plus
the other flats obtained cheaply.
I reckon a total of £6-7 million. Am
Corrupt, criminal filth. You heard
that scum? Rejects from the sewer! Is
that said clearly enough for you?"
As well as: "Oh! I am so privileged:
the plants in front of my windows are being
watered specially for me at 3 o'clock in
the morning! Lucky me!"
I assume that, by turning up at 3 a.m. the scum
who hosed my windows would have been told
that, being a weekday, I would be back and likely
to be in bed. On the other hand, the intention
might have been to make me go out and confront
him. at which point, something could have been
done to me. Who knows?
The reason for this particularly special
treatment today might be connected
to the following: I left the block after
11h a.m. as I decided to take the day off.
Having got out of the block, I remained on
the top step to survey the street. A
man was immediately across, in front of the
hotel, loitering around. I
was not quite sure whether or not he was one
of the 'hired help'. I nonetheless said "Ladsky's
[morally depraved, despicable scum and low life] [Note] thinking that
I would be heard (among others, through the
As the time at which I left it would have led
the 'hired help' to think that I was going somewhere
other than the office, I did one of my little
circuits to reinforce this likely belief i.e.
doing this for the purpose of communicating that
I was going somewhere I did not want them to
know about. Having had my fun, I then proceeded
to the office.
On the other hand.. Maybe it stems from
the frustration of my having the criminals nailed against the wall. In
spite of their continuing threats such
as e.g. the "Final
application" stamped in red on the
last invoice I received from Martin
Russell Jones - and their propensity
to issue the threat of proceedings
at the drop of a hat - they
don't dare to do it.
They know they haven't got 'a leg to stand
Please note that I have NOT acknowledged
any of the invoices sent by Martin Russell
since October 2004.
Considering the events with CKFT and its client
(as well as his other 'puppets' Martin
Russell Jones and Mr
Brian Gale) - and
that they and their client have turned "intimidatory
litigation into an industry"...
come that they have not taken action
against me? (Well... at least, not yet!)
They know that I have a massive amount
of evidence against all of them.
They know that I do not need a lawyer
to represent me - at least in county
And they also know that, by not being
a lawyer, I have no concern about 'burning
my bridges' with other lawyers: I
am not going to be calling on them for assistance
/ a favour in the future.
Hence, I can say things exactly as they are
(e.g. as I have done in my
complaint against CKFT , and in my
reply to Portner and Jaskel ).
I HAVE CORNERED THEM.
So, being the criminal scum that they are,
they do the only thing they know of: harass
and attempt to intimidate and scare a woman on
The unbelievable hell I am going through now: THAT
IS REAL LIFE under Mr Tony Blair's "tough
on crime" government!
(Subsequent note: the criminals did subsequently try their luck - see Portner and Jaskel and West London County Court - Post 2004 - and my summary: threat of forfeiture and bankruptcy proceedings, as well as court claims = FRAUD TOOLS)
Tuesday 5 September 2006 - c. 10h15
I left the block later than usual. Having done
a little circuit that entailed going through
Harrods on the side of Hans Crescent , I proceeded
to go down the tube station.
There were quite a few people. However, as I
was walking in the corridor towards the escalator,
my 'internal radar' locked onto a man on
my right. He appeared to me to be of English
origin; in his late 20s, slim, fairly long red
hair. He wore jeans, a jeans blouson and light
brown, rubber sole, walking shoes.
I slowed down so that he would end-up being
in front of me on the escalator going down to
the platforms. I was about four steps up, behind
him. There was nobody else on the escalator.
From the sound, it was clear that that a train
had arrived on one of the platforms. In fact,
it sounded as though a train had arrived on both
Normally, I would have walked down to catch
the train. I did not, and nor did he. Once
he was off the escalator, he stopped to look
at the map depicting the stations serviced on
both lines. I also stopped, doing the
same thing, placing myself about two metres behind
him. He stayed there for about 40 seconds.
He then started to walk towards the platform
direction Cockfosters. I had moved sideways by
about half a meter to keep him in my line of
vision. After taking a few steps, he
turned around. As I was looking at him,
I smiled while attempting to convey "Caught
Why did this man turn around? He
had no reason to... unless he was interested
in my movements. (If you observe
'normal' tube users: they don't do that.
They look ahead as they continue walking on
the platform). I
then proceeded onto the other platform
and continued with my journey to work.
Friday 8 September 2006 - From 01h00 a.m.
There is something to write every day as I
continue to be followed by 'a small army' the
minute I am anywhere in the street, at any
time of day and night.
On leaving the office at 01h00 a.m., I went
on Victoria Embankment. Something
I have been doing quite a few times in recent
weeks. From there, I then walk in the
direction of Westminster. However, tonight
I had other plans.
Having crossed the road at the crossing, I positioned
myself against the wall alongside the river.
(A good position for observation, as there cannot
be anybody behind me given that it is the river).
I was talking on my mobile phone.
Within two minutes of being there, I noted a young
man, Caucasian, relatively short, walking
at a fairly fast pace on the opposite pavement,
who had come from the direction of
Blackfriars station. He was looking
intermittently in my direction (As you can
imagine, at this time of night, in an office
area, on a weekday, there is hardly anybody
He proceeded to cross the street at the crossing
(i.e. as I had done). He stopped in the middle
island. Although the traffic light was green,
he could have potentially crossed as there was
one car coming but it was some considerable distance
away. It was clear that he was interested
in me as he barely took his eyes off
me until the light turned red. As he
was standing on the island, I said on my mobile
phone "One of Ladsky's [despicable scum] [Note]
He continued looking at me from
the time he crossed the road until
he turned right on the pavement i.e. in the
direction of Westminster .
He continued walking at a relatively good pace. A
few seconds later, when I looked in his direction, he
had stopped and was loitering around, while looking
in my direction . By then he was about
30 metres away from me.
had no doubt in mind: he
was definitely interested in my movements. At
that point I shouted a very 'un-lady
like' comment in his direction. He
became quite disconcerted. He
looked at the traffic that had stopped
at the traffic light. It included
a cyclist who obviously heard what
I said. Some of the car drivers might
have also heard me. He then
The conclusion from what took
place is that this man's
interest was in me. Among
others, consider that
he had been walking at a relatively
fast pace previously.
About two minutes later, a man arrived
from the Westminster direction. Caucasian,
late 30s, blond, overweight, wearing a
dark blue suit. He was walking at a
slightly leisurely pace. He likewise activated
my 'internal radar'. As he went past me,
he looked at his watch. At that point I
can report that I saw her at 0h10 a.m.
man did not look at me as I said this.
From where I was, I had a good view of Temple
Avenue. I saw two taxis,
one of which was light grey and the other
had stopped abreast on the street i.e.
no car would have had the space to overtake
I stayed where I was in their full view, while
talking on my mobile phone. After 2-3
minutes, I saw two men coming out of
one of the taxis and walking off - but
one of them came back in my view.
About 30 seconds later, both taxis reversed
back down the street for a few metres.
They then went forward again ,
eventually up to the traffic light. They
had no option but to turn right. I went in the
opposite direction i.e. towards Blackfriars bridge.
As I was nearing the bridge, I saw a light grey
taxi at the round about., It had stopped at the
traffic light - on the branch of the street that
allows getting access to Victoria Embankment
i.e. where I was. As there were some workmen
cabins (due to some roadworks) I hid behind them. Was
it he same grey cab as I had seen c. two minutes
ago on Temple Av ? I do not know.
I proceeded to walk across Blackfriars bridge
and continued up to the traffic light. At
this point I turned right, walked down a few
metres and then crossed the road. Within
a few seconds a taxi came on my side. I took
it, direction the 'hellhole'
I arrived in Hans Crescent by 01h30. As
I was standing on the corner with Basil
st, near Harrods, a grey taxi arrived (i.e. had
driven alongside the back of Harrods). He
turned right into Hans Crescent. I noted the
number plate although, I doubt very much that
it was the same taxi as I saw in Temple Av.
A few seconds later, the taxi was followed by
another car that arrived at high speed. It also
turned right into Hans Crescent .
At 09h23, on leaving the block, a
small white, delivery type car (not a van),
was parked on the corner of Hans Crescent and
Basil st, in front of the patisserie. Two
men. The passenger was talking on
a mobile. When I started to note the
number plate, the car departed.
I also noted a courier bike rider who
was parked alongside the pavement by
the patisserie. The rider was standing
next to his bike. He did not
appear to me to be doing anything. Just for the
record, I noted the number of the bike.
I noticed two other men. One, late
40s, overweight, unhealthy looking, dressed
in a dark suit (that looked in dire
need of dry cleaning / being pressed) who was
standing on the corner of Basil St and Hans
Crescent, across from the patisserie.
By then I had continued crossing the road and
had placed myself against Harrods to observe
movements. He had activated my 'internal
radar' as he looked to me as though he was trying
to give himself composure (for c. 30 seconds
he looked intently at towards the top of the
building that at the beginning of the street,
across from Harrods). He then mimicked
what I was doing: I had placed my right
foot on the Harrods wall. He did the same thing
against the wall of the house on the corner.
second man was standing to my left,
about 2.5 metres away from me ,
resting against one of the balusters
and looking at me. He
was Caucasian, in his 30s,
nasty, mean look on his face.
He was dressed very casually, with
a canvass type bag across his shoulders.
I was looking in his direction
with a sneer on my face, he
departed in the direction
of the back of Harrods. As
he went past me I said "Ladsky
[morally depraved, despicable scum and low life] [Note] are again on
The other man who had been on the
corner had crossed the road in my
direction. As he went c. three meters
in front of me, I again said the
same thing "Ladsky's [morally depraved, despicable scum and low life] [Note] are on the prowl"
I walked slowly towards the entrance of the
tube station. I noticed one other man on the
pavement, as well as a black VW parked very
close to the entrance to the station. The driver
was Caucasian, c. late 30s. For the
record, I opted to note the number plate - and
took a photograph of the man on the pavement
+ the back of the car.
As I was about to go down the steps to the station,
I noticed that the first man i.e. the
one in his late 40s who had been standing
on the corner of Basil St and Hans Crescent was
now resting against the railing that is alongside
the street i.e. at the edge of the
pavement, on the Brompton Rd. I took a photograph
and went down to the station.
Considering the resources involved and the
time scale over which it has been taking
is 'really' funding this army of [morally depraved, despicable, beneath contempt scum and low life] [Note] to follow me around on a 24
/ 7 basis?
Will I ever get the answer to this question?
I am off to Paris on Sunday and still have quite
a bit to do on the site. So, no more capturing
of this type of events.
W/c 11 September 2006
I am back in my home town - and it feels good!
However, I have still got quite a bit to
do on the site.
End of the week: I have
worked on the site every day since I arrived. Monday
I am meeting with my friend again for the
End of Monday: still more to do. So, launch
will be tomorrow.
Tuesday 19 September 2006
LIFT-OFF!...OF THE SITE...
The input from a
600 page Word document
800 supporting documents
(the longest is 120 pages)
Over 8,000 hyperlinks
going from the 600 pages of site
content to the 800 supporting documents
Over 1,000 links
between the sections and sub-sections
this site has taken...
...over 2,500 hours of my life...
...in the last 17 months.
And I have...
...ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT
THE OUTCOME IS GOING TO BE
THE ONLY THING I CAN DO IS THIS...
...PRAY THAT THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNITY IS GOING TO COME TO MY