Hertfordshire Constabulary and Watford Community Housing Trust gain crack house closure extension for flat in Pinetree House, Meriden estate

Watford Observer: Police officers executed a drug warrant at the flat on August 21, 2013, after receiving numerous complaints from neighbours. Police officers executed a drug warrant at the flat on August 21, 2013, after receiving numerous complaints from neighbours.

A suspected drug dealing den on the Meriden estate will remain shut down due to a court order.

Hertfordshire Constabulary and Watford Community Housing Trust have successfully applied for an extension crack house closure order for the flat in Pinetree House.

The original order was granted in October after the force received numerous complaints from neighbours about nuisance behaviour and suspected drug dealing.

Nikki Simons, Hertfordshire Constabulary Anti-Social Behaviour Officer, said: "We are extremely pleased with the outcome of this hearing. The property has been subject of anti-social behaviour for a long period of time. I’m pleased to say that we have had no reports of anti-social behaviour at the address since the order was granted back in October and the residents’ quality of life has improved tremendously."

Under the original terms, the occupant, Roger Lewis, is ordered not to enter the property for three months. On Thursday magistrates at St Albans Magistrates Court extended that order until April.

Police said no one is allowed into the flat and any attempts to gain access will result in a breach of the closure order and arrest.

Following the decision, Dave Wheatley, Watford’s chief inspector, said: "Clearly the closure has made a big difference to the lives of residents living in Pinetree House and this has been achieved through the hard work and determination of anti-social behaviour officers, from both the constabulary and Watford Community Housing Trust."

Watford Community Housing Trust ASB Officer Denise Cole added: "This crack house closure has shown that working together in partnership, alongside the residents of the block who have suffered ASB for a number of years, we can achieve a positive outcome for all. This sends a clear message to all that we will not put up with this type of behaviour and we will take action against your tenancy."

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:48pm Mon 27 Jan 14

phil mitchel says...

'A suspected drug dealing den on the Meriden estate will remain shut down due to a court order. '
I thought drug dealing was illegal, they're making it sound like a corner shop that's been a little bit naughty.
'A suspected drug dealing den on the Meriden estate will remain shut down due to a court order. ' I thought drug dealing was illegal, they're making it sound like a corner shop that's been a little bit naughty. phil mitchel
  • Score: 9

5:01pm Mon 27 Jan 14

LSC says...

I don't understand this at all. IF this man is drug dealing, then he is simply doing it somewhere else now. Why spend good money to just make him re-locate?
Nick him if he is guilty, or let him into his own home if he isn't. It can't be that hard to find out and at probably half the cost of this pantomime.
I don't understand this at all. IF this man is drug dealing, then he is simply doing it somewhere else now. Why spend good money to just make him re-locate? Nick him if he is guilty, or let him into his own home if he isn't. It can't be that hard to find out and at probably half the cost of this pantomime. LSC
  • Score: 2

5:13pm Mon 27 Jan 14

trickywatford says...

What a waste of social housing. If he's serving up from the premises, then evict him and let someone else live there.
What a waste of social housing. If he's serving up from the premises, then evict him and let someone else live there. trickywatford
  • Score: 7

6:45pm Mon 27 Jan 14

jasonwatford says...

Kick him out and do it up for someone to live in...It's not rocket science is it
Kick him out and do it up for someone to live in...It's not rocket science is it jasonwatford
  • Score: 8

1:09pm Tue 28 Jan 14

EU_OUT_NOW says...

"The property has been subject of anti-social behaviour for a long period of time, Hertfordshire Constabulary"
"The residents of the block who have suffered ASB for a number of years, WCHT"..... A number of YEARS? This is an all too familiar story. The abuser is allowed to carry on far too long and the tenants suffer ill health and abuse. Disgraceful WCHT. Law abiding tenants rights anyone????
"The property has been subject of anti-social behaviour for a long period of time, Hertfordshire Constabulary" "The residents of the block who have suffered ASB for a number of years, WCHT"..... A number of YEARS? This is an all too familiar story. The abuser is allowed to carry on far too long and the tenants suffer ill health and abuse. Disgraceful WCHT. Law abiding tenants rights anyone???? EU_OUT_NOW
  • Score: 5

1:28pm Tue 28 Jan 14

garston tony says...

Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property garston tony
  • Score: 1

1:50pm Tue 28 Jan 14

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable!
I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause? EU_OUT_NOW
  • Score: 3

2:06pm Tue 28 Jan 14

LSC says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote:
Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable!
I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
If there is years of documented problems, why isn't this guy prosecuted? The Public Order Act covers just about anything from swearing to dropping a cigarette.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?[/p][/quote]If there is years of documented problems, why isn't this guy prosecuted? The Public Order Act covers just about anything from swearing to dropping a cigarette. LSC
  • Score: 2

3:34pm Tue 28 Jan 14

garston tony says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing.

The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time.

I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves.

We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?[/p][/quote]Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault. garston tony
  • Score: 1

5:29pm Tue 28 Jan 14

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing.

The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time.

I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves.

We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.
And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic
e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too!
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?[/p][/quote]Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.[/p][/quote]And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too! EU_OUT_NOW
  • Score: 3

11:09am Wed 29 Jan 14

G_Whiz says...

LSC wrote:
I don't understand this at all. IF this man is drug dealing, then he is simply doing it somewhere else now. Why spend good money to just make him re-locate?
Nick him if he is guilty, or let him into his own home if he isn't. It can't be that hard to find out and at probably half the cost of this pantomime.
Social housing is not a right, it does have rules - being anti-social should be enough to get someone kicked out!

The selfish excuse of a man has had more than enough chances.
[quote][p][bold]LSC[/bold] wrote: I don't understand this at all. IF this man is drug dealing, then he is simply doing it somewhere else now. Why spend good money to just make him re-locate? Nick him if he is guilty, or let him into his own home if he isn't. It can't be that hard to find out and at probably half the cost of this pantomime.[/p][/quote]Social housing is not a right, it does have rules - being anti-social should be enough to get someone kicked out! The selfish excuse of a man has had more than enough chances. G_Whiz
  • Score: 1

2:38pm Thu 30 Jan 14

garston tony says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.
And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too!
On the one hand you say dont teach you to suck eggs, on the other hand you post comments that make me think you have trouble sucking air into your lungs let alone anything that comes out of a chickens behind
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?[/p][/quote]Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.[/p][/quote]And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too![/p][/quote]On the one hand you say dont teach you to suck eggs, on the other hand you post comments that make me think you have trouble sucking air into your lungs let alone anything that comes out of a chickens behind garston tony
  • Score: 0

3:04pm Thu 30 Jan 14

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property
Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?
Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.
And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too!
On the one hand you say dont teach you to suck eggs, on the other hand you post comments that make me think you have trouble sucking air into your lungs let alone anything that comes out of a chickens behind
Oh, Tony, this has taken you days to generate a small abusive reply. I am disappointed in you! I thought you had intelligence, I was wrong!
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Its not as easy as blaming WCHT for not kicking their tenant out, they have to do it legally and stupid as it sounds its not always easy to get the courts to give an eviction notice. Landlords have to jump through hoops to get even the worst of tenants evicted, although I would hope that they now have sufficient evidence to get an eviction and who knows the request for an extention could be to allow an eviction request to progress through the courts before the tenant is allowed back in the property[/p][/quote]Thank you Tony. I do know all this. I should do! But YEARS??... Unacceptable! I know the old WBC and new WCHT procedure of old. Have you been on the receiving end of YEARS of ASB abuse and suffered the misery they cause?[/p][/quote]Actually yes, we (along with others) had to keep diary sheets for three years until enough evidence was gathered not to satisfy the housing association (who well knew there was a genuine issue with their tenant) but to satisfy the courts that they were right to seek an eviction over the nuisance that they were causing. The law is biased towards tenants, I can see how that could be a good thing in certain circumstances but unfortunately it means the real nightmare neighbours often get to carry on with their behaviour for some time. I also note that the article refers to the flat as a 'suspected' drug dealing den, doing a quick google search a crack house order can be obtained if there is reasonable suspicion of drug use (not necessarily actual evidence) in a property but the order is against the property itself not the occupier who isnt necessarily charged with anything themselves. We dont know the full details but if the order was obtained because there was a suspicion of drug use there and if the tenant wasnt charged or found guilty of anything associated with it I could well imagine that the WCHT may well not be able to use the obtaining of a crack house order in itself to convince a court to evict the tenant. Its harsh but hardly their fault.[/p][/quote]And on and on and on you go! Tony, you trying to preach to me is like trying to teach grandmother to suck eggs, in my case grandfather. I really don't need your lecture!. I know the procedure all to well. I stand by what I said, its a WCHT disgrace that these tenants at Pinetree House were subjected to this neighbour abuse for YEARS. One year+ is normal for the process to be taken to it's final court conclusion, not YEARS! As for diary sheets, they have a limited use but are outdated, there are better ways to gather evidence. Maybe the WCHT and the police could have enlightened the tenants on 21st century methods of evidence gathering. Perhaps it's also now time WBC and the WCHT were a little more careful in their choice of tenant. This is not an invitation for you Tony to subject me to yet another lecture on discrimination/choic e of tenant/Human rights Act etc etc... I have been down that road too![/p][/quote]On the one hand you say dont teach you to suck eggs, on the other hand you post comments that make me think you have trouble sucking air into your lungs let alone anything that comes out of a chickens behind[/p][/quote]Oh, Tony, this has taken you days to generate a small abusive reply. I am disappointed in you! I thought you had intelligence, I was wrong! EU_OUT_NOW
  • Score: 0

1:01pm Fri 31 Jan 14

garston tony says...

Sorry, I didnt realise I was meant to be sat at the computer logged onto the WO website in order to respond to you the moment you posted. I have a life that means I sometimes am away from the computer you know

I'm not against you, I agree the tenant should be kicked out arrested and in prison by the sounds of it. All I am saying is you are moaning about WCHT when the reality is its likely to be the law itself that is preventing them from taking what looks like obvious action.
Sorry, I didnt realise I was meant to be sat at the computer logged onto the WO website in order to respond to you the moment you posted. I have a life that means I sometimes am away from the computer you know I'm not against you, I agree the tenant should be kicked out arrested and in prison by the sounds of it. All I am saying is you are moaning about WCHT when the reality is its likely to be the law itself that is preventing them from taking what looks like obvious action. garston tony
  • Score: 0

2:28pm Fri 31 Jan 14

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
Sorry, I didnt realise I was meant to be sat at the computer logged onto the WO website in order to respond to you the moment you posted. I have a life that means I sometimes am away from the computer you know

I'm not against you, I agree the tenant should be kicked out arrested and in prison by the sounds of it. All I am saying is you are moaning about WCHT when the reality is its likely to be the law itself that is preventing them from taking what looks like obvious action.
I hear you, believe me I hear you Tony. But from a long association with WBC and the WCHT, not enough effort is made to deal with abusive neighbours, especially as alcohol and drug abuse is on the increase and often the cause. I am fully aware of the law regarding tenants’ rights, the way that abusive tenants misuse EU law to evade eviction or prosecution. It's time the WCHT wised up and started to outwit these abusive tenants. It is easy to hide behind EU law, but there are ways round it. Yes it is risky and costs money, tenants money, the case could be brought to court and lost! But what is the answer? to run or fight? The WCHT needs to make more effort!. There are some shining lights in the WCHT, there are also those who suffer with lethargy. Dairy sheets were being used 30yrs ago and the same WBC thinking has migrated to the WCHT. "Oh there's nothing we can do, we've always done this way and we don't know how to change and now there's EU law!" Come on! Tenants could work as a group along with the WCHT and the police to monitor abusive anti-social neighbours and at the risk of repeating myself, 21st century surveillance could be used! Wake up people and fight. Don't tolerate antisocial behaviour. Of course I could finish up by saying Vote UKIP and leave the EU. That would put a spanner in the HRA!
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Sorry, I didnt realise I was meant to be sat at the computer logged onto the WO website in order to respond to you the moment you posted. I have a life that means I sometimes am away from the computer you know I'm not against you, I agree the tenant should be kicked out arrested and in prison by the sounds of it. All I am saying is you are moaning about WCHT when the reality is its likely to be the law itself that is preventing them from taking what looks like obvious action.[/p][/quote]I hear you, believe me I hear you Tony. But from a long association with WBC and the WCHT, not enough effort is made to deal with abusive neighbours, especially as alcohol and drug abuse is on the increase and often the cause. I am fully aware of the law regarding tenants’ rights, the way that abusive tenants misuse EU law to evade eviction or prosecution. It's time the WCHT wised up and started to outwit these abusive tenants. It is easy to hide behind EU law, but there are ways round it. Yes it is risky and costs money, tenants money, the case could be brought to court and lost! But what is the answer? to run or fight? The WCHT needs to make more effort!. There are some shining lights in the WCHT, there are also those who suffer with lethargy. Dairy sheets were being used 30yrs ago and the same WBC thinking has migrated to the WCHT. "Oh there's nothing we can do, we've always done this way and we don't know how to change and now there's EU law!" Come on! Tenants could work as a group along with the WCHT and the police to monitor abusive anti-social neighbours and at the risk of repeating myself, 21st century surveillance could be used! Wake up people and fight. Don't tolerate antisocial behaviour. Of course I could finish up by saying Vote UKIP and leave the EU. That would put a spanner in the HRA! EU_OUT_NOW
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree