Dear Sir or Madam,

As a single person, home owner and landlord that chooses to rent to
single persons I find this law extremely discriminatory on the
basis of social status and property. Furthermore, elements of this
law seem to impinge upon one of the most fundamental freedoms
established by the court, that being "the home is inviolate".

This act (applicable only to England & Wales) includes section 72
"a reasonable excuse is a defence' and section 245 "power to
dispense with notices".

Could the Department please advise of any guidance, protocol and or
policy with respect to these two sections and the implementation of
this act. (There must have been something in the mind of
policymakers to warrant the inclusion of these sections!) My local
council has no processes and or procedures around either of these
sections. It is not acceptable that law-abiding members of the
public (at great personal expense) be told to challenge these
sections in court in order to establish case law / precedence.

Could the Department further advise when a property owner is not in
a position to spend thousands on unwarranted "works" demanded by a
local council but must thus lose up to one thousand pounds a month
(current rent values) in rental income WHAT is the procedure for
claiming COMPENSATION re LOSS OF PROPERTY.

Could the Department further provide some "protocol" surrounding
the appropriateness of local councils using the 1997 Harassment
Act. This act would seem to strike at the very heart of democracy
and that is that local public servants provide service, including
answers to questions (concerning a residents property) raised by
residents.

Yours faithfully,

Sheila Gibb

Dear Ms Gibb,

I refer to your FOI request of 15 June 2009 about the Housing Act 2004. I
attach the Department's formal reply to your request.

<<090713 Final Reply FOI case F0003176.DOC>>

FOI Advice Team
Knowledge Management Division
Communities and Local Government
Zone 4/D10, Ashdown House
123 Victoria Street, London SW1

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Dear CLG-FOIAdvice,

Sorry but you are WRONG. Overseas landlords CANNOT ACCESS THE
COURTS AS WE CANNOT EMPLOY LAWYERS. WE CANNOT REPLACE AGENTS WHEN
REMOVED BY THE COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL STEAL OUR HOMES WHEN THEY
BECOME VACANT.

I cannot access my own money, equity or indeed any lawyers to FIGHT
this discriminatory law which breaches single persons human rights
and the most fundamental freedoms the court gives us re living in
our own homes as we choose. APPARENTLY I AM NOT A LEGALLY
IDENTIFIED PERSON WHEN NOT AT A UK ADDRESS SO WHY DO I HAVE TO
"OBEY" YOUR LAW?

WHY ARE "WORKS" ONLY MANDATORY IN HOMES THAT HAVE NO VULNERABLE
PERSONS - VULNERABLE PERSON ARE KEY UNDER HHSRS?

WHY WHEN THE COUNCIL STEALS MY HOME IS IT NOT REQUIRED TO MEET THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS LAW AND HOW DOES THIS "IMPROVE THE HOUSING
STOCK"?

AND IF A LANDLORD HAS BEEN RENTING TO MATURE WORKING ADULTS SINCE
1989 WHY AM I GOING TO "LOSE" 800-1,000 POUDS A MONTH (CURRENT RENT
RATE) FOR THE NEXT 23 YEARS OF MORTGAGES? (AND I'M PAYING ANOTHER
25 YEARS HERE DUE TO THE THIEVES IN THE UK ENDOWMENT SECTOR!!!)

WHY DOES A FAMILY PAY 800-1,000 POUNDS A MONTH LESS TO RENT THE
SAME HOME? (NO WONDER THEY ARE FAT!!!!!) THIS IS SURELY UNFAIR
COMMERCIAL PRACTICES BY THE PROPERTY MANAGERS / ESTATE AGENTS!!!!!!

WHAT GUIDELINES ARE THERE SURROUNDING SECTION 69 IF ANY?

I am a landlord who was forced to rent their home due to the
economic downturn of the 1990s and had to seek work overseas. Now
I'm a major criminal as I'm not at a UK address. (I've had to
uproot my entire life to prevent the council STEALING MY HOME
through an EDMO.) I have done nothing wrong and it is the
government that prevents me accessing my own wealth to pay for
silly "works". WHY AM I BEING TREATED LIKE THIS AND WHY WILL I LOSE
MY HOME?

Yours sincerely,

Sheila Gibb