DEED OF DECEPTION

DEED OF DECEPTION

Product Information


The Rogue in question this time is not a person but a form. Reference to this form can be found in 'The Medevil History of Castle Sanctuary' where it is referred to as the 'Deed of Deception'. The form was the brain-child of Janet Swales, Area Manager with Sanctuary Shaftesbury, with assistance from Michael Howarth, Community Developement Officer with Sanctuary Shaftesbury.

The A4 sized one-sided form was given to each tenant, some vulnerable, within the flats community at Timber Close, St Austell, Cornwall. On the face of it the short questionaire gave the tenants an opportunity to determine what became of an area of land and how high they wanted the communal hedgerows to be.

The form was presented almost as an act of democracy in action but hid the fact that it was actually an illegal act of deception by Sanctuary Housing upon the tenants.

Throughout the period of time the 'Deed of Deception' took to conclude Sanctuary Housing knowingly denied tenants services they were entitled to and knowingly continued to take a weekly charge for something the tenants were being denied. Not my idea of  democracy in action.

Throughout most of 2009, the tenants were denied use of most of the rotary driers eventhough they paid a weekly Service Charge for their use and the maintainance of them and the environment. Of the six rotary driers two remained in need of repair for almost a year and two were interferred with by overgrown foliage. The overgrown foliage was the result of an un-authorised garden and neglected hedgerows which should have been closer to 4 feet tall but were actually 8 to 10 feet tall.

The purpose of the form was to return everything back to how it should always have been without the tenants realising that Sanctuary Housing had in fact been cheating and robbing them in denying them services and taking money for it every week. Apart from deceiving the tenants the form itself was, as stated above, instrumental in extending the amount of time the tenants were cheated and robbed.

I do not believe Sanctuary Housing was able to abdicate or transfer it's legal responsibilities, it's part of the contract, to the tenants. I base this on the simple fact that had the tenants voted to keep the hedgerows 10 feet tall the landlord still had a legal responsibility and obligation  to reduce them and desregard that vote. The purpose of the unlawful deception was to avoid liability for the landlords negligence.

The above was one of the issues which should have been discussed and resolved in Mediation but was instead buried because the Mediation process by Sanctuary Housing and TPAS was a scam to protect TPAS Accredited Landlord Sanctuary Housing. I declined £225.00 relative to this issue simply so as not to recognise or legitamise that scam.

In view of the above and as small as it is the form has earned it's place in my Rogues Gallery.

Price: 0.00


Product Code: DoD
OUT OF STOCK