About this blog

Ramblings, thoughts, facts and opinions about political things - starting point council tenant participation with my land-lord Camden council and council tenant reps plus other housing issues, and whatever.

Thursday, 11 January 2018

Judical Corruption?

When I was prosecuted in 2009 on the charge of non violent harassment of 3 tenant reps [camden council volunteers] to which  I plead not guilty - a summary, minor offence may I add, for writing things on this blog [as it happens] - things I noticed in the judicary system:

The only defence one of the barristers I was appointed by solicitor was that of 'free speech' - that was the extent of my legal defence by trained barristers. The judge who heard the case at the magistrates was changed at the last minute. I wasn't given any help whatever by my solicitor in defending myself, how to conduct myself at blah blab blah blah. I wasn't used to court proceedings etc and admit I made a mess of things due to no guidance or help whatsoever. I know a lot more now.

The 3 tenants in my view had obviously rehearsed between themselfs what they where going to say and possibly had help from police. They also had help from 'legal eagle' Terence Ewing who trailed alongside them at court. The DC from holborn police station - who charged me and who was at the court on the side of the tenant reps had tricked me and had unbeknown to me at the time stolen my flat door keys from the police evidence bag and went to my flat entered home and stole property.

When at crown court the 3 tenants tried to intimdate my barrister at the court, barrister told me - barrister didnt however inform the judge. One tenant tried to nobble the judge. 2 tenants lied on oath to the court as well as in police statements.

Oh yes when my barrister did try at crown court to mention camden council - was  told by the judge that the case had nothing to do with camden council. The judge at the crown court only turned out to have been a school governor in Camden.

I was lucky in some ways as it could have been a lot worse and it is a lot lot worse for some - it did make me see how easy it is to set someone up when they are pulled into the system. One of the tenants has since died, the other is still around [labour party member last i heard] and the 'useful idiot' moved away from the tenant participation scene quiet soon after the case and it was said he had moved away but was spotted in the area after that.

I havent forgotten how I was 'dealt with' how I felt when copper snuck into my flat behind my back and stole property, how my mother was dying and then died and how solicitor used this to get me to change my plea to do with  alledged breach of restraining order charge - to 'save' them from having to go before a jury.

As for the 2 firms of solicitors I used - useless really to me and I never saw the evidence against me until afterwards when I asked for it from the solicitor. Loads of points in it that could have gone against the 3 tenants, but never mentioned in court.  Lots of paper work that the tenants had sent to police that only served to make the court bundles big and time wasteful but with very little actual evidence against me in them - a tactic that at least some in the judicary have seen through.. Ah yes I also remember my barrister didnt receive court bundle til a few days before hearing - another tactic to hinder the defence.

I bring this up again due to some other cases I know of where innocent people have had their lives ruined, have had it a lot lot worse than me - they and their families live in a real hell as opposed to the bs one these dodgy tenant reps spouted - all for show to make themselves look the wounded party, holier than thou snowflakes who can't cope with much it seems and use the police, council, party members, to try and 'take down' anyone they don't like - lies and stitch up by all concerned - witnesses, police, lawyers, judges - and often there is local council involvement there as well.

Friday, 1 December 2017

Townhall employee found guilty

taken from http://camdennewjournal.com/article/camden-council-worker-made-list-of-277-vulnerable-pensioners-for-fraudsters


Camden council worker made list of 277 vulnerable pensioners for fraudsters

Social services records used to make list of targets whose bank accounts were drained 01 December, 2017 — By William McLennan


A TOWN Hall employee trawled through sensitive council records to make a list of 277 elderly residents which was passed to fraudsters who then tricked the pensioners out of thousands of pounds.

Charlie Heath admitted using his position to access the names and addresses of pensioners, but told Blackfriars Crown Court on Tuesday that he was acting on the orders of a criminal gang who had threatened him and his family.

The 23-year-old denied all fraud charges and said that, moments after printing off the list on May 23 last year, he had a crisis of conscience and threw it in a confidential waste bin at the council’s King’s Cross HQ. A jury rejected his claims and yesterday (Thursday) found him guilty.

The court heard that the list was discovered by police on June 1 in what was described as a “fraudster’s kit”, alongside the passport, bank cards and bank statements of a 79-year-old woman who had been conned earlier that day.

Mr Heath, who no longer works for Camden Council, told the jury that, after months of intimidating phone calls, he began to compile the list in March when the threats escalated.
He said: “They started to approach me outside of my work. They said they knew where my sister had worked. “I couldn’t leave my house. Every time I did people would follow me. I was scared to leave my house.”

He said he did not report it to authorities because he had “lost all faith” in police after they failed to prosecute a man who stabbed him in November 2015.

Mr Heath told the jury that he decided to give in to the gang’s demands after they attempted to break into his King’s Cross home on May 20 last year.

He said: “I couldn’t see my family hurt like that. On the Monday I went to work as normal and printed off these names. I then just left them and put them in the confidential waste bin.”

Asked about his last-minute change of heart, he said: “As soon as it left the printer I thought about the repercussions and I put it in the confidential waste bin.

“I was scared of the repercussions of what these people could do to these elderly people. I would rather get a kicking than someone else get hurt because of myself. I felt disgusted about it. At the last hurdle I decided it was wrong and threw it away.”

He added: “I have no idea how a list of names got from the confidential waste bin into someone else’s hands.”

The court heard that nine days later police officers travelling with sirens on through Forest Gate noticed a group of men running from a parked car. They pursued the men, arresting 20- year-old Shaheedul Abedin at the scene.

After carrying out a search, they found a brown envelope, discarded under a car, which contained the list of names and the passport, bank cards and statements of a pensioner who had been conned earlier that day by a man posing as a policemen investigating fraud.

She was also tricked into handing over £200 in cash. Everyone on the list was aged 78 or 79, the court heard.

Officers forensically analysed the list and found the fingerprints of Mr Heath’s neighbour, 22-year-old Sayim Ahmed, who was cleared of any involvement in fraud by the jury.

They also found prints belonging to Mr Abedin, of Tower Hamlets, and 20-year-old Kawsar Ahmed, of Lewisham. They were both found guilty of being in possession of an article for use in fraud. They denied the charges, but declined to give evidence to the court.

The court heard that Mr Heath worked as a data “archiver” assigned to the children’s social services department and had “no reason to access adult records”.

But when the list was discovered, a review of computer systems showed he had been able to access thousands of vulnerable adults’ details over a period of two months.
He will be sentenced later this month.

27 Dec 2017

Camden Council worker jailed HERE

Wednesday, 6 September 2017

Rotherham Child Abuse


Outrage at 'miserable silence' of Rotherham abuse scandal bosses HERE

Former senior managers of Rotherham Council wouldn't participate in inquiry into how the council failed 1,400 underage girls.

Chris Burn, Multimedia Reporter

Read more at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/outrage-at-miserable-silence-of-rotherham-abuse-scandal-bosses-1-8740875
Outrage at 'miserable silence' of Rotherham abuse scandal bosses

Read more at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/outrage-at-miserable-silence-of-rotherham-abuse-scandal-bosses-1-8740875Outrage
Outrage at 'miserable silence' of Rotherham abuse scandal bosses

Read more at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/outrage-at-miserable-silence-of-rotherham-abuse-scandal-bosses-1-8740875

Sunday, 25 June 2017

Housing Repairs Fraud Probe

 Wonder whats happened with the below reported case?

Back in June 2015 the local rag reported that:
A FRAUD probe is under way in the Town Hall housing repairs department and a manager has been suspended. The Town Hall has confirmed the investigation but said they will not comment as the allegations are still being looked into. A council spokeswoman added: “We are currently carrying out an investigation, so we can’t comment at this point.” HERE

Then in Jan 2016 a further report by the CNJ HERE
POLICE have been called in at the Town Hall over fraud allegations in its housing repairs department.

The New Journal has learned that a member of staff has been suspended for up to eight months while an internal investigation has gone on.

The council is taking a lockdown approach on information relating to the case. Its press office confirmed that Camden is “assisting police with enquiries”, although a spokeswoman said she could “not comment” further on the nature of the investigation or its scale.

Insiders are now questioning why the allegations have taken so long to be investigated and why the staff member remains suspended without pay – even though no formal disciplinary proceedings have taken place. 
Some with knowledge of the case are concerned that the official has not had a fair chance to answer the claims. 

There are also questions about whether the investigation will reach up to the top of the council hierarchy.

“What lies behind the feet-dragging is anyone’s guess,” said a source. 

The council has been surveilling how repair work is booked and paid for, it has been claimed by insiders.

The Met said it could not comment on the investigation at this stage.

The council spokeswoman added: “Our repairs service is highly rated by residents and we expect the highest level of customer service and professional conduct from all of our staff.”

An update of the above from Nov 2016 HERE  about the prosecution of a supervisor.

Showers and shower pumps.

First it was reported that a Manager had been suspended.

Then 'insiders' questioning why its taken so long for the case to be investigated - questions about how high up the investigation will reach. 

Then in the report of 16 Nov 2016 above, a named Supervisor was charged.

I guess a supervisor is technically a manager of sorts but it may be that a higher graded person [possibly others].  the supervisor hinted at spilling the beans -  about others involved who got away with being prosecuted? 

Tuesday, 20 June 2017

High Rise Fire: Grenfell Tower

I was going to post a news story from the mainstream newspapers about this but stuff about what happened is changing daily and couldn't keep up. the following is from a website a local tenants group set up a few years ago and which is still active https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2017/06/19/grenfell-tower-the-kctmo-culture-of-negligence/

Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence

 "The many who lost their lives in this catastrophe were our friends and neighbours. We tried to speak for them in life and we will continue to speak for them now. We share the pain of the homeless, the injured and the bereaved to whom we offer our heartfelt sympathy, condolences and solidarity. We also share the sense of anger and injustice that has troubled this community for years. That is why we started this blog and that is why we will continue as we started, speaking truth to power whether or not they choose to listen."  Continue reading HERE 

Since hearing of what happened, seeing pictures etc I can't find the right words to say anything other than how utterly tragic, sad and painful for many that something like this could happen. It shouldn't have.

Understandly  many are angry and upset, wanting truthful answers and justice for those who died in the fire and others how have been directly harmed by this. The emergency services have been as reported, outstanding. Its been a hightly emotional and upsetting week for all included. Sending Love and Healing to all. 

Thursday, 15 June 2017

Legal Action Threat for Water Charge Arrears

Land-lord Camden council has sent me a letter [received 15 June 2017] saying they will start legal action against me if I don't pay the arrears of the water charges I stopped paying around Dec 2016.

I think I have a good enough reason for stopping paying the water charges and continuing to not pay it until the landlord gives me and other tenants back the money they owe us because of overcharging us. Plus I think they need to set a new and lawful charge [ if they haven't done so already but they haven't said so].

The water charge isn't the rent, its a seperate charge to the rent yet they call it rent. Its a service charge.

I have ten days from date of letter [9 June 2017]. It says to call them if I have financial or other difficulties. I contacted them a while ago and explained why I haven't paid the charge. They didn't reply but sent the threatening letter instead. Business as usual for the housing department.

Plus all these years I have had to put up with the noise here and the landlord won't do anything about it that I'm aware of,  and estate officier comes to my flat makes 'promises' then goes away and I don't hear anything about it from her again. She could see what a state I was in. Was it just lies to try and butter me up?

Though I feel anxious at the thought of having to go to court and the risk it entails I need to hold my nerve on this.

I await the court case.

23 Aug 2017
Latest letter dated 15 August 2017 is NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION [not to begin before 24 Sept 2017] which I sent them an email in reply to and am waiting for an email reply back. This letter came very shortly after a message from someone in the council left on my home phone answering machine. They haven't been helpful at all to me with the difficulties i'm having, which doesn't come as a surprise.

They will refer my case to the councils legal team if I don't coff up the claimed arrears.

This issue isn't only about me its about all unmetered camden council tenants as well as other london boroughs tenants.

As well as me having difficulties with the water charge payments I also have difficulties with communicating verbally with camden council and find it a lot easier to do so in writing. I would prefer to avoid court but rent support won't reply to emails.

25 August 2017
Came across the following from  http://www.dpglaw.co.uk/hundreds-thousands-overcharged-water/

"A High Court ruling has established that hundreds of thousands of tenants have been overcharged for water and sewerage. Lawyers say that affected tenants will be entitled to refunds running to hundreds if not thousands of pounds.

As reported by the BBC, the test case was brought by Kim Jones, a tenant of Southwark Council.

Along with 37,000 other tenants in Southwark, Ms Jones’ tenancy agreement required to pay charges for water and sewerage to her landlord. The amount Ms Jones was required to pay her landlord was significantly more than the amount the landlord was required to pay Thames Water.

The High Court ruled that this was unlawful because it breached the Water Resale Orders, which prohibit water and sewerage from being resold at a profit.

Whilst initially criticising the decision, Southwark Council has now announced that it will not appeal and will being repaying to tenants some of the unlawful charges.
Ms Jones’ solicitor, Gareth Mitchell, of Deighton Pierce Glynn, said:
Thames Water has confirmed that it has similar arrangements with 69 local authorities and housing associations throughout its area covering 375,000 households. For households in occupation since 2001, they will have been overcharged around £700 to £1,000.

Southwark Council’s announcement that it will only make a partial refund to the 37,000 tenants affected within its borough is unacceptable. These are low income tenants for whom this is a significant amount of money. For many years, Southwark concealed from its tenants the true nature of its relationship with Thames Water. It is not only morally unacceptable for Southwark Council to retain these unlawful charges, the legal basis for their approach is doubtful and further litigation is very likely if they do not relent.

As for the other local authorities and housing associations affected by this issue, we are expecting them to make contact with their tenants over the coming weeks and to indicate what arrangements they will be making to repay the unlawful charges.

However, the impact of the judgment does not stop there.

The judge also decided that between April 2002 and April 2010 Thames Water should have billed the owners of rented accommodation for water and sewerage, rather than tenants. Whereas Thames Water’s evidence in the High Court was that throughout this period it had billed and recovered charges from tenants, rather than landlords.

Thames Water has not yet announced what arrangements it will be making to reimburse these tenants, all of whom were incorrectly charged hundreds of pounds each year during the 2002 to 2010 period.

BBC London TV news report on 25 April 2016 (lead item) see: here. 

DPG’s Gareth Mitchell was also interviewed about the case on Vanessa Feltz’s breakfast show on 25 April 2016 at 07:35hrs (35 mins in); with Southwark council’s response at 08.21hrs (1 hour 21 mins in): here.
An article about the implications of the case will appear in the May 2016 edition of Legal Action.

8 Sept 2017
Rent officer has passed me onto the councils Financial Inclusion officers who sent me a letter and who I emailed and await their reply.

The Notice they sent to me is a sham.

4 Nov 2017
No word yet from the Financial Inclusion officers I sent an email to about the letter they sent to me.

7 Nov 2017
Someone from the Rent service phoned me yesterday and I explained a bit why I was with- holding the water charge and that I had replied via email to every letter I received but haven't had any email replies back.  I don't know what happens next will wait and see.

Saturday, 27 August 2016

Vulnerable people targeted in Town Hall scam

taken from the local rag Camden New Journal HERE

Four arrests after private details of vulnerable residents are 'stolen' from Camden Council.

Published: 25 August, 2016

FOUR people have been arrested after the private details of some of Camden’s most vulnerable residents were “stolen” from Town Hall computer systems – raising fears that personal information has already been passed to cold-call scammers, the New Journal has learned.

Detectives were called in by Camden Council after the names, dates of birth and addresses of elderly residents were allegedly plundered from confidential databases.

One line of inquiry for investigators is that information taken by an insider working for the council was passed to accomplices on the
outside looking for prime targets who would be most vulnerable to door-to-door con tricks and telephone scams ultimately aimed at obtaining bank details.

A member of council staff is understood to have been removed from a position as the probe continues. Town Hall chiefs have made a series of home visits to elderly residents to apologise for the data breach and to advise on how they can now protect themselves.

They are telling residents to check the credentials of people who call at the door unannounced and to be wary of so-called “vishing”, or voice phishing, rackets in which bogus callers insist bank information must be provided.

Martin Pratt, executive director of supporting people directorate, has written to residents explaining the council’s response. He has told those affected: “I am deeply sorry that your personal information was stolen from us and I want to assure you that we have taken steps to ensure that this does not happen again.”

The Information Commissioner, the independent watchdog that investigates data breaches of private information, has been alerted by the council.

In his letter – seen by the New Journal – Mr Pratt added: “We are strengthening our systems to protect the information held on our systems... However, the police have told us that a number of people across London have recently been contacted by ‘scammers’ who try to steal money from them.

“They use stolen information to make contact with people and then try to get hold of bank account and PIN number details.

“People have also been called by someone pretending to be a police officer. The fake police officer calls and asks the person to go immediately to their bank to withdraw money and then hand it over to another fake police officer who will call at their home address. The police or your bank will never call you and ask for your PIN number or bank account details. They will never send someone to your home to pick up your bank cards or your money.”

While arrests have been made, so far nobody has been charged.

A council spokesman said: “We are supporting police as they investigate and we have taken urgent steps to warn vulnerable residents of the dangers of scammers. This includes providing direct support to those whose information has been taken. A criminal investigation is under way and it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.”

In the wake of the alleged theft of data from council systems, Camden residents worried they may be affected by bogus calls are advised to:
l Never give bank account details to someone you don’t know;
l Never give out any personal information, such as bank and credit card details, or copies of documents such as a passport or driving licence, unless you know who you are dealing with and why they need it; and
l Never email your financial information, even if you know the person you are emailing.


Judical Corruption?

When I was prosecuted in 2009 on the charge of non violent harassment of 3 tenant reps [camden council volunteers] to which  I plead not g...