Request for facts of your TMO sub agents

Stuart made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Mae'r ymateb i'r cais hwn yn hwyr iawn. Yn ôl y gyfraith, ym mhob amgylchiad, dylai Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea fod wedi ymateb erbyn hyn. (manylion). Gallwch gwyno drwy yn gofyn am adolygiad mewnol.

Dear Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea,

Please could you answer for your sub agents behaviors.

Michelle Jones, Justine Hart and co-conspirators of the RBKC/TMO are attempting to defraud the RBKC Tenants and Central London Courts.

Please provide the following “specific” information, any dismissals to respond are rebutted ab initio and nunc pro tunc. Withholding of information are breaches and specific crimes under the Larceny ACT, Fraud ACT and other acts.

Fraud Act 2006 Sec 2 ss (2) a, b, c, sec 3, sec (2) 1-5 Sec 930 A, B Sec (4) ss1 a,b,c & Sec 2. Sec(5) 1-4 sec (6)
Sec (7) 1c, Sec (10) Sec (11) sec12 (1) (2) (3) sec 13 1-4 sec 12 c, sec 18 (ii) sec 24 (3) (bb) (v) sec (25) (b)
sec 28(3)

Larceny act 1916 re-enacted

Sec (1)2 a,b,sec 13 b,sec (14) sec 21,sec 22,sec 29 (i) (ii) (2) b,(4).30,(32) (1) (2) a & B (33)(1).(34) (35) (37) (39) (40) 1,2,3,4 (41) 1, 3, (42) (44) 1,3,5 (45) (46)

Fraud Act 2006 :Deception” means any deception (whether deliberate or reckless) by words or conduct as to fact or as to law, including a deception as to the present intentions of the person using the deception or any other person.”

Maxim in law : they that deny admit

How many times have you or you colleagues breached the following OFT “Guidance on unfair terms in tenancy” regulation since 2005.

4.21 We take the view that it is unfair to change the nature of a debt owing to the landlord by means of a contractual term. We are likely to object to terms that deem outstanding interest, administration or service charges, or any other monies owing to the landlord other than rent, as being rent or provide for them to be deducted from the rent account. Housing legislation provides that arrears of rent may be treated differently from other debts, particularly in agreements relation to eviction, and we consider it is unfair for landlords to seek to enforce these other debts in this way.

How many times you or your colleagues used constructive fraud and conversion upon the courts claiming RBKC/TMO Tenants are behind on rent when it’s service charges; in breach of the above 4.21 OFT regulation.

Maxim in law: Out of a fraud no action arises. A case cannot be built on an original fraud.

How many RBKC/TMO Tenants have you or your colleagues made application for or evicted in contempt of this following EU precedent since February 2011
‘Woman on benefits owing £3,500 rent can't be evicted: New European human rights ruling: the Supreme Court said that – under the controversial European Convention on Human Rights – this would be a breach of the right to ‘respect for a person’s home’.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

Given The TMO was reminded of both of these in August 2012 before any proceedings commenced, and therefore any actions you have taken thereafter upon any Tenant are in contempt of the law, please explain who instigated this after the fact.

How many RBKC/TMO Tenants are you or your colleagues presently threatening in contempt of this OFT regulation and EU precedent?

How many people has the RBKC/TMO evicted during Miss Jones split terms out of office whilst away on maternity leave, What are the dates Miss Jones was not working for the RBKC as sub-agent/trustee of the TMO.

How many people have been evicted in breach of these 2005 OFT terms during your split terms in office, supply dates in office and figures during these terms?

How many times have you or your colleagues sworn in court that you are a “first party” witness when you are not and/or committed perjury upon the courts?

How many RBKC/TMO Tenants have you or your colleagues bared false witness against using third parties subjective views to create your own conjectures in order to obtain false instruments from the courts for unlawful and illegal evictions?

How many times you have stood in court as a witness in court using third party hearsay against Tenants?

How many times have you or your colleagues of the TMO used fraudulent conveyance of language in order to obtain modification of contract fraud for the RBKC to issue a fraudulent instrument(s) upon the RBKC/TMO Tenant(s) in contempt of the law.

Please supply and under sworn affidavit that all evidence you have entered into these cases is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Please supply and under sworn affidavit you have supplied the data requested of a full audit of the Trellick Tower as requested in a FOIA request to Ann Archer of the *** which you told the court you had given and stood under, thereby committing perjury?

Please supply and under sworn affidavit how tenants have you evicted knowing that they have suffered a heart attack due to your tyrannical and persistent lying, deceit, subterfuge and failures to provide requested statutory evidence? Namely upon myself, Umberto Silvestry and Barry Mc Queen and others.

How many services did you charge the Tenants for during the major works on Trellick Tower that were not provided?

Please provide evidence of your consumer credit license. (2nd request)

Failure to respond to all the above points will be deemed by tacit agreement and acquiescence that you and your colleagues admit to liability, perjury and contempt of the law(s) nunc pro tunc of these OFT rulings and EU Precedents.

We are in agreement as of my schedule of fees of 17th January 2012 that “the TMO agree pay all costs and legal expenses”.

Do you deny for breaches outside of the constitution you all become “personally liable” as the insurance bond does not cover fraud or malfeasance in Public office and attempting to claim them for your induced controversy is Fraud.

Do you deny outstanding alleged claims have been settled, setoff and discharged according to the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 subject to proofs of claim of the facts, (which to date you have not provided) yet retain the valuable consideration as acceptance according to that Act? And thereafter still making claims constituting fraud upon the courts http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict...

Please provide proof of claim you are not in contempt of the law according to Lord Halshams ruling of promissory notes being cash.

Do you deny The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties Act) 1999 advises that unless a third party is signatory in the original contract, they have no rights whatsoever to enforce or make claims upon the contract.

Please provide proof of claim you have exhausted the administrative process by sworn affidavit.

Do you deny instructing any third party to issue a summons for rent arrears whilst rent arrears are recorded as zero with the principle contractor before and after the court hearing?

Do you deny that Deputy Judge Coonan refused to see evidence in front of 8 witnesses in contempt of this precedents above and below?

“An order issued by any Judicial chair occupant who elects to ignore the evidence or acts in contempt of the evidence presented to the judicial chair occupant; amounts to a false instrument, which is abuse of office and leading to the imposition of costs attached to the false instrument - House of Lords ruling - Elman -v- Myers” yet you still choose to attempt to enforce a fraudulent instrument.

Please supply and under sworn affidavit proof that you have provided all information subject to sec 21 of the 1985 housing Act.

Please supply and under sworn affidavit you, your colleagues, agents or otherwise deny being requested to sign and/or failed to sign a declaration of truth?

Please supply the names of all parties who aided and abetted in any of the above.

I thank you for your considerations.

The applicant reserves the right to enter all information nunc pro tunc of this information, documents or otherwise into evidence including failures to respond.

*All replies to this request are on the following conditions below as endorsed by the Central London County Court on the 29th October 2012

All senders rights are reserved and Non Assumpsit.

All respondents affirm to the best of their knowledge full disclosure is provided with motives logically identified.

All respondents affirm that any statements declared are honest and wilfully contain no non sequiturs.

All respondents affirm full disclosure is provided and no wilful attempt is made to make false or fraudulent declarations.

All respondents affirm to the best of their knowledge under penalty of perjury they have written the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God.

Respondents accept this oath under the UK Statutory Declarations Act 1835.

Negligence will be deemed as Wilful Misconduct or Malfeasance of office.

That my fees schedule is noted should wilful and or implied misconduct apply.

I reserve all rights to bring a private prosecution under section 6(2) Prosecution of Offences Act 1985

"including (but not limited to)" (All errors and omissions excepted).

Yours faithfully,

* Stuart Russell Cocks

General Executor/Beneficiary and occupant of the office of the senders estate.

Gadawodd Stuart anodiad ()

An order issued by any Judicial chair occupant who elects to ignore the evidence or acts in contempt of the evidence presented to the judicial chair occupant; amounts to a false instrument, which is abuse of office and leading to the imposition of costs attached to the false instrument - House of Lords ruling - Elman -v- Myers

Gadawodd Stuart anodiad ()

European Convention on Human Rights. (ECoHR) Article 13. "EVERYONE whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention that are violated SHALL have an effective remedy before a national authority not
withstanding that the violation HAS BEEN committed by persons acting in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY".

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

Dear Mr. Cocks

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REF: 2013-282

 

I am writing to confirm that we received your information request on 15
March 2013. For your information and future communications your request
has been allocated the reference number FOI2013-282. Please quote this
reference in any future correspondence.

 

We will consider your request and respond in accordance with the
requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Our duty is to
respond promptly or at least within 20 working days.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Robin Yu

Information Protection Assistant

Information Governance Team

Information Systems Division (ISD)

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

The Town Hall, Hornton Street, London W8 7NX

Tel: 020 7938 8226

 

Web: [1]http://www.rbkc.gov.uk

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

Dear Mr. Cocks

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REF: 2013-282

 

I am responding to your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000,
which we received 15 March 2013, for information held by the Council.

 

Having consulted with the TMO, we do not believe that this is a legitimate
FOI request. The TMO are only required to respond to FOI requests which
relate to their day-to-day business providing housing services for the
Council.

 

We can advise in relation to your question in relation to consumer credit
license that the TMO are not required to have one.

 

Complaints

 

I trust this has satisfied your request.  Should you be unhappy with the
handling of your request, the Council has an internal complaints process
for handling FOIA complaints. Complaints are reviewed by the Chief
Solicitor and Monitoring Officer or her nominee. A form is available from
our website to lodge your complaint
[1]http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/councilanddemocra...
Please contact us if you do not have website access and we can provide you
with a copy of the form. Following this review, should you still be
unhappy with how your information request has been handled, you have a
further right to appeal to the Information Commissioner who is responsible
for ensuring compliance with FOIA.  

 

Yours sincerely

 

Robin Yu

Information Protection Assistant

Information Governance Team

Information Systems Division (ISD)

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

The Town Hall, Hornton Street, London W8 7NX

Tel: 020 7938 8226

 

Web: [2]http://www.rbkc.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

References

Visible links
1. http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/councilanddemocra...
2. http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/

Gadawodd Stuart anodiad ()

Thank you for your minimal non-responsive reply that is not a satisfactory answer.

Please answer all sections on a point by point basis and giving clear explanations according to the terms. On the ones that you feel are not a applicable please answer fully why not.

Please also clarify if there is any contract between a Tenant and your sub-agents TMO

Maxim in Law: He who denys admits.