Unlawful evictions, attempted murder, fake enforcement officers, collusion within the courts,police,council - bankruptcy

Deb Williams made this Freedom of Information request to Cabinet Office

This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was refused by Cabinet Office.

Dear Cabinet Office,

Please provide under the FOIA the safeguards you have in place in whatever format to protect the rights of families to be protected in their property/family homes and not terrorised by the state.

Explain how it is possible for a Stay of Execution not be put in place that was paid for in advance and the application sent to Liverpool insolvency section by a barrister that enabled unlicensed thugs posing as enforcement officers to break into the family home of former Councillor / whistleblower Sheena Williams ( including disabled children) in Maidstone Kent on the morning of 23 January 2019 witnessed by neighbours & others that could have resulted in their death/murder Police CAD 23-0188 through the excessive force using Jack/battering-ram ( The Lock Father) along with 5 unidentified enforcement officers (2 females 3 males) all refused to provide ID and worked apparently work for Equita, one male stated Equita is owned by Capita.

James Alexander King does not work for Equita and is not a High Court enforcement officer .

Kent Police apparently were satisfied with their checks although they clearly failed to check the registers or make them produce their names or ID or produce a Writ of Possession and the police also failed to produce a warrant or give a copy of either and refused to speak to the barrister who witnessed this unlawful eviction by phone.

So in effect a family could be murdered without lawful authority within their own family home aided and abetted by Kent Police on behalf of a bankruptcy trustee Michael Abram Goldstein who just also happens to use the same outsourced solicitors firm (J E Baring & Co ) as Maidstone Borough Council.

How is anyone to have any faith in a government or any public services when the real criminals are being paid and not being arrested and imprisoned for their crimes?

Please provide the following under FOIA for Chief Registrar Nicholas Briggs his direct contact details for complaints and to enable complex cases involving corruption, collusion with the courts and council to be addressed by litigant in person who have been badly let down by the system that is supposed to protect their family and natural unalienable rights.

Such as why natural persons can not obtain any justice within the courts and when they do pay to obtain alledged legal help to ensure a fair hearing and correct procedure is followed they are still stitched-up, either through collusion within the court service or sheer incompetence.

How does one get a case put before the Chief Registrar to expose what is going on including the use of thugs posing as enforcement officers, all facilitated by police who do not know the law.

As Head of a public service I am sure that he will be horrified at what is happening, no law, rules, or regulations are being followed and that brute force has replaced the principles of natural justice.

No one deserves to be unlawfully evicted without a writ of possession or any ID or names being given by alledged enforcement officers and whilst the police turn a blind eye who are supposed to prevent a breach of the peace not join in.

Since when have Battering-Rams been allowed for wholly domestic family homes.

How many people have been or could be murdered or dragged from their homes without any paperwork being produced including children, which amounts to torture by the state.

Yours faithfully,

Deb Williams

FOI Team Mailbox, Cabinet Office

CABINET OFFICE REFERENCE:  FOI327586

Dear DEB WILLIAMS

Thank you for your request for information. Your request was received
on 5/2/2019 and we are considering if it is appropriate to deal with under
the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This email is just a short acknowledgement of your request.

When corresponding with the Cabinet Office, you may wish to be aware of
how we treat your personal Information.  This is set out in our personal
information charter, at the following
link: [1]https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...

If you have any queries about this email, please contact the FOI team.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Yours sincerely,

 Knowledge and Information Management Unit

Cabinet Office

E: [2][Cabinet Office request email]

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...
2. mailto:[email address]

FOI Team Mailbox, Cabinet Office

1 Attachment

Please find attached the reply to your FOI request

 

 

 

Regards

 

 

FOI Team

Room 405

70 Whitehall,

London, SW1A 2AS

E-mail -[1][Cabinet Office request email] 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear Cabinet Office,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Cabinet Office's handling of my FOI request 'Unlawful evictions, attempted murder, fake enforcement officers, collusion within the courts,police,council - bankruptcy'.

There is no evidence that this is not a valid FOI request.

I do believe that the Cabinet Office and HMCTS /MOJ is hoping to conceal fraud being committed or allowed to be committed within the Chancery Division RCJ ICC by refusing to ensure that the Authorised High Court Enforcement Officer is named on any Writ of Execution for possession of a family home. And is well aware that excessive force can not and must not be used against domestic homes

And that all Certifcated Enforcement ( Bailiff) Agents must identify themselves and the name of the company they are authorised to work for otherwise it is their intention to illegally obtain entry dishonestly and to cause a loss and make a gain for the trustees/ others by false representation and by failing to disclose information and abusing their position.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/u...

Yours faithfully,

Deb Williams

FOI Team Mailbox, Cabinet Office

CABINET OFFICE REFERENCE:  IR327586

Dear DEB WILLIAMS

Thank you for your request for an internal review. Your request was
received on 4/4/2019 and is being dealt with under the terms of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This email is just a short acknowledgement of your request.

If you have any queries about this email, please contact the FOI team.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Yours sincerely,

Knowledge and Information Management Unit

Cabinet Office

E: [1][Cabinet Office request email]

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Cabinet Office request email]

Liz Watson left an annotation ()

This, below is an accurate and well written account of the despicable practices and unconsciable acts of State terrorism and unwarranted oppression to innocent people in their homes : these goings-on should not be happening in a purportedly civilised society and are nothing less than an abomination which needs to be outlawed!

What the hell is going on? This is GANGLAND BRITAIN

no Law in England supports eviction by a mortgagee nor dispossession of a property by a bank - it’s illegal

Dear FOI Team Mailbox, Cabinet Office Reference IR327586

The Government Cabinet Office said that it would be dealing with the internal review on 4.3.2019 but has not done so.

Why are the Cabinet Office ignoring the fact that the courts, including the High Court of the Chancery Division who are marking their High Court Writs as if coming out of the Central Office of the Queens Bench Division when they are in fact being issued but not being marked as coming out of the Chancery Chambers by court staff, who are allowing High Court Writs of Possession and Control (Writ 66) and without an element of Control being granted by the lower county court, to be issued in the name of a company and not the named High Court Officer assigned to the company, on behalf of the trustee (Michael Abram Goldstein) chosen by Maidstone Borough Council billing authority , who also use the same out-sourced solicitors J E Baring & Co and their 'agents' Equita Ltd who are the council's agents for council tax enforcement.

How are these solicitors/agents/trustees of the council and state, managing to obtain unlawfully without correct procedures being carried out High Court Writs and also instruct paid state (thugs) rogue bailiffs who wrongly identify themselves as a High Court Enforcement Officer for Equita Ltd (James King Certificated to Newlyn PLC) and who refuse to identify themselves and produce ID, warrant card/ copy of their bailiff certificate etc or lie and give false information ( Shawn Bowen, Sean Boyland, Shaun Boylan also Certificated to Newlyn PLC and not Equita Ltd) and Freemason SIA registered celebrity bodyguard (Sidhesh Kumar Arora director of Deadline Security Ltd etc) and Door Supervisors (Kerry Yates also works for Deadline Security ) and (Natasha Jones) , locksmith ( Andrew Marsh The Lockfather) who have absolutely no right to evict anyone let alone violently from their land or family home without the correct authority and court paperwork.

How did Maidstone Borough Council self appointed trustee and out-sourced solicitors firm manage to obtain a High Court writ made out to Court Enforcement Services Ltd and not to one of the assigned named High Court Enforcement Officers for that company, and manage to have their High Court Writ of Possession and Control(Writ 66) altered to Equita Ltd ( same company used by the council to enforce council tax ) and without the writ being made out to Equita Ltd named High Court Enforcement Officer James Metcalfe.

How was it possible for Michael Goldstein to make applications/ witness statements on behalf of joint trustees when he was no longer a joint but sole trustee, to obtain a Possession Order from HHJ Backhouse at the county court hearing centre at Maidstone, who included section 42 County Court Act 1984 to transfer her order up to the High Court for enforcement, when Michael Goldstein did not include this request in his 'joint trustee application' yet she failed to include or confirm which division of the High Court her order must be appealed to.

Why did Kent Police refuse a request to speak to an inspector who should know the law, but instead let these rogue bailiffs break into a wholly domestic family home after it had been pointed out to Kent Police call centre that their police officers, Sergeant Webster, Police Constables Kelly, Qualey, Eastgale and Derry were refusing to listen or make correct checks regarding these rogue unidentified bailiffs who had broken through locked gates and porch doors and were violently banging on the front door and demanding entry and who had gave false information, and would not produce names or ID or a copy of the High Court Writ, neither did the police produce a warrant card or copy of the arrest warrant etc.

Why are Kent Police Force failing to arrest these criminals including their own officers who also aided & abetted attempted murder and who are refusing to investigate whilst sitting on evidence to protect their own officers.

And how did Kent Police Force manage to arrest former Cllr/Whistleblower Sheena Williams , on an application for a warrant of arrest for contempt of court for questioning (with the 'questioning part struck out' who was arrested by 2 males police officers and refused medical treatment and held in a tiny room at the county court for several hours with these 2 male police officers (PC Kelly and PC Qualey) and then brought straight into the county court for questioning and then forced to agree to attend the next day for questioning or be re-arrested for contempt of court ) for failing to attend a Creditor's Bankruptcy Petition Hearing in November 2017, when she had already been made (unlawfully) bankrupt in May 2016 at the county court at Maidstone and there is no further legal requirement to attend another petition hearing. Did the council use one of the two differing creditor's bankruptcy petitions for the alledged same 'debt' that they lodged in September 2015 that was ignored when raised with both the county court staff and the judges ?

This application for a Warrant of Arrest was applied for by Michael Goldstein in May 2017 and granted by HHJ Backhouse in March 2018, but conveniently not enforced until 23.1.2019 at the same time the unlawful eviction took place, after threatening to smash her vehicle windows with her children inside whilst on their driveway, after assisting the rogue bailiffs to violently drag and evict them from their family home.

The High Court judges must not allow a trustee to obtain a Writ of Restitution when they are made fully aware that the eviction was carried out unlawfully by rogue bailiffs etc who refuse to produce the writ of possession or identify themselves correctly. Why was Michael Goldstein so confident that an annulment will not be granted and why did the High Court Chancery Division not set aside his Writ of Restitution when they know the eviction was unlawful.

The first bankruptcy being unlawful because no proper procedures, rules or regulations were not followed and ignored by the courts and evidence of wrong doing not allowed to be shown. The sum was below the bankruptcy £750 threshold, and funds moved unlawfully (misappropriation of funds) by the council to a different year that was already secured.

The county court have apparently rejected a further second creditor's bankruptcy petition from the council solicitors who pretended to have an order from the county court rejecting the second Application to Set Aside a Statutory Demand, when it was their petition that was rejected.

So how is it possible for the solicitors on behalf of the council to serve a second creditor's bankruptcy petition apparently issued from the county court at Maidstone when the Official Receiver advised the court staff to reject the petition because the same petitioner can not lodge a petition twice when the bankruptcy period has not expired.

Or are the court staff colluding with the council and their agents to by- pass due process of law (yet again) in order to obtain a second unlawful bankruptcy order, when the damages they and their agents have caused, both physically and mentally against natural individuals and against their land and family home would far exceed any alleged council tax outstanding.

Why is there never a pending petition registered by the county court staff or correct paperwork/ petition served by unlicensed process servers ( Tracey Jewsbury 7.5.2019 would only provide a Christian name and refused to provide her company name or the company she was working on behalf of and broke the Data Protection Act by not placing court documents in an envelope and failing to identify who she was serving).

A review into bailiffs enforcement powers is toothless without stopping the county courts colluding with the councils and their agents and stopping the High Courts issuing writs incorrectly and stopping the judges turning a blind eye to wrongful court practices and rogue bailiffs criminal actions on behalf of the council's billing authority and others (who must also be made accountable for their part) and without the police forces failing to arrest these criminals (including their officers who break the law ) for multiple crimes against natural individuals including children, land and family domestic homes etc.

Otherwise these state atrocities will continue without being exposed and kept hidden and need to be remedied by both the government and courts immediately and without further delay.

Yours sincerely,

Deb Williams

FOI Team Mailbox, Cabinet Office

1 Attachment

Please find attached the reply to your IR request

 

 

 

Regards

 

 

FOI Team

Room 405

70 Whitehall,

London, SW1A 2AS

E-mail -[1][Cabinet Office request email] 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear FOI Team Mailbox,

It is appalling and truly shocking that there is no written or recorded information in place to protect families from rogue Governent police, (bailiffs) enforcement agents/officers , court staff and judges who do not have jurisdiction.

Who can simply terrorise, assault and batter with deadly weapons and attempt to murder for financial gain, whilst being given free rein to rob, steal and plunder to cause destitution and poverty, by the Cabinet Office.

Asking enforcement agents/officers to wear body camera's to record footage that can easily go missing just like the rogue police who wish to ignore DSAR to hide their part in wrong-doing and protect rogue bailiffs is simply ineffective and virtually useless, unless you are going to make it a criminal offence with a long sentence for failing to record their criminal activities.

Enforcing the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 s.26 however against rogue police for 14 years in prison extended to rogue bailiffs and rogue court staff, council staff/agents would work and with immediate effect.

Yours sincerely,

Deb Williams

Deb Williams left an annotation ()

Rogue bailiffs and police who do not know or uphold the law and are acting lawlessly outside of their remit and office are to be treated as intruders !

CPS Self-Defence and the Prevention of Crime

Section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008

The law on self defence arises both under the common law defence of self-defence and the defences provided by section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (use of force in the prevention of crime or making arrest). It has recently been clarified by section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

Subsection (5A) allows householders to use disproportionate force when defending themselves against intruders into the home.

In deciding whether the force might be regarded as 'disproportionate'or 'grossly disproportionate' the court will need to consider the individual facts in each case, including the personal circumstances of the householder and the threat (real or perceived) posed by the offender.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/se...