I have a dilemma I have only so many spoons. Do I make another High Court Claim for CCC or SSWP or do I just report Carla B to the police?
You have my permission to use AI to read this post.
I have decided to put a criminal case together for Carla B, the Customer Service Team Leader in the Cambridge Job Centre.
I have never done criminal law before.
But I do know if two white police officers from Parkside come to your home, to hand deliver a letter, and read it to you (perhaps because you are dyslexic) so that the can personally tell you that they will not investigate the racist comments made that you recorded. This is because they asked them and they sad they did not say that. But importantly the police officers have their cameras on, without telling you for their protection (without telling you) which is very criminal. So you smile and show them your partner watching on the IPAD, and later ask for the Video via GDPR. That sort of crime is obvious because is it is very much misconduct in AB v Hampshire Constabulary, first decision under new IPT rules IPT/17/191/CH this is because recording in someone's home not for an interview or a crime is unlawful surveillance:
"42. In the present case, what took place at AB’s home was not an interview at all.
” … Before attending the address I was warned by my sergeant and members of the Lymington Neighbourhood’s Team that AB was renowned for making complaints against the Police on a regular basis. For this reason I also attended the incident with another colleague to ensure that anything said was witnessed. At no point had I operated the body worn video device for surveillance purposes, it was to record the interaction between myself and AB.”
43. In our view, with respect, it is not for the officer concerned to decide whether he was using the device for “surveillance purposes”: that is a matter for this Tribunal. The fact is that it was not to record an interview, as was the case in Re A Complaint of Surveillance.Rather it was, it would seem, to record by way of anticipation anything that might happen, in other words the behaviour (possibly anticipated misbehaviour) of AB.
Conclusion
44. For the above reasons we have come to the conclusion that the video recording in this case was capable of amounting to “surveillance” for the purposes of Part II of RIP A"
Here the evidence is more nuanced.
Carla obviously will not stop until she is physically removed from the Jobcentre building. For example when I made the High Court claim nothing changed for Carla. This is because of the DWP solicitors (god help them if the DWP ever found out they had a disability), just repeatedly lied to the High Court.
I am confident in saying that because they did. They showed Carla, that they were going to protect her no matter what, so Carla just kept on.
The only change in her Carla's behaviour was a discrimination claim against her. I including her colleagues. And suddenly, they were about to use email.
You might say that the only reason they did that was because you threatened them. Well, yes. But what could have been criminal. I could have been arrested. I was not. You cannot use a lawful claim to make some break the law. With the personal claim I removed the protection of the DWP. And yes you all can be sued if you break the equality act at work. Even the DWP says this:
"Compliance with the Equality Act 2010..14. To ensure DWP complies with the Equality Act, all staff must: - Make sure there is no unlawful discrimination... - If a customer is able to establish in a court that they have experienced discrimination as defined in the Equality Act, they could be awarded compensation. This could be awarded either against DWP or an individual member of staff. Therefore, staff must take their responsibilities in regard to complying with the Equality Act seriously."
Note: remember to save this for Ms H, the DWP solicitor stepped in and lied about that claim. She said,
"@governmentlegal.gov.uk > to Ryan 17 Jul, 11:43 Dear Mr...Although you have named individual employees in the attached claim form, it is clear that the claim relates to actions carried out by those individually named employees in the course of their official duties as employees of Department for Welfare and Pensions (“DWP”). Pursuant to the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 and the principles of vicarious liability, liability in such cases rests with the government department, in this case the DWP, not the individual employees personally.
Furthermore, your claim form refers to the Cambridge Job Centre, which is under the control of DWP, this confirms that a government department is involved in this matter. As such, the department will assume responsibility for defending the claim. The claim form was served by the Court on the Cambridge Job Centre (part of DWP) and the DWP has instructed GLD to defend the claim you have made. I work for GLD and I am representing DWP in defending this claim . As the claim currently stands – I am instructed to apply for strike out of the claim if you fail to serve your Particular of Claim.
I attach a guidance note prepared by The Law Society for litigants in person, which you may find helpful.
Kind regards,
MsEH
Lawyer - Welfare, Health and Transport Private Law Team"
Ms EH is actually contradicting her boss, the DWP. And has been instructed to do so.
It is like a plague of lies.
So between now and the 3 November I am going to have to put together a criminal case against Carla B. Which may also include Ms EH, or Ms Sue Amner.
Cambridge City Council's response to my claim.
Apparently Sue Anmer change the date from when she can start a possession claim from The 3rd of November 2025 to a point I do not actually know plus 6 weeks. This date when Cambridge City Council can apply to the court for a possession order. They cannot be trusted to stick to that. I have needed GT Steward in 2019. And now they did the same lie as the DWP. Lying about the facts and the claim and making unmerited claims with costs, to tie you up.
CCC lie was to change the defendant on my claim to themselves, just like the DWP.
Instead of Gareth the wrote that they will not start proceedings But this is not guarantee as it is so vague as to be unintelligible. They also claim that they sent a letter before action, referenced in their bundle. But I have another letter in their GDPR response that is different. Both have no proof of posting.
With that deception in their background would you trust them? They cannot even acknowledge that you sent them a letter before action. The call it. "your comments from your email dated 2nd October", in there there response:
"From CCC 3 Oct 2025...I have noted your comments from your email dated 2nd October, however I must advise you that a Notice Seeking Possession is the first step towards legal action and does not involve any court action at that stage. Whilst i appreciate your frustration with this matter, you have already been advised by Michelle Davies that we are not able to influence the DWP and that we have liaised with them on your behalf to try and resolve the matter, but ultimately we are not able to change their rules.
I will hold off on any court action for a period of at least 6 weeks pending the outcome of your dispute but I must draw your attention to the following from the pre-court protocol for rent arrears:...Sue Amner"
This misrepresentation of my claim is disturbing. It was not just comments on the 2 Oct 2025. It was the precursor to a claim.
How Sue Amner Misrepresented my real complaints: Noise, ASB, and Garden, in her 3 Oct 2025 email.
Together with the misrepresentation of my complaints made on the 5 Sept.
1. 14 May 2025 I complained about loud car music. But the Cambridge City Council EPA team lied to not investigate. First they claimed that idle/moving vehicles could not be prosecuted. This was a lie. Only Car music "in traffic" is exempt under the EPA section 79. Lastly, the other lie was that my complaint said "idle/moving". No where did my noise complaint say this.
2. The EPA team, also falsely claimed that the car music was ASB. But they never treated like anASB complaint. Never followed the correct proceedings. If they had, the person would not have continued to abuse the neighbours with his loud music, and my by staying outside my house until I when back in. (Apparently knowing allowing abuse from another neighbour is prosecutable under the protection from harassment act). But here in the complaint for ASB, the person verbally assaulted me in my garden, and made hand signals to me on a regular basis. This harassment went on. He refused to stop sitting on my wall. Also he was making others scared by sitting there at 2-3am in the morning. He would sit smoking drugs. Three neighbours were upset by his behaviour. A young woman was concerned about him starting arguments for no reason. Anther couple were disturbed by him sitting in the dark in the morning near the car bays, beside my house. This was a continuation of the ASB from May to Sep, that could have been stopped by Cambridge Environmental team. Their names are not worth mentioning.
3. The Housing department sent me a letter, August 2025. It requested in one month: Clean my garden and the pavement. It claimed that this was required under the terms, (possible grounds for possession). They followed this with a request to clean the garden within a month or they will clean it, and charge me.
The reason why they omitted it from my complaint. It very illegal. There are no terms to clean the pavement. Its the council's job - highways something act! So asking me to clean the pavement is really obviously not my job. This is probably another joke, like delaying a disability bathroom for 5 years.
More perverse. In 2021- 2023, I was so unwell that I could not clean my garden. No one complained. But I asked the council to clean it and I would pay. But they refused! Asking me to now clean my garden shows they are making it up as they go along, just for laughs.
This is harassment. They did not include my complaint about the garden letter: including repeatedly refusing to add the complaint, or escalating it to stage 2,, after 10 days. It was put in on the 7 Sept, accepted 8 Sept, added again on 10 Sept deline 24th. Then it was deleted on the 26 sept. And change to another complaint number. for the 3 Oct reponse. Complaints take 10 days. This has taken 1 month.
See a picture timeline below of how CCC has completely destroy the duty to take complaints. Sue Amner responded on the 3 Oct but with a totally different complaint number.
This is how the Cambridge City Council manipulates the complaints system.
Add Escalation as a complaint:
Omit relevant details and Add escalation as a new complaint:
Reverse complaints
But my Noise, ASB, Garden complaint is now "lack of progress with my case". (vague deliberately). They now use my escalation request as original complaint, and reply as solved on the 3 Oct 2025 with new number CAM756044, not CAM70749.
Omit details of a Letter before action vs Reverse complaints CAM756044 and CAM70749:
Sue Amner's 3 Oct complaint response treat my Letter before action as a complaint, omitting that it is a legal letter., and requires a substantive response. Minimising it as "comments on the 2 Oct" and including it with other complaint is likely an abuse of process.
This means that the CAM756044 and CAM70749 switcheroo is not really the worse that Cambridge City Council is doing. That lie is to defraud all people of a valid complaint response. As I thought I was the only one they were doing this to. I was wrong.
This is how they maintain their score with the social housing regulator.
"Regulator finds council overcharged tenants £4.2m 11 Jul 2024 — The council apologised and said it was working out how much tenants were owed, and said it could take "some months" for refunds to be processed. - BBC"
maintain their complaints. This worse this is that they are treating a legal obligation to respond to a letter before action.
"Steps before issuing a claim at court
6. Where there is a relevant pre-action protocol, the parties should comply with that protocol before commencing proceedings. Where there is no relevant pre-action protocol, the parties should exchange correspondence and information to comply with the objectives in paragraph 3, bearing in mind that compliance should be proportionate. The steps will usually include—
(a) the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;
(b) the defendant responding within a reasonable time – 14 days in a straight forward case and no more than 3 months in a very complex one. The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed and whether the defendant is making a counterclaim as well as providing details of any counterclaim; and
(c) the parties disclosing key documents relevant to the issues in dispute."
They say a fish rots from its head.
Yes, I did email the CEO, Robert Pollock. But apparently Anna Hill, head of housing has been updating everyone, including the counsellors. However that information was not in my GDPR reply.
Here is my Letter before action for judicial review, 2 Oct 2025. And see how the letter is minimised and hardly referred to on the 3 Oct after by Sue Amner.
How can you trust people like this to hold of for "6 weeks" from the end of something? They cannot even lie straight.
This is the last comment in this posts. You have my permission to use Ai to read this content.
My letter before action 2 October 2025
Ryan 2 October 2025 at 17:37 To: "Cc: Robert Pollock" <Robert.pollock@cambridge.gov.uk>
Cc: Gareth @cambridge.gov.uk>, Income Team <incometeam@cambridge.gov.uk>, Anna Hill <anna.hill@cambridge.gov.uk>
Gareth C
Robert Pollock
Daniel R.
Anna Hill
Date: 3 October 2025
Dear Sirs / Ms
The discrimination issue
Gareth C 's Discrimination proceedings have started and are attached.
Similarly, I am considering personal discmration or criminal proceedings against Daniel R , and Anna Hill. The Judicial Review proceedings
Robert Pollock, Daniel R ,and Anna Hill please take note:
This is a formal pre-action protocol letter giving notice that, unless the matters set out below are remedied by Friday 3 October 2025 3pm, I will commence urgent proceedings on Monday 6 October 2025 without further notice warning. Those proceedings will include Judicial Review and criminal proceedings for Misconduct in Public Office against the relevant public officers, and civil claims including unlawful discrimination and breach of the possession protocol where appropriate. That immediate application to court is warranted because you have failed to engage in any substantive means to remedy this situation.
Pre Action Protocol for Judicial Review On the application of Ryan Tremble-Niccolls v Cambridge City Council Summary of the case
I am a 49-year-old Black man with multiple documented disabilities, including dyslexia, PTSD, ADHD, stammer, and ongoing anxiety and depression, and I am disabled under the Equality Act 2010. My disabilities and adjustments required are known to the Council and other public bodies.
This council and their officers, has repeatedly denied lawful requests from 2019 until present day by repeatedly ignoring the law, fairness and evidence. And has done so knowing the illegality and the consequence, both to themselves and me.
On or around 11 September 2025 a decision was taken to start possession proceedings against me. I was not contacted to comment on or challenge the facts.
On or around 22 and 24 September 2025 the Council received new evidence demonstrating that the original decision was based on false evidence supplied by Ms Carla Beuey. The Council made a decision to take no corrective action and ignored requests to reconsider the possession decision in light of that evidence, and by a letter by Anna Hill.
Relevant officers, including Anna Hill and Daniel R, have failed to make reasonable adjustments, refused to properly investigate the new evidence, and have failed to follow both statutory duties and the Pre-Action Protocol for social landlords. Their failures have caused and continue to cause serious risk of harm to my health and welfare and to my legal rights.
Legal and factual basis of intended claims
Procedural unfairness and public law unlawfulness:
The decisions taken without affording me an opportunity to be heard and without proper consideration of material evidence, contrary to the Council’s public law duties:
Unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 through failure to make reasonable adjustments and failure to consider disability-related needs before and after the adverse decision.
Breach of the social landlord possession pre-action protocol:
failure properly to consider Housing Benefit matters; failure to refer to Social Services; failure to conduct an impact assessment of my disability; and absence of appropriate post possession contact and support.
Criminal proceedings:
Misconduct in Public Office by named officers for deliberately or recklessly failing to act on clear evidence that the possession decision was founded on false information, and for ignoring repeated requests for reconsideration and reasonable adjustments.
Key facts and chronology (short)
2019: Found to be homeless and vulnerable; owed main housing duty; housed after legal intervention. Records confirm vulnerability and priority need.
2019–2025: My disabilities and need for reasonable adjustments have been repeatedly notified to the Council and other public bodies; examples of adjustments include assisted waste collection, disability bathroom installation, and exemption from council tax.
May–June 2019: Council housing records and communications (Dawn Hutchinson / Ms Blyth) confirm main housing duty and priority need.
Sept 2024–Sept 2025: Ongoing medical incapacity; GP fit notes in place. I remain in receipt of PIP and have documented advice and assessments (Intermediary report 2020; Care Assessment award 2020; Cognitive Report 2024; vulnerable witness designation 2023–24).
11 Sept 2025: Possession proceedings issued (or decision to issue).
22 & 24 Sept 2025: New evidence provided to the Council establishing the original decision rests on false evidence supplied by Ms Carla Beuey. No substantive correction or reconsideration followed.
24 Sept 2025: Email from Anna Hill acknowledged receipt but refused to engage substantively or to suspend action pending proper investigation.
Relief sought By 3 October 2025 I require all of the following:
Cessation of PP
1. An immediate written confirmation that any and all possession proceedings will be stayed and not pursued pending the outcome of a full and fair review of the decision to commence possession proceedings. This is not negotiable, the possession protocol has not been complied with. I am still pending benefits.
Information
1. A full copy of my entire housing file and any and all records, notes, emails, audio recordings and documents relied upon in the decision to start possession proceedings, including any documents provided by or relating to Ms Carla Beuey.
Evidence of conderiation in the first decision to start position
1. Copies of all relevant policies and procedures relied upon in making or reviewing the decision, including the Council’s possession pre-action protocol, reasonable adjustment policy, safeguarding and vulnerable adults procedures, and any internal guidance on handling housing benefit and UC cases.
Evidence of consideration in the second decision to continue proceedings following policed
1. A written statement explaining why the new evidence provided on 11 to 24 September 2025 was not
considered sufficient to pause or reverse the decision to commence possession proceedings, and why.
2. This policies referred to by Anna Hill and how they applied to that decision
Communication
1. A named senior officer with authority to suspend possession action, to review the evidence, and to make binding decisions on reasonable adjustments and referrals to social services. Provide that officer’s contact details.
Support and ongoing compliant with the Protocol for housing possessions and other duties not limited to
1. An immediate referral to Social Services for a needs and impact assessment and a copy of that assessment and any associated action plan.
2. Confirmation of any steps the Council will take to ensure I receive my outstanding UC and housing benefit entitlements without further delay, together with a named contact in benefits who will manage my claim.
ADR
I accept a solicitor or barrister led discussion to resolve this. This does not prevent the not providing the documents mentioned, or actions requested.
Questions requiring an answer
Do I have a pending claim for UC, Housing Element, which has not closed and is awaiting an award?
Am I disabled?
Did Carla B lie about the evidence given to her email claiming that the Judge agreed to her?
What did this statement mean to discharge you compliance with th Protocol
Why was I not consulted on that evidence by Carla B?
What date, Judge, Case was Carla B was referring to in her email?
What issue was Carla B was referring to in her email when she said the judge agreed with her, ID or GSE or Claimant commit?
When did you know about the Judicial Review Case AC-2025-LON-001439
When did you know about the Discrimination Claim Case M1QZ2Y40
Documents attached (served with this letter)
Particulars and Claim in the discrimination proceedings issued today against Gareth C's.
See of medical notes, fit notes, prior housing correspondence concerning vulnerability and main housing duty, and key emails of 22 and 24 September 2025 giving the new evidence.
Copy of the 24 September 2025 email from Anna Hill acknowledging receipt and stating that I should await formal processes. Deadline and intended proceedings
Deadline for a substantive written response addressing each numbered item in “Relief sought” and providing the requested documents: Friday 3 October 2025 3PM
If the Council does not comply by that deadline, or if possession action is not immediately stayed pending a proper review, I will on Monday 6 October 2025 issue:
(a) urgent Judicial Review proceedings seeking injunctive relief and quashing of the unlawful decision;
(b) a criminal referral and private prosecution for Misconduct in Public Office where appropriate; and (c) further civil proceedings for discrimination and breaches of statutory duties, without further notice.
Consequences of continued non-compliance
Continued pursuit of possession proceedings without dealing with the material new evidence and without proper reasonable adjustments will materially prejudice my health and welfare, and will strengthen the case for an urgent interim injunction and for criminal complaint(s).
I will seek costs and damages and will rely on the Council’s failure to follow protocol, statutory duties, and equality obligations.
Address for service Ryan Tremble-Niccolls 3 Caledon Way Cambridge CB4 2UT Tel: 07510 435973 Email: ryan.niccolls@gmail.com
Yours faithfully,
Ryan
Attached to my letter before action 2 Oct 2025 was the housing advisors email refusing to make reasonable adjustments that I needed.
"On Thu, 2 Oct 2025 at 13:36, Gareth C <Gareth.C @cambridge.gov.uk> wrote:
Good Afternoon Ryan
Attempts have been made to contact you for arranged Housing Needs assessment calls have been made at 13:02 and 13:15 on the 2nd October 2025.
As per code of guidance I will need to carry out a accurate and composite assessment. You will receive a copy of what has been discussed in the meeting.
I have set an alternative phone appointment for the following:
Date: Tuesday 7th October 2025
Time: 1Pm
Advisor: Gareth C
14/10/2025, 16:36 Gmail - Re: Phone Appointment/Documents Request
Reasonable adjustment – I acknowledge your request for reasonable adjust and have taken step for this to happen I have arranged for support with your assessment from Stuart Brown Adult Early Help Team for coming appointment on the 7th October 2025 and for appointment not attended on the 2nd October 2025.
I have also provided a number of document that can be completed in email you received via esign. For your ease these documents are as follows:
Health and risk factors
Income and expenditure
Referral General information
Housing History
As per my prior email I will need you to provide the relevant necessary proofs listed below no later than 9am Tuesday 7th October 2025:
Identification for ALL members of you household (Passport, Driving License, Birth certificate)
National Insurance Numbers for all household
Proof of residency (Share code/Biometric card front & back)
Details of your household income (wage slips, benefits, self-employed income) – 3months payslips & Self employment
Last 3 months itemised bank statements for ALL accounts held in the UK & abroad for both you and your husband. Any letter or notices from your landlord
Any medical evidence you may have at home including future doctor letters or appointments or medication Any other documents that you feel may support a homeless application- Support workers you may be working with Completed 5 year housing history (Sent via esign)
Completed income and expenditure (Sent via esign)
Signed consent (Sent via esign)
214 statement (Sent via esign)
You can take photos or screenshots of your evidence and email them to your housing advisor prior to your appointment at gareth.c @cambridge.gov.uk . Complete the forms with clear and detailed responses. It is always helpful if you can provide them prior to your appointment. You can also bring your evidence to Mandela House. Please be aware that you will not be seen by the customer service team but you can put all the documents in the letter box outside Mandela House and they will be copied and returned to you. Please mark the envelope clearly with your name and reference number and the name of your housing advisor.
Under Section 214 of Part 7 of The Housing Act 1996, it is an offence to give false statements, withhold information or fail to disclose a change of circumstances in relation to any homeless application.
Should your circumstances change before now and your appointment and you need further assistance please call 01223 457918 9am until 4.30pm and 03300538109 at all other times.
I can confirm I have received gp fit note ending 30 October 2024.
Kind regards
Gareth C |Housing Advisor |Communities Group|Cambridge City Council
Gareth.C @cambridge.gov.uk | Housing Advice Service: 01223 457918
cambridge.gov.uk | facebook.com/camcitco | twitter.com/camcitco |instagram.com/camcitco"
Sue Amner's response to my letter before action 2 October which completely ignored the meaning responding to an legal letter before actions.
[CaseRef:CAM756044] Email Response CAM756044
1 message
cambridge@ctemail.uk <cambridge@ctemail.uk> 3 October 2025 at 13:54 Reply-To: cambridge@ctemail.uk
To: ryan
Dear Ryan
Subject: Lack of Progress with My Case - CAM756044
Thank you for raising your complaint with the Council. I am writing with reference to your Stage 1 case dated 5 September 2025 concerning the above.
I understand that you have already received a response from Sarah C ’s line manger with regard to your complaint about the lack of progress on your case in relation to your Universal Credit claim. I will therefore not be addressing this matter again within my response except to say that the council have no jurisdiction over the DWP and can only liaise with them on your behalf with explicit consent from you.
Complaint Definition
I therefore understand the remaining issues of your complaint to be:
· You feel the council has not made reasonable adjustments in relation to your disabilities · You reported a noise nuisance and ASB and do not feel this was properly addressed · You are unhappy that you were served with a Notice Seeking Possession whilst you still had outstanding issues with the DWP
Investigation
I am sorry that you feel the council has failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate your disabilities, and that this has caused you further distress.
I am aware that although you have listed ADHD, Dyslexia, Anxiety, Depression and possible Autism, you do have other disabilities that may mean we need to make further adjustments for you. I do need to clarify that neither I, nor any members of the housing staff, are medically trained and as a ‘reasonable adjustment’ for one person would not be the same for another it would be helpful if you could let me know what further adjustments, in relation to your disabilities, could be made to make our services more accessible to you.
I must however clarify that reasonable adjustments do not cover ‘fixing gardens’ or ‘putting up 6ft fences’, but the tenancy sustainment team may be able to help you with securing services that could help with the garden clearance. They may possibly be able to advise of services to help with the fencing too, but unfortunately the council cannot undertake this work unless it relates to communal areas owned by the council.
I understand that you were wrongly advised in April by our customer service team when you reported noise from your neighbours' car and would I like to apologise that as a result of this the information was not passed on to our Community Safety team or Environmental Health team as it should have been.
Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 section 79(1)(ga) local authorities can take investigate and enforce ‘noise that is prejudicial to health or a nuisance and is emitted from or caused by a vehicle, machinery or equipment in a street’. Noise by traffic (and others) are exempt from this definition. In practical terms this means we can investigate noise from car alarms and playing of loud music from cars. The standard rules still apply when investigating nuisance such as time of day, how long it goes on for, and the maliciousness and frequency of the nuisance.
In relation to the ASB issues, I can confirm that the Community Safety team will take the lead on your case so you may report any further incidents to them.
Our Community Safety team will also take any necessary action using the legal powers for this type of nuisance under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
There is also a useful link for information purposes Help with anti-social behaviour for social housing tenants - GOV.UK
I have attached a ‘Reporting ASB’ leaflet and ‘ASB incident diary sheets’ for you as well, and you may report any further incidents online Reporting antisocial behaviour - Cambridge City Council. I believe Nadine from the Environmental Health team has also provided you with information about noise nuisance and has provided you with this link https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/resolve-or-report-a-noise-issue
With regard to the Notice Seeking Possession dated 17th September 2025 I have noted your comments and read the Court Order in relation to your Universal Credit (UC), and whilst I can see that there is still an ongoing dispute with the DWP, the Notice was served based on rent arrears amounting to £1146.93 and the fact that your claim for Universal Credit (UC) was still outstanding and arrears were therefore continuing to increase.
I can see that the DWP have agreed to reasonable adjustments but have stated that they are unable to make an assessment on the Gainfully self-employed status via written communication. I am unaware at this stage if this issue has now been resolved, and whether you are any closer to completing the assessment or receiving any UC payments.
I have noted your comments from your email dated 2nd October, however I must advise you that a Notice Seeking Possession is the first step towards legal action and does not involve any court action at that stage. Whilst i appreciate your frustration with this matter, you have already been advised by Michelle Davies that we are not able to influence the DWP and that we have liaised with them on your behalf to try and resolve the matter, but ultimately we are not able to change their rules.
I will hold off on any court action for a period of at least 6 weeks pending the outcome of your dispute but I must draw your attention to the following from the pre-court protocol for rent arrears:
Possession proceedings for rent arrears should not be started against a tenant who can demonstrate that –
(a) the local authority or DWP have been provided with all the evidence required to process a housing benefit or universal credit (housing element) claim;
(b) there is a reasonable expectation of eligibility for housing benefit or universal credit (housing element); and
(c) they have paid other sums due that are not covered by housing benefit or universal credit (housing element).
The landlord should make every effort to establish effective ongoing liaison with housing benefit departments and the DWP and, with the tenant’s consent, make direct contact with the relevant housing benefit department or DWP office before taking enforcement action.
The landlord and tenant should work together to resolve any housing benefit or universal credit (housing element) problems.
At this stage there appears to still be evidence outstanding in relation to point (a) above so whilst I can reasonably expect that you will be eligible for UC, point (b), I cannot confirm that all evidence has been provided or that you have given consent to relevant parties to assist in resolving this matter and it would be on this basis, should this not be resolved within a reasonable time-frame, that court proceedings would commence.
Decision
At this stage I am only able to partially uphold your complaint on the basis of you being wrongly advised over the noise nuisance, but with regard to matters relating to your UC claim I cannot uphold this part of the complaint as I can see that you have been offered a significant amount of support from several different teams , and in particular Sarah from Tenancy Sustainment, who has liaised relentlessly on your behalf with the DWP, but your co-operation and issues with giving consent to those best placed to offer assistance has been limited, and at times withdrawn completely.
Actions
Could i please ask that you:
Continue to work with the tenancy sustainment team with regard to your UC claim and seek their assistance/advice with your garden clearance.
Provide consent to relevant parties who can assist you, with one of those being Richard Smith from our benefits team, who has also offered to help with your UC claim.
Continue to work with the DWP and co-operate with any reasonable requests.
Report any further incidents of ASB or neighbour nuisance to our Community Safety team and / or the police.
Continue to make the housing team aware of any issues affecting your tenancy.
Escalation to Stage 2
I trust that you feel your complaint has been answered and that you are assured we are taking steps to prevent future occurrences. If however, you remain dis-satisfied with the outcome of your complaint, you have a right to escalate your case to stage 2 for a review by a member of the Corporate Management Team.
To do this, please reply to this email indicating that you wish to escalate your case to the second stage of our Complaints process.
It would be helpful when investigating your case at stage 2 if you could inform us, if you haven't already:
1. Which elements of the stage 1 response you disagree with, or how the stage 1 investigation has not met your expectations
2. Your preferred outcome/resolution from escalating your case to stage 2
Once we escalate your case, it will be passed to a stage 2 case owner to review and provide a further response within a further ten working days. We will only escalate a case within three months from the date of this email.
Please click here to give feedback on your experience with our complaints process by completing a short questionnaire. This questionnaire is for general feedback only and cannot be used to escalate a case.
Yours sincerely,
Sue Amner
2 attachments
Reporting ASB leaflet.docx-638950103671962204.docx
42K
ASB Incident Diary Sheet 2022 (1).docx-638950103873635860.docx
33K"
Comments
Post a Comment