Email this site to a contact
Wasting
over 2,000 hours of my life = more than a whole year,
based on a 35-hour week, desperately trying
to get justice and redress
|
| You are here > Home > Document Library |
|
Document Library
(NOTE: This section is c. 20 pages in length)
My desperate attempts at getting my statutory
rights and common law rights enforced,
getting the service defined under the codes
of conduct of English so-called 'regulatory
bodies', or the remit of government departments
- as well as redress - have led me to
engage in 28
battles (at December 2007) that
have cost me well over a full
year (based on a 35-hour week), writing more than
100 letters .
Sections
- (1) The 28 battles
- The Leasehold Valuation Tribunal , Mr John Prescott's Office
- West London County Court -2002-04 , Wandsworth County Court , Lord Falconer of Thoroton
- West London County Court - Post 2004 , HMCS 'Customer Service'
- Piper Smith Basham /Watton , Law Society , Legal Services Ombudsman
- Mr Stan Gallagher , Bar Council , Legal Services Ombudsman
- Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor , Law Society , Legal Services Ombudsman
- Portner and Jaskel - 2006
- Portner and Jaskel , Law Society - 2007, 2008 , 2009
- Martin Russell Jones , Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
- Pridie Brewster , Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales
- Kensington & Chelsea Housing , Local Government Ombudsman , Mr John Prescott's Office
- Kensington & Chelsea Police , Police Complaints Authority , Metropolitan Police Authority - 2002
- Kensington & Chelsea Police - 2003
- Kensington & Chelsea Police - 2007
- Land Registry , Lord Falconer of Thoroton
- Financial Services Authority
- The Royal Mail
- Hutchison 3G
- (2) Examples of other letters / information packs that have proved to be another complete and utter waste of my time are those to MPs:
- (3) Summary of my 28 battles (excluding correspondence to MPs)
- (4) The root cause of my six years of absolute, sheer, utter hell and the outcome: desperate, as MY SITUATION IS WORSE THAN EVER
- (5) What would a being from another planet - with strong moral principles of right and wrong - make of events, considering the root cause?
- (6) 'NO', I am not a 'lone voice'. There are 'weighty' voices that are highly critical of the current state of affairs:
(1) The 28 battles
The following represents the sequence of the
main correspondence in the context of these 28
battles. All documents are hyperlinked to the
source document.
NB. These documents are in addition
to at least another 450 letters I
have had to write since the beginning of this
horrendous and very traumatic nightmare in
2002.
|
Letters
prior to escalating to next level |
Next
level |
Next
level |
Time
from complaint to launch of site |
Leasehold
Valuation Tribunal (LVT) and Mr
John Prescott's Office |
Following
Steel Services - Martin Russell Jones 7
August 2002 application to
the LVT - which resulted in report LVT/SC/007/120/02 (ref #992 on LVT database)
LVT 8
October 2002
LVT 10
October 2002
Mine 22
October 2002
LVT 29
October 2002
Mine 25
November 2002
Mine 9
December 2002
LVT 11
December 2002
Mine 18
December 2002
Mine 12
January 2003
Mine 12
January 2003
LVT 6
February 2003
LVT 27
March 2003
My solicitors to
LVT 7
April 2003
LVT to CKFT 21
July 2003
Mine 30
July 2003
LVT 1
August 2003
Mine - 20C application 10
August 2003 and covering
letter 12
August 2003
LVT 14
August 2003
LVT to CKFT 26
August 2003
LVT 29
August 2003 |
Complaint,
request for summary of 17
June 2003 determination to Head
of LVTs 6
September 2003
Head LVTs 12
September 2003
Office
of Deputy Prime Minister 6
October 2003
Mine 6
October 2003
Mine 9
November 2003
Head LVT 26
November 2003
|
|
Nearly
three years |
CONCLUSIONS
(1) Over 250 hours of
my life (= SEVEN WEEKS, based
on 35-hour week), including writing
to the Head of LVTs, as well
as writing to the media
(2) £30,000 (US$53,000)
of my life savings
(3) an unbelievable amount
of torment, anguish and distress - including,
post issuing its report. LVT/SC/007/120/02, as the
LVT failed to perform its remit
by not including a summary of
the impact of its determination
on the "reasonableness of
the global sum demanded" resulting
in an on-going battle in the
courts with CKFT over the following
year; battle still continuing
in 2006
This has also led me to spend thousands more in costs
Furthermore, the summary of the case on the
LVT's database, reference #992, blames me for
the LVT action. This amounts to libel under the Defamation Act 1952 and 1996 |
YEARS 2002 TO 2004
West
London County Court (WLCC)
and Wandsworth County Court (WCC)
and Lord
Falconer of Thoroton
(See below year 2007) |
West
London County Court claim ref: WL
203 537 filed against 11
leaseholders representing 14
flats , on 29 November 2002
Mine to the LVT 9
December 2002
LVT reply 11
December 2002
Mine to WLCC 10
December 2002
Mine to WLCC 17
December 2002
My
defence to the claim dated 17
December 2002
WLCC 21
March 2003
Mine to WLCC 25
March 2003
WLCC 27
March 2003
Mine 30
March 2003 to LVT, copied
WLCC
Mine to WLCC 1
April 2003
WLCC 12
June 2003
Mine to WLCC 17
June 2003
Mine to WLCC 22
June 2003
WLCC 23
June 2003
Mine to WLCC 15
July 2003
Mine to WLCC 9
August 2003
WLCC 18
August 2003
WLCC 26
August 2003
Citizen Advice Bureau
to WLCC 2
April 2004
WLCC 21
April 2004
WLCC 28
May 2004
Mine 4
June 2004
WLCC 9
June 2004
WLCC - consent order 1
st July 2004
Mine to WCC 8
July 2004
Mine to WLCC 8
July 2004
Mine to WCC 19
July 2004
Mine to WCC 22
July 2004
WCC 23
July 2004
WCC 27
July 2004
WCC 2
August 2004 |
'Cry
for help' to Lord
Falconer of Thoroton 29
June 2004
Court Service reply 23
August 2004
|
|
Over
two years |
CONCLUSIONS
(1) Over 200 hours of
my life (= SIX WEEKS, based on
a 35-hour week), including writing
to Lord Falconer
(2) Over £10,000
(US$17,000) in legal fees (Healeys,
Piper Smith Basham, Butcher Burns,
Pliener, Staddon) and other costs,
such as transcript of 24 May
2004 hearing, etc.
(3) An indescribable amount
of torment, anguish and distress
over a period of ONE YEAR AND
NINE MONTHS - and
continued anguish since then
as it WRONGLY captured that the
action against me be 'stayed'
i.e. open to further action - knowing
full well that an agreement had
been reached |
YEAR 2007-2008 West London County Court (WLCC) - Post 2004 and Her Majesty Court Service (HMCS)'s 'Customer Service'
(see above for Years 2002-2004)
As well as the Supreme Court Costs Office and see related: below Portner and Jaskel Year 2007
|
WLCC claim, 7WL00675, 27 February 2007 - Filed by Portner and Jaskel
My 22 March 2007 Acknowledgment of Service - highlighting that there are 2 names for the 'claimant' (NB: over the following 16 months I raised the issue a total of 11 TIMES)
My 4 April 2007 document in support of contesting the court's jurisdiction
WLCC 26 April 2007, hearing for 8 May, Skeleton Argument by 3 May 2007
My 30 April 2007 fax asking for extension
My 3 April 2007 Skeleton Argument
My 4 April 2007 fax to WLCC asking for letter from Portner Jaskel
WLCC 4 May 2007 that hearing postponed to 24 August 2007
My 30 June 2007 demand for amended 3 April 2007 Order
My 12 August 2007 letter highlighting no Skeleton Argument from Portner Jaskel
My 16 August 2007 letter that still no Skeleton Argument from Portner Jaskel
My 22 August 2007 fax that Portner Jaskel lies: it has received my Skeleton Argument
WLCC 24 August 2007 Order that I pay £293 to "Roostock Over. Corp"
My 28 August 2007 demand for tape of hearing
My 12 September 2007 "Defence & Counterclaim"
My 13 September 2007 letter to prove delivery of my "Defence & Counterclaim" to Portner Jaskel
WLCC 27 September 2007 asking me to pay £1,700 to "file a counterclaim"
My 2 October 2007 letter re. Portner Jaskel's 26 September 2007 correspondence
My 14 October 2007 letter chasing a reply to my 2 October 2007
My 14 October 2007 letter chasing amended version of 3 April 2007 Order
My 28 October 2007 letter chasing a reply to my 2 October 2007 letter
My 28 October 2007 letter chasing amended version of 3 April 2007 Order
WLCC 11 January 2008 amended version of the 3 April 2007 notice WLCC 19 Dec 07 - 4 Jan 08 'order' stricking out my - non-existent - counterclaim
WLCC 11 January 2008 'allocation questionnaire' (I did not return)
WLCC 7 March 2008 allocation questionnaire and threat
My 14 March 2008 allocation questionnaire to WLCC and supporting document
WLCC 9 April 2008 case management directions
WLCC 18 April 2008 notice of trial (on 21 August 2008)
My 30 April 2008 application to WLCC
WLCC 9 May 2008 refusal of my application
My 14 May 2008 reply to District Judge Nicholson
Portner and Jaskel 23 May 2008 ccd WLCC suggesting 'multi track' My (74 pg) 3 June 2008 Witness Statement; (4 pg Main Points) (NB: as per 9 Apr 08 WLCC directions, sent only to Portner and Jaskel) My 5 June 2008 that 'Claimant' has not sent witness statement
Portner and Jaskel 6 June 2008 Notice of Discontinuance of "all of the claim" against me
My 22 July 2008 to copy on my Notice Commencement Assesssment Costs and Statement of Case for costs
My 26 August 2008 reply to Mr Ladsky's 11 August 2008 'points of dispute' re. my 26 June 2008 Bill of Costs, and application for assessment hearing 12 Sep 08 Notice of 4 Nov 08 Detailed Assessment hearing My 11 Nov 08 letter to copy on my 11 Nov 08 letter and enclosures to Portner
4 November 2008 WLCC Order for transfer of the detailed assessment hearing to the Supreme Court Costs Office
18 December 2008 Notice from SCCO of detailed assessment hearing on 30 January 2009
My 22 Jan 09 covering letter for delivery of bundle - and list of documents in bundle
4 Feb 09 Final Costs Certificate |
My 13 November 2007 complaint to Her Majesty Court Service (HMCS)'s Customer Service
HMCS Customer Service 15 November 2007 initial reply I will hear in "two weeks"
HMCS Customer Service 29 November 2007 letter: "reply in next two weeks"
My 5 December 2007 reply: "transfer my case immediately to another court"
HMCS Customer Service 10 December 2007 letter totally ignoring my demand
HMCS Customer Service 20 December 2007 'reply' to my complaint
My 27 December 2007 reply
HMCS
HMCS Customer Service 2 January 2008 - back to square one |
My 11 December 2007 letter to Mr Jack Straw, Justice Secretary, asking for assistance
HMCS Petty France Customer Service initial 21 December 2007 acknowledgement
My 27 December 2007 reply
HMCS (2nd person) Petty France 10 January 2008 "reply to my complaint"
My 28 January 2008 reply to 10 January letter
HMCS (3rd person) Petty France 24 January 2008 follow-up to my complaint
My 18 February 2008 letter to Mr Jack Straw re. WLCC silence following 26 Jan 08 letter |
My 26 January 2008 letter "To: A Judge committed to the concept of Justice" - asking for transfer of case out of WLCC |
CONCLUSIONS
|
Piper
Smith Basham, Law Society and Legal
Services Ombudsman and Lord
Falconer of Thoroton |
Mine 2
December 2003 to Piper
Smith Basham (which I view as an extremely
generous letter)
Reply 18
December 2003
Mine 24
January 2004
Reply 30
January 2004 |
Complaint to the Law Society (LS) 16
March 2004
LS 2
June 2004
Mine 17
June 2004
PSB 1
July 2004
LS 3
August 2004
Mine 16
August 2004
PSB 25
August 2004
LS 22
September 2004
Mine 30
November 2004
LS 8
December 2004 |
Complaint to the Legal
Services Ombudsman (LSO) 5
December 2004
LSO 17
January 2005
LSO 27
April 2005
LSO - Decision 12
May 2005
Mine 22
May 2005
LSO 7
June 2005 |
Two
years and four months |
CONCLUSIONS
(1) c.200 hours of my
life (= FIVE WEEKS, based on
a 35-hour week) in relation to
my complaint against them and
the one year of ensuing battles
with them, the Law Society and
the Legal Services Ombudsman
(This is in addition to
the c.300 hours of my life -
much of these due to the need
to argue with them: my legal
and statutory rights; get them
to undertake what had been agreed)
(2) In the process, they - combined
with Mr
Stan Gallagher and Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor - have 'allegedly'
made me endure the most appalling
torment, anguish and distress
(3) They have also cost
me the following six months of
on-going battle with CKFT which,
among others, led me to have
to take more time off my annual
leave (visits to the Citizen
Advice Bureau, the court)
(NB. Piper Smith Basham
cost me £6,500 (US$11,300)
in fees (including £1,500
(US$2,600) (for counsels), and £1,500
in other costs, including 'allegedly'
loss of earnings) |
Mr
Stan Gallagher and Bar Council and Legal
Services Ombudsman and Lord
Falconer of Thoroton |
Complaint
to Mr
Gallagher / Arden Chambers
Mine 20
January 2004 Reply 23
January 2004
Mine 26
January 2004
|
Complaint to the Bar Council (BC) 5
April 2004
BC 14
April 2004
BC 28
April 2004
Mine 3
May 2004
BC 6
May 2004
SG reply 9
June 2004
Mine 29
August 2004
SG 11
October 2004
Mine 31
October 2004 + 2
November 2004
BC - Decision 27
January 2005
Mine 25
March 2005
BC 30
March 2005
BC 3
June 2005
Mine 22
June 2005 |
Complaint to the Legal
Services Ombudsman (LSO) 25
March 2005
LSO 1
April 2005
Mine 2
April 2005
LSO 8
April 2005
LSO - Decision 30
August 2005 |
Two
years and three months |
CONCLUSIONS
(1) over 250 hours of
my life (= over SEVEN WEEKS,
based on a 35-hour week) spent
on writing the complaint against
him and the one year of battles
that followed with him, the Bar
Council and the Legal Services
Ombudsman
(2) In the process, Mr
Gallagher - combined with Piper
Smith Basham and CKFT - has 'allegedly'
made me endure the most appalling
torment, anguish and distress
(In addition, 'allegedly',
the loss of the majority of my
spare time from 13 November 2003
and, in fact, starting after
the 28 October 2002 meeting -
over 200 hours (= SIX WEEKS,
based on a 35- hour week), as
well as the time I continued
having to take off my annual
leave (visits to the Citizen
Advice Bureau, the courts) during
the on-going battle with CKFT,
as well as the courts over the
following seven months) |
Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor
and the Law Society and the Legal
Services Ombudsman and Lord Falconer of Thoroton |
CKFT 7
October 2002
Mine 17
October 2002
CKFT 21
October 2002
Mine 9
August 2003
Mine 19
December 2003
+ numerous other
letters |
Complaint to the Law Society (LS) 20
December 2004
LS - Decision 8
February 2005
Mine 19
February 2005
LS 17
March 2005 |
Complaint to the Legal
Services Ombudsman (LSO) 20
February 2005
LSO - Decision 11
July 2005 |
One
year and seven months |
CONCLUSIONS
Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor,
its client Mr Andrew Ladsky and
his other puppets, Martin
Russell Jones and Mr
Brian Gale have cost
me over £75,000
(US$133,000) of my life-savings
and more than 9,000 hours of my life,
including the 18 months spent on
developing this website - at c.
40 hours per week. Based on a 35-hour
week, it amounts to FIVE YEARS
They are
a key part of the root cause of the indescribable
sheer utter hell I have gone
through since 2002.. and
they continue to make me go through
the same sheer utter hell now
On its own, the complaint
against Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor has cost me c. 200
hours of my life (= SIX WEEKS
of my life, based on a 35-hour
week), including the ensuing
battle with the Law Society and
referral of my complaint to the
Legal Services Ombudsman |
YEAR 2006
Portner and Jaskel (PJ)
(see below for Year 2007+) (see also Notices by landlord and My Diary, 18 February 2006) |
PJ 10 February 2006 "notice"
Mine 3 March 2006
PJ 6 March 2006
Mine 11 March 2006
PJ 14 March 2006
Mine 30 March 2006
PJ 3 April 2006
Mine 30 April 2006 (1.1MB) |
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
I hold the view that the 10 February 2006 "notice" sent by Portner and Jaskel was 'bogus' and that this action was motivated by malicious intent
While it led me to undertake a comprehensive search of the Land Registry titles for Jefferson House and to discover that Steel Services no longer has control of the last floor of Jefferson House, this exchange of correspondence has cost me in excess of 50 hours of my life
Portner and Jaskel has subsequently confirmed that its client is Mr Andrew Ladsky - which I knew all along (see My Diary 3 October 2006 )
|
YEAR 2007, 2008, 2009 Portner and Jaskel (PJ) and Law Society
(See above for Year 2006) (see above related: WLCC Year 2007 ) |
PJ 16 February 2007 threat of bankruptcy
Mine 25 February 2007 never heard of company
PJ filing of WLCC claim, 7WL00675, 27 February 2007
PJ 17 April 2007 asking for "my defence"
PJ 1 May 2007 to WLCC claiming only just received 19 April 2007 Order
PJ 1 May 2007 to WLCC copy 6 April 2007 letter from my website visitor
PJ 1 May 2007 supplying 3 April 2007 WLCC Aknowledgment Service Filed
PJ 1 May 2007 to me of what sent to WLCC
PJ 4 May 2007 to inform me 8 May 2007 hearing cancelled
PJ 8 May 2007 asking me copy my contesting jurisdiction of court
PJ 8 June 2007 chasing me for my evidence contesting court's jurisdiction
My 30 June 2007 letter supplying my 4 April 2007 Skeleton Argument
PJ 12 July 2007 to send "Rootstock" title
My 12 August 2007 reply
My 22 August 2007 detailing my costs
Gary Williams, barrister, 22 August 2007 Skeleton Argument
My 10 September 2007 to send cheque for £293.70
Gary Williams, barrister, 26 September 2007 Defence to my "Defence & Counterclaim"
PJ 4 February 2008 'List of documents'
My 15 March 2008 re. my allocation questionnaire
My 6 May 2008 standard disclosure
My 16 May 2008 request from std disclosure
My 19 May 2008 Part 18 Request
PJ 19 May 2008 supply of 7 Jan 08 airspace transaction for £1 My 21 May 2008 to supply full copy of all of my standard disclosure
My 22 May 2008 to supply outstanding documents - including 'sums claimed by year'
PJ 23 May 2008 ccd WLCC suggesting 'multi track'
My (74 pg) 3 June 2008 Witness Statement; (4 pg Main Points)
My 5 June 2008: no reply to my Part 18 rqst; no witness statement
"Rootstock" 6 June 2008 Notice of Discontinuance of "all of the claim" against me
My 26 June 2008 statement of costs
My 22 July 2008 Notice of Commencement of Assessment of Costs, and my Statement of Case for costs
Mr Ladsky's 11 August 2008 'points of dispute' re. my 26 June 2008 Bill of Costs
My 26 August 2008 reply to Mr Ladsky's 11 August 2008 'points of dispute' re. my 26 June 2008 Bill of Costs, and application for assessment hearing
My 31 Oct 08 fax to confirm Detailed Assessment hearing on 4 Nov 08
3 Nov 08 fax from Portner to WLCC claiming had not been informed of hearing
My 11 Nov 08 amended Bill of Costs
"Rootstock" "14 Jan 09 "offer" of £4,500 "for all my costs"
My 19 Jan 09 reply rejecting "offer" + my 19 Jan 09 amended reply to 11 Aug 08 Points of Dispute + my extra costs and extra interest since 26 Jun 08 My 22 Jan 09 covering letter for delivery of bundle - and list of documents in bundle
"Roostock" costs at 30 Jan 09
My costs at 30 Jan 09
PJ 4 Feb 09 cheque for £6,640.72
My 9 Feb 09 acknowledgment of cheque |
My 28 February 2007 complaint to Mrs Fiona Woolf, President of the Law Society
Mrs Woolf 2 March 2007 (forwarded my complaint to CEO of Legal Complaints Service)
30 March 2007 Solicitors Regulation Authority decision of "no malpractice" by Portner and Jaskel |
|
[ ] |
CONCLUSIONS
Since filing its 16 February 2007 unlawful threat of bankruptcy, followed by filing the fraudulent 27 February 2007 claim against me, Portner and Jaskel has cost me [ ]
The unlawful 16 February 2007 threat of bankruptcy has caused me an unbelievable amount of torment, anguish and distress.
And the horrendous nightmare has continued ever since following the filing of the fraudulent 27 February 2007 claim against me in West London County Court
[ ] |
Martin
Russell Jones and the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) |
Several
files full of letters to Martin
Russell Jones since 1989 |
Complaint to the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) 2
February 2005 (1MB)
RICS 1
March 2005
Mine 5
March 2005
Mine 21
March 2005
RICS 13
May 2005
Mine 17
May 2005
Mine 2
June 2005
RICS 10
June 2005
RICS 3
August 2005
Mine 14
October 2005
RICS 4
November 2005 |
RICS 14 August 2008 threat of legal proceedings
My 18 August 2008 reply asking for clarifications
RICS 21 August 2008 ignoring my reply and implied encouragement to Martin Rusell Jones to issue proceedings against me
My 4 September 2008 reply |
|
CONCLUSIONS
Martin
Russell Jones, its client
Mr Andrew Ladsky and his other
puppets, Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor and Mr
Brian Gale, have cost me
over £75,000
(US$133,000) of my life-savings
and more than 9,000 hours of
my life, including the 18 months
spent on developing this website
- at c. 40 hours per week.
Based on a 35-hour week, it
amounts to FIVE YEARS
They are
a key part of the root cause of the indescribable
sheer utter hell I have gone
through over the last five years...
and they continue to make me go
through the same sheer utter hell
now
On its own,
the complaint against Martin
Russell Jones to the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors has cost
me over 200 hours of my life
(= over SIX WEEKS of my life,
based on a 35-hour week), including
the eight months battle with
the Institution of Chartered
Surveyors |
Pridie
Brewster and the Institute of Chartered
Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) |
Mine
to Pridie Brewster 30
March 2005
Reply 15
April 2005
Mine 17
April 2005
Mine 9
May 2005
|
Complaint to the Institute of
Chartered Accountants in England
and Wales (ICAEW) 19
July 2005
Mine 2
August 2005
ICAEW 4
August 2005
ICAEW 23
August 2005
Mine 1
September 2005
ICAEW 6
September 2005
ICAEW 2
November 2005
Mine 7
March 2006
ICAEW 16
March 2006
ICAEW` 13
April 2006
Mine 17
May 2006
ICAEW 24
May 2006
Mine 6
June 2006
ICAEW 8
June 2006
Mine 12
July 2006
ICAEW 18
July 2006
ICAEW 29 August 2006
ICAEW 9 October 2006 |
|
One
year 5 months |
CONCLUSIONS
...and A HELL OF A LOT MORE - before - and since - due to fraudulent accounts. |
Kensington & Chelsea Housing dept and Local Government Ombudsman and Mr
John Prescott's Office |
Mine 22
June 2004
Tenancy Relations
Officer (TRO) to CKFT-MRJ 25
June 2004
Mine 2
July 2004
Mine 22
July 2004
Mine 25
July 2004
Mine 6
August 2004
Mine to Ward Councillor 30
August 2004
Mine to Chief Housing
Officer 10
September 2004
Mine to Chief Housing
Officer 15
September 2004 |
Complaint to the Local
Government Ombudsman (LGO) 17
September 2004
Ward Councillor 30
September 2004
Mine to Ward Councillor 5
October 2004
LGO 5
October 2004
Chief Housing Officer 15
October 2004
TRO 25
October 2004
Mine to Chief Housing
Officer 11
November 2004
Mine to TRO 11
November 2004
LGO 16
November 2004
Mine to LGO 17
November 2004
LGO 17
November 2004
Housing Dept Exec.
Director 16
December 2004
LGO 26
January 2005
LGO 9
February 2005
Mine to LGO 27
February 2005
LGO 14
April 2005
Mine to LGO 17
April 2005
LGO 12
May 2005 |
My 22
November 2004 letter to the
Parliamentary
Ombudsman (not a 'proper'
complaint as I did not go through
my Member of Parliament to file
my complaint) |
8
months (to get accounts -
that are not compliant) |
CONCLUSIONS
The battles with Kensington & Chelsea
Housing over a seven-month period
have cost me c. 150 hours of my life
(= over FOUR WEEKS, based on a 35-hour
week) The battle with the Local
Government Ombudsman has cost me another c.
100 hours of my life, including
my letter to the Parliamentary
Ombudsman (=nearly THREE WEEKS,
based on 35-hour week)
They have also cost me
c. £100 (US$180) in postage
costs
I also hold
Mr
John Prescott, then overall
head of Local Government responsible
for the battles I have had to
engage in with the council
and the ombudsman |
YEAR 2002
Kensington & Chelsea
Police (K&CP) and Police Complaints
Authority and Metropolitan Police
Authority and Home
Office
|
Crime
report BS
560 4102/02C 1st and 2nd
application as the first form was "lost" by
K&CP police
Mine 21
February 2002 |
Complaint to the Police Complaints
Authority (PCA) 13
March 2002
Detective Inspector 19
March 2002
Mine to CID 25
March 2002
PCA 25
March 2002
Mine to CID 26
March 2002
Mine to Detective
Inspector 2
April 2002
Detective Inspector 23
April 2002
K&C police 9
May 2002
K&C police 20
June 2002 |
Complaint to the Chair of the Metropolitan
Police Authority (MPA) 5
May 2002
MPA 13
May 2002
Mine to MPA 31
May 2002
MPA 5
June 2002
MPA 11
July 2002
Mine to MPA 4
August 2002
MPA 7
August 2002
And the 27
August 2003 reply from the
Home Office from being copied
on my
letter to the media |
eight months |
CONCLUSIONS
In the process, they have
caused me considerable torment,
anguish and distress, including
leaving me in the situation of
assuming that I now have a police
record - as a "complaint
has been fully recorded by the
police."
In addition to this, Kensington & Chelsea
police has also cost me more
of my time following its letters
of 27
January 2003 and 6
February 2003 - leading
me to reply on 11
February 2003
As with the Leasehold
Valuation Tribunal and West
London County Court , they have also
been the cause of my spending
a significant number of hours writing
to a dozen media
As the Home
Office is the overall head for
the police, I also hold it responsible
for events |
| YEAR 2003
Kensington & Chelsea Police (K&CP) |
[ ] |
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
[ ] |
| YEAR 2007
Kensington & Chelsea Police (K&CP) |
[ ] |
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
[ ] |
Land
Registry (LR) and Lord Falconer
of Thoroton + My Diary |
Mine 28
March 2006
LR 4
April 2006
Mine 18
April 2006
LR 25
April 2006 |
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
The
Land Registry has wasted c. 30 hours
of my life (= nearly ONE WEEK, based
on a 35-hour week)
I also hold Lord
Falconer of Thoroton responsible
for events as the Land Registry
is one of his departments |
Financial
Services Authorities |
Mine 23
April 2005
FSA 12
May 2004
Complaint of 4
June 2005
FSA 20
June 2005
Mine 4
July 2005
FSA 26
July 2005 |
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
The
Financial Services Authority has
wasted c. 20 hours of my life
I am glad it has finally been exposed e.g. HBOS |
Royal
Mail (RM) |
Complaint 17
May 2005
Mine 14
June 2005
Mine 21
June 2005
Mine 10
September 2005
RM 15
September 2005
Mine 11
March 2006
RM 4
April 2006
Mine 3
July 2006
RM 12 July 2006
[ ] |
Postwatch Must to my annoyance, I have unfortunately misled the reply agreeing that I have complaint against the Royal Mail - My Diary 26 Nov 06
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS
I
was not going to include my battle
with the Royal Mail (post office), 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 this nightmare
in 2002.
However, the unreliability
of the service is continuing
and is causing me a lot of anxiety
So far, the post office
has cost me about 20 hours of
my life.
Update, post the launch of my site - The unbelievable events that took place in October 2006 and November 2006 caused me, among others, an enormous amount of distress and an additional c. 50 hours of my time.
These events led me to contact Postwatch which supports my complaint.
Hence, for the FIRST TIME in my horrendous, five-year nightmare, I HAVE HAD A COMPLAINT UPHELD. |
CONCLUSIONS
As a result of its very deliberate actions intended to cause me grief (My Diary 29 Dec 08 ; 23 Jan 09) - as well as depriving me of my mobile number for three months - as detailed in my 25 January 2009 letter to Hutchison 3G, it has cost me £140.14, comprising of :
Personal time: 13 hours (in truth, it cost me more than that) - which I charged at £9.25 per hour (the rate allowed by the courts for a Litigant in Person) = £120.25
Postage costs = £19.89
To this I added the £41.25 credit I had, and therefore claimed back £181.39.
In the end, I settled for £120.00
BUT, I also clock-up my second success with a watchdog (first with Postwatch) - even though Ofcom was not the right watchdog to contact. Isn't that great? When you've gone through the absolute, sheer utter hell I have been going through since 2002: TRUST ME. IT DOES FEEL GREAT to finally get some help. |
Back to list
(2) Examples of other letters / information
packs that have proved to be another complete
and utter waste of my time are those to MPs:
Back to list
(3) Summary of my [28] battles (excluding correspondence
to MPs)
|
-
[17] COMPLAINTS (Up to 120
pages in length ) (For a brief overview, see My Diary 6 May 2008)
- Over 100 LETTERS FROM
ME
- TAKING more than 2,000 HOURS
OF MY LIFE = more than one year, based
on a 35-hour week... and keeps on going
Fair minded, reasonable
visitor to the site, please
remember that, as I was in full time employment until January 2008, I had to find
this time in the evenings, at
weekends and by using my annual
leave - which was not enough, leading me to buy extra days. (Yes = more costs)
These letters are in addition
to at least ANOTHER
450 LETTERS I have had
to write since the beginning of
this horrendous and very traumatic
nightmare in 2002.
Fair minded, reasonable
visitor to the site, this is
why I have spent practically
all my evenings, weekends, and
the best part of my annual leave
tied to my desk and my computer since 2002. At October 2008, I calculate the total number of hours at c. 16,000 hours. Based on a 35-hour working week, it amounts to nealry NINE YEARS.
A NINE YEAR PRISON SENTENCE, suffering treatment which, I assume, if inflicted on prisoners of war, would be considered as inhuman under the Geneva Conventions. And I am NOT the criminal. I AM THE VICTIM.
And YES: it all stems from the fact that when, in July 2002, I was presented with a service charge demand for £14,400 (US$25,400) I 'dared' to ask the question: "what are going to spend it on?"
When I was writing this section, I kept
breaking down in tears as it brought
back the horror of what I have
been made to endure by the above-mentioned
parties.
The feeling of absolute and utter disgust took over the tears. I have resigned myself to an objective of continuing to accumulate evidence of what can happen to a leaseholder who 'dares' to challenge a 'sacrosanct landlord' - in the hope that it will be a trigger for change (home # 17). Somebody has to do it.
Too many people are suffering at the hands of this barbaric, feudal system and its supporting infrastructure (e.g. media articles ; Comments ; my fellow leaseholders ; My Diary 22 Nov 08)
I have been going through
the most unbelievable, horrendous
hell - AND STILL DO - EVERY
DAY!
For more
than seven years now, MY LIFE
HAS BEEN TOTALLY, TOTALLY RUINED. |
Back to list
(4) The root cause of my seven years of absolute, sheer, utter hell and the outcome: desperate, as MY SITUATION IS WORSE THAN EVER
 |
Fair
minded, reasonable visitor to the
site, when looking at the above,
consider that ALL
OF IT stems from the fact that:
• When, in July 2002,
I was presented with a service
charge demand of £14,400 (US$25,400) I 'dared'
to ask the question "what are
you going to spend it on?"
• I insisted on getting
a reply to what I consider to be
a perfectly reasonable question
to ask
• I did this in the
context of agreeing that
works needed to be carried out,
and I would consequently need to
pay my 'just and fair share' of
it - as I captured in my 19 October 2003 Witness
Statement (point 6) (My 19 October 2003 Witness Statement)
'Daring'
to ask this question - and pursue
the answer to it - has led me
to go through this most unbelievable,
horrendous hell since 2002. |
 |
What
have I achieved as a result of
going through this indescribable,
unbelievable hell that has led
me to lose the main part of
my life savings, has
totally ruined my life since
2002 - including suffering on-going
harassment, bullying, victimisation, abuse, intimidation, defamation of my name and my character, etc.?
NOTHING!
In 2006, at the time of launching the website...
... I wrote "in fact, my situation is worse than ever". I had four invoices from Martin Russell Jones amounting
to £44,246 (US$78,000) hanging over my head: £15,500 (US$27,300), £14,500 (US$25,600), £5,625 (US$9,900), £8,621 (US$15,200). (They were the trigger to my lauching the website) This is in spite of the fact that
I - eventually - accepted Steel
Services' ' offer '
of £6,350 (US$11,200) vs.
the original demand of £14,400 (US$25,400)
and obtained a Consent Order endorsed
by West
London County Court on 1
July 2004 . Legally,
I DID NOT OWE THIS SUM. ( CKFT # 6.6 , # 6.8 ; West London County Court # 9 - # 13 )
Ms Ayesha Salim, Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor , stated
in her 28
May 2004 letter to me, acceptance
of the Consent Order I had drafted
while, in her 15
June 2004 letter, she
stated having sent it to the
court for approval and sent
me a copy with her correspondence
of 14
July 2004. (Lord Falconer of Thoroton # 3 , WLCC # 14 , CKFT # 4 , # 6.4 )
The judge, in West
London County Court, issued an order
that the action against me be 'stayed' (open
to further proceedings) - in
spite of the court knowing (as
confirmed by the Court
Service ) that agreement
had been reached (Lord Falconer of Thoroton # 4 )
By becoming a 'lessee'
of Lavagna Enterprises ,
the landlord, Steel Services,
could no
longer fulfil major covenants (1.1MB)
in my
lease - as it no longer
had control of the last floor.
No financial institution
would lend under these circumstances (Headlessors , Owners identity # 3 , # 3.1 )
I have spent the best part of
my life savings c. £75,000
(US$133,000) (and a lot more since 2006) and cannot afford
to employ more legal advisers - of
which, not surprisingly, I have
now become extremely wary. (Lawyers, Courts & LSO )
In spite of the fact that I have
supplied with my complaints what
I consider to be very damning 'black
on white' evidence, none
of my complaints (as listed above) have
been upheld. (Legal Services Ombudsman , Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors , Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales - and, in 2007, Portner and Jaskel # 4 and # 5 )
Hence, I cannot get the redress
and just treatment I believe
I deserve.
In addition:
I have suffered libellous, scurrilous, defamatory statements made against
me to a tribunal and two courts,
as they had the effect of - falsely
- portraying me as a liar and a
cheat (the same highly libellous, scurrilous statements have also been captured
in a significant number of other
correspondences).
Has this false information been
captured by e.g. credit rating
agencies?
Some of these documents are in
the possession of other leaseholders,
hence, the public at large.
Kensington
and Chelsea police has "fully
recorded a complaint" against
me. Hence, I assume that I now
have a police
record.
Furthermore, in March 2007, Kensington & Chelsea police also made scurrilous statements against me by implying - without evidence in support - that I committed "a crime" on which it then backed down when challeged by my website Host. It also branded me as "a Nazi" for having German blood in me.
Launching the website in the hope of putting pressure on resolving my situation has had the net effect of lining me up for similar, vicious, barbaric attacks - summarised on the home page.
In 2006, I stated that the above invoices were fraudulent (Pridie Brewster # 12 , Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor # 6.3 )
I demonstrated this in my 3 June 2008 Witness Statement in relation to the FRAUDULENT 27 February 2007 claim filed against me in West London County Court by Portner and Jaskel - which led to "ALL" of the claim against me being dropped on 6 June 2008 (Portner # 6 , # 29 , # 30 , # 31 , # 33) - and I further proved my position that: threat of forfeiture, of bankruptcy, as well as as courts claims = FRAUD TOOLS.
However, as can be seen in my Witness Statement, this victory has not changed my overall situation - nor my objectives in lauching the site.
|
Back to list
(5) What would a being from another planet - with strong moral principles of right and wrong - make of events, considering the root cause?
Consider that THE ROOT CAUSE OF ALL OF THIS IS...
...Mr Ladsky et. al. and their aides
deciding that I (and other leaseholders) would
be made to pay for this (2.4MB): the
CONSTRUCTION OF A PENTHOUSE FLAT, ADDITION
OF THREE OTHER FLATS AND RELATED WORKS
- FOR WHICH WE
ARE NOT LIABLE.
This pack (2.3MB), as well as this pack (1.1MB) contain key evidential documents.
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.
In October 2007, the selling price was £6,500,000 (US$11.5 millions)
Jefferson House
July 2002 |
|
Jefferson House
September 2005 |
To be more precise:
( PDF
of above diagram - at February 2006)
|
...and
'the system' deciding to give them
its full support
What would a being from
another planet - with strong
moral principles of right and
wrong - make of this?
That it
is a VERY SICK society heading
for 'meltdown'? |
Back to list
(6) 'NO', I am not a 'lone voice'. There
are 'weighty' voices that are highly critical
of the current state of affairs:
Government as a whole perceived as "not
fit for purpose"
• In April 2006, the Home
Office (with responsibility for the police) started
to come under fire from several corners leading
to the head being replaced. The new head was
reported as saying that he viewed the Home Office
as "not fit for purpose''
This
statement led a journalist at the Daily
Express , to write (16 June 2006)
"Contrary to Home Secretary John Reid's
declaration that his department is "not
fit for purpose" I would suggest that this
whole Government is "not fit for purpose" -
and the Home Office situation is just symptomatic
of a general uselessness throughout this administration"
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE with this journalist.
English local government described as "morally
corrupt"
• Article in The
Times of 16
August 2005 , in which the journalist
wrote:
"...LGO Watch... called for the setting
up of an independent local government
complaints commission to bring order
into a
system it described as "morally corrupt"
...the 2000 Act was supposed to herald
a regime of quality, efficiency and
leadership.
In fact, it has meant the
introduction of the payroll and pork-barrel
politics into English local government, along
with the acceleration of an arrogant,
managerial style of operation"
A court service and legal system criticized
by many, including the (then) Prime Minister, Mr Tony
Blair, the Governor of the Bank of England and
Sir David Clementi
• The 24
June 2006 issue of the Daily
Mail quotes Mr Tony Blair as saying that
"He called for judges to stand
up for "decent law-abiding folks" who
he said, "think the political and legal
establishment are out of touch on the issue
and they are right" .
But then, as stated in the article
"Ever since he promised to be 'tough on
crime, tough on the causes of crime' in 1993,
Tony Blair has been promising to overhaul the
criminal justice system. Unfortunately, since
coming to power in 1997, he keeps sticking
to the same script."
And, "unfortunately" , like previous
governments, crooked landlords and their
aides who commit criminal offences by stealing
from leaseholders, using harassment, blackmail,
bullying and intimidation tactics, etc.,
'mysteriously' do not come under Mr Tony
Blair's "tough
on crime" radar.
Maybe if rogue landlords and their aides were
teenagers, "decent law-abiding folks" like
me 'might' stand a chance of being treated
justly and fairly. On the other hand, in
a society that evidently regards landlords
as sacrosanct, with carte blanche to do
exactly as they please...maybe not.
• The Governor of the Bank
of England , in a speech, on 21
June 2006 , at the Lord Mayor's Banquet
for Bankers and Merchants of the City
of London at the Mansion House (pages
6 and 7) (NB: The highlights are all
mine)
"After 13 years, we have at last drawn a
line under the BCCI case, the most expensive
fishing expedition in history."
"It matters that there are simple,
clear and timely ways of resolving disputes"
"What the BCCI case revealed was a
legal system incapable of guaranteeing that"
"How can a case described by the
trial judge himself as built "not even on
sand but on air" take thirteen
years and over £100 million (US$177
million) in costs to come to a conclusion?"
"As Mr Justice Lightman argued in his 2003
Edward Bramley Memorial Lecture, the adversarial
system imposes huge costs on litigants and
defendants alike"
"As he put it, "to the great majority of
the public the perception (if not the reality)
is that the legal system is a profitable
monopoly of the lawyers" . BCCI showed
that perception was indeed reality.
"A system that is powerless to prevent
a case so hopelessly misconceived continuing
for thirteen years requires examination.
I
very much hope that the Government
will look carefully at this case, learn the
lessons, and take steps to ensure that such
an outcome can never occur again"
Many of these conclusions, insights
and questions apply in my case - as indeed
they do in what is likely to be the majority
of landlord-tenant cases.
In fact, I reflected some of the above sentiments
one and a half year prior to this speech in the
process of referring my
complaint against the Law Society to the
Legal
Services Ombudsman for its handling of my
complaint against CKFT , as I wrote:
"This is my first ever experience with a
court.
At the time the claim was filed against
me, I held the very naïve view that a
court was there to ensure justice - and would
therefore assist me.
I have now come to conclude
that they are just 'paper pushers'- and not
even good at that" (page 2) (see West
London County Court and Lord
Falconer of Thoroton )
"It reinforced my view that Steel Services
i.e. Mr Ladsky et. al was 'running the show'
in West London County Court " (page 3)
Needless to say that the Legal
Services Ombudsman,
who reports to Lord Falconer, Head of the Department
for Constitutional Affairs, made a point of noting
these comments against one of her 'sister departments'
in her
reply (page 2) (I wish she had been as diligent in noting the points in my complaints)
Subsequent note - Actually, more evidence to add as further endorsement of my claim that courts are 'paper pushers': see My Diary 9 March 2007 and 4 April 2007 for damning evidence in relation to the fraudulent claim of 29 November 2002, as well as another fraudulent claim filed against me on 27 February 2007
Talking to numerous leaseholders 'battling
it out' in court with their landlord leads
me to the conclusion that many of these cases
should not even be entertained by the courts.
Instead, as in my case, the courts just
'sit back' - ignoring all calls for assistance
- and evidence supplied... leaving 'the
fraternity' i.e. lawyers coming out as the
key beneficiaries.
• Sir David Clementi 's
conclusions following his review of the legal
profession (as reported in the Financial
Times of 16 December 2004)
"The current regulatory system
is flawed."
"It has insufficient regard to the
interests of consumers"
"I am not satisfied that the main frontline
bodies have always put consumer interests ahead
of their own interests"
• Extracts from an article in the Law
Gazette of 1 April 2005:
"The Bar Council has made
a U-turn over its plans to challenge a High
Court judge's ruling that its complaints procedure
is in breach of human rights law . "
"The Visitors' judgment could lead
to hundreds of disciplinary cases being reopened"
The chartered surveyors - managing agents sector
in which "no action is taken against serious
professional incompetence" and in which
an "almighty shake-up is required to clean-up
the sector and improve standards"
• Professor Sir Bryan Carsberg who,
following his 2006 survey of the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors found - to his "surprise" that
the
"RICS does not, as a matter of course, take
action against [its] members' serious
professional incompetence"
• The Estates
Gazette (one of the sector's
leading publications), in its 7 January
2006 issue
"The internal RICS complaints
procedure cannot be said to inspire widespread
confidence..."
"...But it is also a bed of its own making:
the system seems set up to investigate
frivolous complaints often just because
they are made, while the serious issues brought
to its attention.are not vigorously
tackled"
• The MD of a firm of managing
agents was reported
in the 10
June 2006 issue of the Estates
Gazette as saying (in relation to
gross over-charging on insurance
premiums by managing agents)
"The alternative is that managing agents
improve the professionalism of their service."
"It will take an almighty shake-up
to clean up the sector and improve standards"
I REST MY CASE.
ALL THOSE LISTED ABOVE AS PARTIES IN
MY 28 BATTLES HAVE CAUSED ME TO DEVELOP
THIS WEBSITE - AND MAINTAIN IT.
THIS OUTCOME IS OF THEIR OWN DOING .
Back to top
|
