Friday, December 11, 2020

Peabody Trust: Declan has this evening written to our local MP and three councillors for a referral of his complaint to the Housing Ombudsman

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).

This evening Declan has emailed our local MP and three councillors for the referral straight to the Housing Ombudsman of his complaint against Peabody Trust about appalling new terms of tenancy. Without this referral, he will have to wait until the period of eight weeks has passed before the Ombudsman will consider the case. Such is the short-term threat to our tenancy that we are immediately starting work on an application to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 at 16:56, Declan Heavey wrote:
Rt Hon Lyn Brown MP
Member of Parliament for West Ham

Address removed for email


11 December 2020

Dear Ms. Brown,

Declan Heavey, 71 Queens Road West, Plaistow, London E13 0PE
Peabody Trust, 45 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7JB

I am the above-named constituent and I am contacting you about a housing complaint. In accordance with the Localism Act 2011, I am writing to ask you to refer the complaint to the Housing Ombudsman.

I have attached a copy of the landlord's final response letter to my Stage 2 complaint below. I have also attached written consent from the resident (me) for you to make this referral.

The outstanding dispute centres on the refusal of the landlord, Peabody Trust, to renew my and my wife's tenancy as twice before. As explained below, I have been offered appalling new terms of tenancy that in effect poses a threat to my life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative designated property.

I think that since Peabody have previously insisted that they have offered a tenancy "like for like as requested", it is only fair and reasonable that they issue such a tenancy. Furthermore, they falsely allege that I have appointed a solicitor in this case and have effectively written out third party support that we fought long and hard to receive.

Thank you in advance. I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

Mob: xxxxxxxxxxx

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan


Declan submitted this complaint to Peabody on 17 October:

What is your complaint (Please add as much detail as possible including any reference numbers you may have)?

Ref: CAS-506345-C3J0K0

I am not satisfied with Head of Specialist Housing Management Sonia Palfey's response dated 7 September 2020 to the Stage 1 complaint I raised with Peabody about new terms of tenancy. I received Ms Palfrey's response through the Housing Ombudsman Service last night. I respectfully ask you to escalate this matter to a Stage 2 complaint for me, or, alternatively, provide me with a final response letter for the Ombudsman to consider.
  
By way of background, my wife and I have been living in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiate (RSI) property that is owned by Peabody. Our tenancy has been twice renewed like for like as requested. The original two-year term expired in 2016, and again in 2018 but Peabody agreed to new tenancies on like-for-like terms on both occasions. In an email of 27 April 2020, Housing Officer Rukia Khatun asserted in relation to the third agreement offered that "the terms are the same and a like for like as requested". In a further email of 1 May 2020, Ms Khatun falsely accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement.

On 27 May 2020, I received an email from Area Housing Manager Rosealeen Sogunro about the third renewal of our tenancy. By way of supporting evidence, after I have submitted this form, I will email you this email from Ms Sogunro, the Stage 1 response I received last night from Ms Palfrey and an updated document titled 'Comparative Screenshots'. It is my contention that, given Peabody's apparent ongoing insistence that we have been offered a tenancy like for like as requested, it is only fair and reasonable that you produce such a document. Instead, my wife and I have been previously falsely accused of not signing a like-for-like agreement and continue to be provided with assurances that are not reflected in the new tenancy agreement.
 
My wife and I are currently not protected from a 'no fault' eviction in a weekly periodic tenancy. Despite Ms Palfrey's apparent assurance that no action of this sort will be taken, our legal position in respect to Section 21 possession poses a direct threat to my life. It also has a destabilising effect on our tenancy and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. For example, my wife cannot resume a volunteer position she held in the community for four years. I am also forced to maintain a suspension on my voluntary work in the community. The level of pressure and uncertainty connected with our tenancy is not only unfair to us but also to the community centre my wife has been volunteering in since June 2016. The centre obviously wants someone who is reliable and able to commit to set days and times.
  
How would you like us to resolve your complaint?

To resolve my complaint I request a tenancy like for like as requested, as has been issued twice before, and not a tenancy agreement that is not remotely the same document. Substantial and/or adverse variations include: unspecified visiting support that neither I nor my wife wants or needs; the removal from the agreement of the rent cap for social housing; the both of us remaining liable for rent and service charges until the end of the fixed term if Peabody does not agree to the termination of the tenancy despite our one month's notice in advance; and the stipulation of a much shorter length of time in rent arrears for possession.

Consider, for example, that the stipulated time in arrears for possession has been reduced from 8 weeks to 14 days. This in itself renders unsignable the new tenancy agreement, thereby destabilising our tenancy and inhibiting our ability to exercise our rights. Newham Council has already twice suspended our housing benefit because of erroneous notifications from the Department for Work and Pensions that we had vacated. We have not had any contact with the Department during our tenancy due to us both having been part-time employed.

I reiterate in conclusion that my wife and I have no legal protection from a 'no fault' eviction in a weekly periodic tenancy, and to assert otherwise is both factually disingenuous and unsupported by law. I have sought and received legal advice from a UK lawyer on this point, and a Housing legal advisor such as Shelter concurs on their website. I am a 60-year-old asthmatic with a long history of serious respiratory illness, thus placing me in the high-risk group for COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections. That my wife and I should be forced to live under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction in an RSI designated property seems to us to be unconscionable. There is no question that such an eviction would return us to the streets for the third time through no fault of our own, and this time with little or no prospect of ever being housed again.



Metropolitan Police Crime Reference No. 5330050/20. On 16 October, our flat door on the 2nd floor was vandalised by two thugs with a crowbar. Declan and I were in the flat at the time and fortunately our double locked door held firm. It's my opinion that they just wanted to break the door lock but didn't have enough time. The communal door lock downstairs wasn't broken, and on 11 November that lock was changed. Our flat door was repaired by a security contractor on 1 December with silicone sealant and glue gun. The police closed the case within two days of the crime due to a lack of evidence.

11 December: Our landlord Peabody Trust has effectively just threatened us with a 'no fault' short term eviction from a flat that falls under the Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative. Declan has asked our local MP and three councillors for a referral of his case straight to the Housing Ombudsman (newer post)



For months we have been dealing with an almost total blockade of our emails to space advocates anywhere in the world. The latest email we gave up on to Washington DC is our reply email to a close colleague on 3 December. Declan's recent use of his mobile phone to try to get my permission emails through to space advocates has also proven unsuccessful. On both occasions the leading expert could only be reached through voice mail because, we assume, of the pandemic that is currently raging in America. Most recently we have had the honour of listing a Hall of Famer astronaut among our Honorary Associates. It was one of the few emails that we have gotten through to space advocates in the past three months.

6 December: It would not be an exaggeration to say that more than a thousand of our emails have been blocked this year taking into account Washington DC. My emails to space advocates are among those targeted




From My Picks:

24 November: For the fourth time Pixsy chase payment without a claim letter for the past non-commercial use of one image on the Church and State website. We're still waiting for Peabody Trust's final decision letter for the Housing Ombudsman to investigate appalling new terms of tenancy



Our list of 287 Honorary Associates includes 17 Nobel Prize laureates, 11 US National Medal of Science laureates and 12 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these three categories of emails in particular.

http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/

"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