Email this site to a contact


Three times: "I can't help you. Get legal advice" = Euphemism for "GET LOST!"

Mr Michael Portillo Re. Jefferson House, 11 Basil St, London SW3 1AX


(If the linked documents within the PDFs do not open, try with Internet Explorer:


If Internet Explorer does not go to a specific part of a page on my website i.e. does not link to an anchor:

In the Internet Explorer browser, select Tools, then 'Compatibility View settings'.

Under 'Add this website' enter: '' and click 'Add').


Several events led me to contact Michael Portillo, 'my' then local (Conservative) Member of Parliament, including, among others:

•  the 13.11.01 planning application to build a penthouse apartment (Planning applications);

•  my suffering extensive harassment, intimidation, as well as, on one occasion, assault from Andrew David Ladsky - within days of my challenging Joan Hathaway, MRICS, Martin Russell Jones (MRJ), on the true nature of "the works" (Police # 1 - Background);

•  Hathaway's denial in 'her' (=Ladsky) 26.03.02 letter to me that the proposed works were connected with the planning application ((NB: See proof of her lies);

•  'her' 26.03.02 letter to the leaseholders at Jefferson House:  

"The surveyors [NB: Brian Gale, MRICS, part of the mafia] have indicated that the cost of works is likely to be in excess of £1 million [US$1.8m] + VAT and fees.

We would stress that this is a very rough indicative estimate and should in no way be relied upon as an exact figure.

The tendering contractors may produce a price which is significantly more or less than the price indicated above depending on numerous factors which contractors take into account when tendering"

Bearing in mind that:

  • under the covenants of my Lease, the works that ought to be taking place were 'repairs and maintenance works';
  • "We have to state that the sum quoted may be exceeded due to disbursements but these will be of a minor nature. Sufficient funds are held to cover the cost of the works within the Reserve Fund"...

...- these comments added to my alarm bells. Either Brian Gale, MRICS, Andrew Ladsky's surveyor, was exceptionally inexperienced, or Joan Hathaway, MRICS, was preparing the ground in order to refer back to this letter at a later stage, along the lines of: "But we did warn you in March 2002".

(See Home Page-Overview for evidence that I was justified in having these concerns)

I prepared a pack, dated 27.05.02, I sent ahead of my meeting with Mr Portillo.

In this, I explained the situation in which I and other leaseholders in Jefferson House were finding ourselves at the time - principally, an intention by the landlord to ask leaseholders for a very large sum of money for "major works" (NB: I was right!). In this, I also captured actions I hoped Mr Portillo would take.

It led Mr Portillo's Researcher (?) / Assistant (?) to phone me from the House of Commons to say that she was very impressed with the pack I had prepared. I thanked her, and replied that I hoped to be equally impressed with his response.

During the 10-15 minute meeting, Mr Portillo told me that he did not think that he could help me, but that he would nonetheless think about it.

He obviously did not spend too much time 'thinking' as,... a letter dated 28 May 2002 (1), i.e. written on the same day, Michael Portillo stated that

he could not help

and suggested that I "get legal advice" (2)

(1)- No hyperlink to the letter, as it is 'lost' somewhere in my files. However, what I am quoting can be verified from the follow on correspondence - referred to below).

(2)- = One of the 'Get lost!' favourites used by the British Establishment, its henchmen and flunkies - to get rid of 'the little people' (other examples under complaint summary # 1.9)

As I had heard that Barry Gardiner, MP, was sympathetic to the plight of leaseholders, on 1st July 02, I sent him a pack similar to the one I had sent to Mr Portillo.

In his letter to me of 29.07.02, Mr Portillo wrote

"As you know, your letter of 1 July addressed to Barry Gardiner, MP, together with the comprehensive booklet you have prepared has been forwarded to me, as I am your Member of Parliament.

"I am very sorry that your worries in respect of Jefferson House continue"

"However, as you will know from my earlier letter of 28 May, as your local Member of Parliament, I do not see how I can assist you in your current situation but would suggest that the best way forward for you is, if you can, to obtain a sound legal opinion"

My conclusion on this: 2nd (typical) 'Get lost!'

In my 02.08.02 letter, I demonstrated that

"I was not exaggerating about the amount I would have to pay if no action is taken"

By then, I had received, 'from' Joan Hathaway, MRICS, MRJ, the "major works" 'service charge' demand of 17.07.02 for £14,400 (US$25,400)...

- being "my share" of the £736,206 (US$1.3m) demanded in Joan Hathaway's letter of 15.07.02 (Overview # 1).

The letter showed a clear intent of asking for money at a later date. My claim that this demand was fraudulent was substantiated (Overview # 1 , # 2 , # 3 , # 5).

In my letter, I asked Portillo:

"If this was addressed to you. How would you feel?"

I quoted the example of a notorious landlord who had been reported recently in the press, and stated:

"Basically, in this country, landlords can do anything they want short of committing manslaughter: they know it is too difficult for individuals like me to challenge them, and they know that the authorities will not provide support to individuals" (*)

"Thirty years ago I decided to make the UK my home. I committed to it by taking on the British nationality.

I thought this was the land of 'fair play', a land where there would be justice.

Clearly, I also misunderstood the saying: "an English man's home is his castle"

(*) I was very amply proven right (Summaries of my 'cries for help' and complaints). Unfortunately, at the time, I was still - naïvely - hoping for some decency and humanity - somewhere in 'the system'.

It led to the 3rd (typical) 'Get lost!' from Michael Portillo in his 06.08.02 'reply':

"I have noted what you say in your letter and am sorry about the frustration you obviously feel in your current situation.

However, I can only reiterate what I have already said, that the best way forward for you is, if you can, to obtain a sound legal opinion".

And back to the "Get legal advice"

And if I cannot afford to "obtain a sound legal opinion"? (first hoping that I am not going to end up with a corrupt lawyer...followed by corrupt judiciaries)?

What do I do - as the innocent victim of organized crime?

Accept to be ruined by a 'sacrosanct' landlord and his 'brothers' - and commit suicide?

Answer: YES! And the criminal psychological harassment regime will go into overdrive to ensure that I do.

With the benefit of hindsight and considerably more knowledge since, I recognise that:

•  the title of my 27.05.02 pack can seem exaggerated to somebody not familiar with my case (but I stand by it in terms of the tactics used by Andrew David Ladsky and his gang of racketeers - see e.g. extortion);

•  my 'wish list' of actions I expected of Mr Portillo includes some that are unrealistic.

Nonetheless, I consider that he could, at the very least, have made suggestions - not to mention raise this, as appropriate, in 'the Westminster village'.

Instead, what I received were 3 "get legal advice" - in other words: 3 (typical) 'Get lost!'...

that cost me - in vain - c. 50 hours of my life, and £25 in costs (summary # 5.11)

(And his successor, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, tried to do the same thing - but, second time round, I was determined to not let him get away with it).

My conclusion on this was that Mr Portillo was not going to 'rock the boat' on my behalf.

As Barry Gardiner, MP, stated during his 8 Jan 02 speech to the House of Commons:

"In the 118 years that have elapsed (since 1884) [of the] 31 different Bills dealing with leasehold reform. All but two of those 31 Bills have been defeated.

Such has been the power of property and the landed classes in this country."

Three years later, I referred to events in my 06.04 05 letter to Michael Howard, then leader of the Conservative party. (This letter was in reply to the Tory propaganda at the time of the general election).

I did not even receive an acknowledgement. Just as well the Tory party positions itself as the "listening party" . (See Michael Howard for detail)




  C O M M E N T S

Back to top