On Friday last week, late in the afternoon, I was presented with Court papers notifying me that an Injunction has been taken out against me. Again this ASB action has followed from baseless allegations being made by the tenants living at No.Y and No.Z. Thankfully, at least the police followed the correct procedure by asking me whether or not the allegations were true. Being satisfied with my reply, they took no action.

Quite a different response I got from the landlord's ASB Team. The witness statement of the ASB Case Officer notes that I have had 6 Anti Social Behaviour cases against me involving the same tenant. The ASB Officer does not mention this tenants history of making nuisance calls to the police. In this case the allegation was deemed not something the police think worth bothering about, owing to the origin of the allegations The ASB Officer does not provide any evidence obtained from the defendant because, I was never contacted by them. Consequently they are unaware that I believe I have an audio recording of the conversation with another tenant, which is the root cause of this Injunction.

Statement of Truth

The Officer fails to mention that their three unlawful attempts failed to get what they were seeking, my eviction. They failed because there was no "evidence" of actual Anti Social Behaviour and the Case Officer's witness Statement was almost entirely perjurous. Additionally this ASB Case Officer was claiming Anti Social Behaviour for incidents which do not qualify as Anti Social Behaviour. According to the Judge at the Breach Hearing, the incidents being reported were not worth bothering the courts with.

The ASB Case Officer made the third attempt to get me evicted employing exactly the same "none evidence" which had just been rejected at the County Court. Without any doubt this was "unlawful". I consider myself to be very fortunate on this occasion that the attempt was spotted and thwarted. BUT - the Tenancy Review Hearing was only scrapped because I had a legal representative. Otherwise, I believe that it is highly likely that the Panel of the Tenancy Review Hearing would have taken part in an unlawful Hearing without ever being aware of it.

Honestly ?

Did the ASB Case Officer know that this was acting unlawfully ? Surely her employer's in house legal department, or at any rate their representative in court, Ward Hadaway should have known this.

The tenants at No.X and No.Y now appear to be baiting me. Yet again, the ASB Team has accepted without question, the allegations that are being made without checking the validity of the claims. The landlord's agents have never given me any opportunity to respond to the allegations before initiating ASB actions. This is a complete breach of the ASB Policy and my Tenants Rights. Consequently, I am even more afraid now. As anyone would be.

Warning Letter October 2024

Here is a very interesting fact.

At any rate, the two recordings of the event don’t match up. A police officer spoke to me shortly after the incident and was only concerned because, in the audio recording I could be heard to swear. By contrast however, the Warning Letter claims that in the recording made by tenant living at Y, I can be heard shouting through the letter box of tenant living at X, making threats to the tenant, as well as to her family and relatives.

So the Warning Letter clearly contradicts the evidence which the police witnessed at the time of the incident.

Stalking and Harassment ?

Now I Have Rent Arrears

Consequently, my Housing Benefit payments to the landlord have stopped and I am in rent arrears of about £1,000. As a consequence of this new maliciousness my time in the flat has once again, largely been taken up with making lengthy phone calls, etc. engaging, complying, seeking assistance. I have been required to supply proofs of residency to the local council. Twice now ! Both lots have ben rejected by the adjudicator. I have until the 26th of this month to provide "adequate" proofs or they will close my claim for Housing Benefit. Without any idea of what proofs they will accept when they have already refused Driving Licence, Bank Statements, a DWP Letter notifying me about recent Pension increases.

I often ask myself, Is this really happening ?

The first I knew about anything was a text message notifying me of the rent arrears. The text message, like others contained two telephone numbers - which the text message said I could to use to contact them to discuss the issue. Telephoning either number leads to an automated switch board. The caller must select which department they wish to talk to. If unable to make a selection, a receptionist will answer the call. Unfortunately, the receptionist is unable to help unless the caller knows why they are calling, “either” of those telephone numbers. Of course, that information is NEVER included in the text message, so attempts to communicate as requested - are bound to fail. I believe that it is a failing in their legal requirement under GDPR that they should NOT communicate ONLY via electronic means.

Landlord's Solicitors Omitted Defendant's Evidence from the Court Bundle

Quote.... Ward Hadaway “But even if we did, it does not matter because - he did not rely on it in court”. This blatant lie is then compounded with another claiming that I was legally represented and that my representative would have pointed it out to the court at the time. As a matter of fact, I was a litigant in person at the Injunction Hearing in 2021.

They failed to address the equally important concerns, forming part of my complaint to the SRA and to the ICO. Two spreadsheets mysteriously had their pages shuffled before the documents were printed and presented to the Judge as the Court Bundle. This made the data contained unintelligible. The documents no longer contained the original information in the form in which the documents had been sent to the court by the defendant. The shuffling process, or "maladministration" had certainly altered the spreadsheet information in such a way that rendered the spreadsheet pages utterly useless for evidence which the defendant could use in his defence in court.