Leaseholder H, who headed the Residents Association at Jefferson House, went through the most horrendous experience - from the time she co-ordinated the leaseholders' response to the so-called "offer" to buy the headlease. (See Notices by landlord - 13 December 2000).

Evidently, her action was interfering with Mr Andrew Ladsky et. al's plans, as Mr Ladsky 'cranked-up' the harassment and intimidation .

As I was a member of the Residents Association Committee, Resident H kept me informed of developments.

In her 18 December 2000 letter she wrote:  

"...Mr Ladsky... has approached me demanding that I handover the Chairmanship and all the files of the Residents Association to him. He became rude and threatening when I refused"

She copied me on her letter to Mr Ladsky, dated 14 January 2001 :

"I also know that you have made a very large number of telephone calls to my home. There is no reason for you to persist in ringing, including after midnight. People visiting me have witnessed this"

Leaseholder E was one of the persons who witnessed harassment and intimidation of Leaseholder H by Mr Ladsky, as evidenced by her 18 April 2002 email to me (by then, Mr Ladsky had succeeded in making Leaseholder H leave the block):   "Her experience was horrendous. I was there on two occasions on Jan & Feb last year with this harassment going on" This leaseholder also wrote in her email: "Chelsea Police advised her off the record to fold her tent and go - which she did, can't blame anyone for that"

In copying me on her letter of 14 January 2001 to Mr Ladsky, in her covering note of the same date i.e. 14 January 2001 , Leaseholder H wrote,  

"Given the extreme nature of the behaviour, and the fact I am getting no peace, I have written...

The conversation with Mr Ladsky was one sided, consisting simply of him ranting and becoming increasingly offensive and threatening.

Mr Ladsky was immensely aggressive . if I spoke, he threatened all the more.

His last call to me was at 12.40 am, which can hardly be described as reasonable..."

In her letter to me of 16 January 2001 she stated

"I have sent out the enclosed because I have heard from several residents that they have been spoken to by Mr Ladsky and either threatened or harassed, or told that they need not consider casting a vote to buy the lease.

Situation is pretty awful - phone calls to me all the time - and some residents terribly upset."

In her letter of 29 January 2001 she wrote:

"Ladsky does not want to buy this block, redecorate it and be a landlord; he proposes to force residents out by making the financial situation intolerable, intervening to block sales (already done once) and cutting off rental income. He then forces residents to sell to him at a loss.

To fight is one thing, but to be the focus of harassment in your own home by a resident landlord is not something I would wish on anyone."

Her letter to me of 30 January 2001 :

"Mr Ladsky. told me that he would own the block by the end of February..given that the prospective landlord. is already acting improperly by trying to eliminate the Residents Association, threatening residents, trying to buy their flats cheaply."

While in her letter of 31 January 2001 she wrote:

"I am working late and have no need for an alarm - I am getting 30 nuisance calls a day again only now he keeps the line open if I reply"

Not surprisingly, once the opportunity to buy the headlease was taken away from us (see Notices by landlord - 13 December 2000), Leaseholder H left the block .

Hence, Mr Ladsky had achieved another key step in the 'Business Model of the Unscrupulous Landlord in 21st century England':   eliminating the opposition and the possibility of leaseholders acting as a group.

From then on, different stories could be told to each leaseholder e.g. Leaseholder F reporting to me in her 1 November 2002 that she had been told by Ms Hathaway, MRICS, Martin Russell Jones, that

"everybody else had paid their share of the major works".  

In fact, 28 days later, Cawdery Kaye Fireman & Taylor filed the - fraudulent - 29 November 2002 claim, ref. WL203537, against me and 10 other leaseholders (representing a total of 14 flats), in West London County Court. Ms Hathaway, MRICS, Martin Russell Jones, endorsed the Particulars of claim with a statement of truth.

In relation to the claim, see also Mr Brian Gale - who produced this pack (2.2MB) - and note his interpretation of the "remedies" required in relation to the "defects" he identified in his condition survey of February 2002.

And note also the 2 May 2006 (2.3.MB) response from Mr Barrie Martin, FRICS, Martin Russell Jones , to my criticisms of his firm and of Mr Brian Gale which was "Your allegation is false and we require your written acceptance that you were wrong to make it"

See also: Leasehold Valuation Tribunal and Pridie Brewster

And against all of these parties consider the undeniable proof that the threat of forfeiture (and bankruptcy proceedings), as well as court claims = FRAUD TOOLS

Back to top