Church and State blog: Peabody: Declan asks Peabody CEO Brendan Sarsfield for an explanation for the non-renewal of our tenancy. We are in a flat that falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (WITH UPDATE 2/5/2020)

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Peabody: Declan asks Peabody CEO Brendan Sarsfield for an explanation for the non-renewal of our tenancy. We are in a flat that falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (WITH UPDATE 2/5/2020)

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

Joseph R. Carvalko, Esq., American lawyer (read full email below)

Our Church and State website has no less than 59 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms formulates what is the core of free speech. "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression." In an important interpretation of this article, the European Court of Human Rights in Handyside v. UK (1976) indicated that this "freedom of expression" should be construed as follows. It "is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received, or regarded as inoffensive, or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population". Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society" (see Cliteur, 2010).

The Central London County Court is based at the Royal Courts of Justice. The hearing of the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's application to have Declan's claim struck out before Senior Circuit Judge Marc Dight CBE has been adjourned to a date to be fixed.

Declan and I are housed in a flat that falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Alongside our tenancy is access to the Mayor's Tenancy Sustainment Team (TST) at St Mungo's. It has been acknowledged by the Greater London Authority in court papers that we can live independently – we do not have addictions or mental illness or behavioural issues. Our needs are solely related to the harassment, discrimination, intimidation and victimisation we routinely face. This is typified by the behaviour of St Mungo's during proceedings currently before the court. On 16 April our landlord, Peabody housing association, intimated that they will not be issuing us a "renewed assured shorthold tenancy" (clause A6) before our tenancy ends next month. So now we are facing a periodic tenancy and eviction at will by the landlord from 17 May because we cannot get St Mungo's to even vouch over the phone that we are clients of theirs. The ending of our current status as tenants who are part of the Mayor's TST programme by necessity is how Peabody previously interpreted appalling and dangerous new terms of tenancy that we have refused to sign. For a start, the acceptance by the court that this interpretation actually exists would likely render academic Declan's claim against St Mungo's for an effective failure to provide support, and might even result in costs being awarded against him for filing a spurious claim based on a necessary need for support that doesn't seem explainable allowing for this interpretation of the tenancy. This is Declan's email this afternoon to Peabody CEO Brendan Sarsfield in further response to a staggering email from one of his housing officers yesterday:

Brendan Sarsfield
CEO
Peabody

Address removed for email

28 April 2020

Dear Mr. Sarsfield,

Please treat this letter as a request made under the Human Rights Act 1998.

I hereby once again request Peabody's explanation for the non-renewal of my and my wife's tenancy. I received the email below from Rukia Khatun yesterday. I reconfirm that the type of tenancy on offer may be the same as shown on my existing tenancy agreement, but the expressed and implied terms of the contract (the "terms of contract") are appalling and unacceptable. Contrary to what Chelsey Smith seems to suggest in her email this morning, the tenancy being offered is most certainly not like for like with our current tenancy. It ought to go without saying that the terms of a contract are the essence of a contract, and tell the reader what the contract will do.

I believe that it would be imprudent of me to negotiate or engage in any way about discrepancies in the terms set out, due to me being unrepresented by counsel. I therefore once again request Peabody's reason(s) for not providing me with a like-for-like tenancy - taking both type of tenancy and terms of contract into account - as has been issued to me twice before. Our current tenancy states in clause A6 that what we have "is a renewed assured shorthold tenancy" (emphasis added). The new clause A6 is restricted to stating that what is on offer "is an assured shorthold tenancy". This is because it cannot state that the tenancy has been renewed due to it not having been renewed.

As I have repeatedly stated, I have managed to sustain my tenancy but to ensure that I do not face homelessness again, I need St Mungo's TST support to achieve financial independence. The same goes for my wife. The tenancy agreement we have would work for us, if only St Mungo's TST would honour their side of the contract in respect of the support required. They will not even take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's TST programme in North London (TST North), and have chosen instead to fight me on this issue in court. I have noted that there is "an agreed decision" by Peabody and St Mungo's about the ongoing tenancy.

I have made a very clear request that we want to sign a document like the ones we signed twice before. Our publishing colleague Don Collins, Sr. responded to this request yesterday. He writes: "Seems very reasonable. Hope that your calm repeated request for justice will allow them to do the right thing." Please find attached a "To whom it may concern" letter by another publishing colleague of ours, Joseph Carvalko, who is an American lawyer. I will file his letter with the court in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

Who can say that Declan does not have opposition?

The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Headquarters in Gogarburn. The RBS owns National Westminster Bank (NatWest).

Declan currently has the Royal Bank of Scotland (along with NatWest Bank) before the Financial Ombudsman for the cancellation of a standing order on the Network for Church Monitoring business account without his knowledge or consent. And this after he received £100 compensation from the RBS in recognition of his time, travel costs and inconvenience in setting up this and another standing order over two months ago.

13 April: Royal Bank of Scotland: Despite his earlier dealings with the RBS Executive Response Team, Declan has been waiting over six weeks to learn from Natwest Bank who cancelled a standing order on the Network for Church Monitoring business account without his knowledge or consent (Financial Ombudsman case ref. PNX-3576860-D6B8)

In his fight for a reasonable degree of justice, this is the "To whom it may concern" letter by Joseph Carvalko that Declan will file with the court in due course:

In the Matter of: Mr. and Mrs. Declan Heavey

To whom it may concern:

I am a U.S. attorney writing to introduce Mr. and Mrs. Declan Heavey, publishing colleagues of mine, in their current struggle to avoid an eviction in London. Permit me to introduce myself and summarize the Heaveys' predicament.

For four decades I have practiced law in the U.S. I also have spent many years teaching law, where currently I am Adjunct Professor of Law, Science and Technology, Quinnipiac University, School of Law. I also hold other positions in academia and professional organizations such as Chairman, Yale Technology and Ethics working group, Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics, member of the Community Bioethics Forum, Yale School of Medicine, and a member of Publications Board, IEEE Transactions on the Implications of Technology in Society.

In my various roles I have written many books and articles, this last point connecting me to the Heaveys, who are engaged in an important project that deals with the publication of issues significant to social policy in a number of key areas, e.g., population, climate change, futurism, atheism, and free speech. Established as Network for Church Monitoring, a nonprofit company limited by guarantee, their main publication, found at the website, Church and State, has no less than 59 Nobel Laureates on it, 16 of whom signed on as Honorary Associates. I might add that the list of 276 associates also includes 10 recipients of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 12 knighted professors. There are contributions to the site by six members of the House of Lords, 29 knighted professors.

The Heaveys have aided my publication efforts, vis-à-vis articles about bioethics and technology law, principally the role these fields play in conserving humanity in an era of hyper-technological progress. Mine is not a particularly controversial topic, but the Heaveys have courageously undertaken to call attention to other subjects, not the least which have been critical of the interaction between religious and secular institutions. The Heaveys have been the target of numerous threats and actions, e.g., the former resulting in "threats to Mr. Heavey's life," and the latter, which have led to vandalism. The various incidents are on record with the police and other official agencies.

With the background as provided above, the Heaveys now are facing an eviction notice from their landlord, Peabody Trust housing association. The tenancy is a flat, which falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Pardoning my intrusion into English law, but in fairness there does not appear to be any reason for the eviction, relying apparently entirely on the discretion of the landlord.

The eviction matter has come before His Honour Senior Circuit Judge Marc Dight at the County Court at Central London. The Court will notify of remote hearing details in due course, when both the legal representative for St. Mungo's (the charity in effective control of the tenancy) and Mr. Heavey would present their positions. Both Mr. Heavey and St. Mungo's had written to the court explaining that an adjournment would be appropriate, and that it is not a matter which could be conducted by telecon due to Mr. Heavey being unrepresented. I might add the Heaveys do not have the funds to hire a solicitor in this matter. The problem as perceived by the Heaveys is that Peabody Trust, under a Section 21, which they fully expect to receive on or about 17 May, will force them to vacate. Vacating would be consequential as they have no means by which they can secure housing at this time.

I appreciate that as we are undergoing the Covid-19 pandemic, so are you, which may present obstacles in representation. However, especially during this pandemic, an eviction, especially into the streets, might well pose an unimaginable threat to the Heaveys' well-being.

Thank you for the opportunity to call your attention to this urgent matter. If you can assist please let me know, or reach out directly to the Heaveys at dheavey@gmail.com.

Very truly yours,

Joseph R. Carvalko, Jr. Esq.

Update 2 May 2020

Yesterday Peabody reconfirmed that our tenancy will not be renewed and without an explanation for why. We were again confronted with an abominable choice: sign appalling new terms of tenancy or face a periodic tenancy and eviction at will by Peabody from 17 May (16 days to go). It had been previously stated that this is an "agreed decision" by Peabody and St Mungo's about the ongoing tenancy. The Covid-19 pandemic notwithstanding, it wouldn't surprise us if the inevitable eviction back into the streets actually comes before Declan gets to make his case against St Mungo's in court for the support we need. St Mungo's, after all, has chosen to take their chances in court rather than even vouch over the phone that we are clients of the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's Tenancy Sustainment Team in North London (TST North). The hearing of St Mungo's application to have Declan's claim struck out before Senior Circuit Judge Marc Dight CBE has been adjourned to a date to be fixed. Today Declan is working on a pre-action letter to Brendan Sarsfield under the Human Rights Act 1998. Not to deliver on this we believe would only be to increase our vulnerability going forward, with eviction already a fait accompli unless Declan can at last gain a positive hearing from an authority capable of keeping us in our home.

16 days to go to a periodic tenancy
in a Mayor of London RSI designated property

St Mungos management were repeatedly warned by their staff via Unite that their actions weere unethical, damaged the work of front line staff and were likley to be unlawful. The same senior managers remain in place https://t.co/ZSXwq3Xd81 #homelessness #ukhousing @labhomeless_cam
— UniteHousingWorkers (@UniteHousing) November 5, 2019

From My Pick's:

3 April: Declan's claim against the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's before Senior Circuit Judge Marc Dight CBE has been adjourned to a date to be fixed. St Mungo's TST is still unwilling to even take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of theirs

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan

What the issue in these court proceedings boils down to is whether the court will decide that Declan and I should live in a destabilised tenancy that inhibits our ability to exercise our rights and poses a threat to his life, simply because the Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's Tenancy Sustainment Team in North London (TST North) will not even take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of theirs. The court must surely find that this is not proportionate and lawful.

Our need for this support continues to escalate?

"Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." Edd Doerr (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty

http://churchandstate.org.uk/about/

Church and State

MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY
DAY 406 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A SECTION 21 NOTICE

(SEE PARA. 3 BELOW)

1. Our 308 Honorary Associates include 20 Nobel Prize laureates. Declan and I are engaged in a project that deals with the publication of issues significant to social policy in a number of key areas, e.g., climate change, population, futurism, atheism, and free speech. Established as Network for Church Monitoring, a non-profit company limited by guarantee, our main publication, found at the website, Church and State, calls attention to subjects, not the least which have been critical of the interaction between religious and secular institutions. We have been the target of numerous threats and actions, e.g., the former resulting in threats to Declan's life, and the latter, which have led to vandalism. The various incidents are on record with the police and other official agencies.

2. There are no less than 63 Nobel Prize laureates on the Church and State website from 20 Honorary Associates, eight articles, nine book excerpts and 33 petition signatories. (For example, one Nobel laureate signed our Nobel petition in support of human embryonic stem cell research and gave us permission to excerpt from one of his books.) Our list of associates also includes 18 US National Medal laureates, and six Turing Award laureates (the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in computer science). We have published one article and excerpted from the books of seven members of the British House of Lords. And there are 31 knighted professors on the site from 13 Honorary Associates, one book excerpt and 21 petition signatories. These figures are despite the never-ending assault on our email (this link reveals the targeting of our emails to, among others, a close colleague in Washington, DC as well as space advocates and Nobel laureates).

3. This is Day 406 for us living under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust.[1] We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) property. Peabody's appalling new terms of tenancy have forced us into an unstable weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to Declan's life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Declan accumulated quite a history with the Housing Ombudsman Service before he received the Ombudsman's decision not to investigate a referral from Lyn Brown MP on jurisdictional grounds. The Ombudsman was asked to consider whether or not our tenancy has been renewed like for like; and whether, if not, it should be in light of the landlord having accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will not accept a referral of discrimination from Ms Brown, the Commission's helpline (EASS) having grossly distorted the complaint against Peabody. We no longer have pro se access to the courts (see next paragraph).

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that also poses a threat to his life.

5. When it comes to traffic, we have had 10.7 million hits in the past three years on Facebook; however, I left the platform on 13 March 2021 for one year rather than risk being banned for life. It is indisputable that with any sort of level playing field Church and State would have far exceeded 2.5 million hits last year. In addition to a large variety of blocks without explanation, Facebook had so severely restricted our Page's distribution by October 2020 that it was almost as good as an unpublished page.[2] Currently, we are up to their 85th block since 1 December 2015, and as usual without an explanation. This block records as one half of their 3rd double block in the first five weeks of this year that lasted 60 days. Our traffic has also been curtailed by over 2.5K blocks on access to Church and State since 26 July 2016, including 29 full distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks since 17 May 2019 that have lasted for as long as 54 hours at a time.[3] About 70% of our hits are from Americans.

"This is precisely the hard hitting kind of response needed to clarify the unfair way Facebook is treating your highly reputable site." Don Collins, Founder, International Services Assistance Fund, Washington DC

Last updated: 26/06/21

_________________________

[1] Once a fixed term has elapsed, the landlord has the option to seek eviction even if the tenant has upheld their obligations in full (though of course the landlord must still apply for and obtain a county court order).

[2] 17/10/20: We have permission to publish this ISAF letter of 30 September to Facebook COO Sheryl Samberg. Facebook has so severely restricted our Page's distribution since 4 September that it's almost as good as an unpublished page

[3] Since October 2019, we have been defining a full DDoS attack as having such a high volume of up to 4-minute blocks on access to Church and State that we don't bother recording them all.

Church and State blog

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Peabody: Declan asks Peabody CEO Brendan Sarsfield for an explanation for the non-renewal of our tenancy. We are in a flat that falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (WITH UPDATE 2/5/2020)

About me

My Picks

Church and State

Blog Archive