People should make informed decisions based on facts, rather than what is claimed by Caledonia Housing Association.(CHA)



 There is nothing more the public enjoy than when unscrupulous/corrupt/lawbreaking people who hold positions of trust, are exposed. The cherry on the cake is when the evidence is in the public domain. Well the public can feast on this website.

The only people who are uncomfortable with the truth being known, are all those who have something to hide!



Background to Caledonia Housing Association’s campaign of harassment


I just asked Housing Officer Cheryl Connelly from CHA, to desist from using an anti-social tenant (a.s.t.) to harass a 75-yr. old man and other tenants; (see chapters 3 then 6). Everything quickly snowballed from this. Caledonia people have huge but very fragile egos and go into attack mode very easily. My son and myself were then subjected to a catalogue of unlawful harassment and mistreatment by Caledonia Housing Association, orchestrated by the Directors, Tim Calderbank and Garry Savage, using some willing contractors and staff, who are named and evidenced throughout my website.



CHA people pretend to do their jobs. It’s just role play. The company is their playground and the resources used for their own twisted self-serving agendas. They lie about everything, and falsify records to avoid accountability. The Directors instructed contractors to tamper with our electricity to elevate our bills ( fire and electrocution risk), instructed painters to seal our bedroom windows shut, see chapter 6, engaged in multiple violations of our privacy (Ch.6), numerous data protection breaches (Ch.’s 5 & 6), deliberately withheld services including  forced us to pay for our own kitchen, and deliberately left our home insecure and more (Ch. 6 & 7); to *harass us out of our home.  Caledonia Housing Association Directors and those who assisted them, have committed criminal offences under The Rent Act 1984.  Yet this is perfectly acceptable to all those who claim to abide by and enforce the law but instead, chose to cover their backs. It is not just CHA, who lack integrity and credibility.




When I took CHA to court, the first Sheriff (Ch. 2) went against the court rules, her judicial oath and the law; to assist Caledonia Housing association in avoiding accountability. CHA also manipulated their own solicitors to lie and mislead the court over the facts, one was exposed in a second Case Management Discussion. (see in Ch.’s 2 & 6), both going against the Law Society’s rules. They were all disrespectful  making a mockery of the law, by covering for a morally repugnant, law breaking company. 

They have all proven, how eager they were, to dive into the Caledonia Housing Association cesspool; and are up to their necks in it! Regulators and other supposed enforcers of law, are not the solution but part of the problem and therefore unfit for purpose, wasting £M’s of public money under the guise of protecting the public’s interest. The public needs protection from them!


It is a prime example of how some people pursue careers to give them power and choose to use it for dishonourable means.



Despite showing them overwhelming evidence, the so-called regulators listed at the bottom of this page all ignored CHA’s dishonesty and malicious intent to cause us and others harm. Those who ignored my case are therefore complicit in promoting criminal offences ; of unlawful harassment by neglect of their duties.

  see legislation below


The number of people complying to CHA’s every demand is astonishing, such is the power of the manipulative narcissists, but I hope whatever they got out of the arrangement, is worth the public humiliation of every one knowing what they did and how untrustworthy, they have all proven themselves to be. I guess it is true, like-minded people really do stick together.



 Fact; Caledonia Housing Association is operating above the law with impunity because they pull strings and manipulate people to do their bidding to cover their morally repugnant and unlawful behaviour. No decent human being would protect this rotten company but I guess decent human beings are in short supply, when it comes to those holding positions of trust. It is scandalous and absolutely disgusting that any of these people are allowed to operate at all.



“A nation that will not enforce its laws has no claim to the respect and allegiance of its people.”     AMBROSE BIERCE



*Unlawful eviction and harassment of occupier.  This law applies to CHA staff, directors, and contractors



 (1)If any person unlawfully deprives the residential occupier of any premises of his occupation of the premises or any part thereof or attempts to do so he shall be guilty of an offence unless he provesthat he believed, and had reasonable cause to believe, that the residential occupier had ceased to reside in the premises.



(2)If any person with intent to cause the residential occupier of any premises—

(a)to give up the occupation of the premises or any part thereof; or

(b)to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the premises or part thereof;

does acts calculated to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household, or persistently withdraws or withholds services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises as a residence, he shall be guilty of an offence.



[F1(2A)Subject to subsection (2B) below the landlord of any premises or an agent of the landlord shall be guilty of an offence if—

(a)he does acts likely to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household; or

(b)he persistently withdraws or withholds services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises in question as a residence,

and (in either case) he knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that that conduct is likely to cause the residential occupier to give up the occupation of the whole or part of the premises or to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the whole or part of the premises.



(2B)A person shall not be guilty of an offence under subsection (2A) above if he proves that he had reasonable grounds for doing the acts or withdrawing or withholding the services in question.



3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a)on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both; and

 (b)on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both.



The Directors at least deserve to go to prison for their malicious intent to cause service users harm and abuse of trust to harass  us out of our home. They could cause strokes or heart attacks or drive someone to suicide, with their harassment campaigns. Maybe they already have, but because they routinely falsify records and are protected by their regulator friends, and at least one Sheriff, they can easily bury the evidence of wrongdoing.  The public will not be so forgiving.


 CHA bosses and their protectors are leaving themselves wide open for being sued or abuse. Their arrogance is seriously clouding their judgement and will not protect them for ever.





Scottish Housing Regulator


Claims:  Regulating to protect the interests of tenants, people who are homeless, and others who use social landlords’ services.


(Reality: Denied their own statutory obligations to protect their corrupt, rotten friends in CHA, to the detriment of the service users, evidence is in  Ch.’s 3,4,6,7, & 8).





Claims: The UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals.


(Reality: The ICO originally went against CHA, but because the arrogant self-regulating Directors did not like this, the ICO then retracted her previous decisions and ignored the Data Protection Act and Equality laws etc as evidenced in chs.5 and 6).


The ICO has demonstrated it is happy to suck up to a completely untrustworthy company, so it is a foregone conclusion that no-ones data is safe with them. Someone on Trustpilot,( about the ICO), said they sent their complaint to the company they were complaining about, except the ICO messed up and sent the complaint to the wrong company, who sent it all back to the one making the complaint, and the public are supposed to trust these amateurs, who have no respect for the data subject or the law themselves!



OSCR(charity regulator)


Claims: By reporting to us and meeting legal requirements, a charity demonstrates to the public that assets are properly accounted for and that it’s being run properly. 


(Reality: ignored all of the dishonourable and lawbreaking practices of CHA… see Ch. 8)



The (couldn’t )Care (less)Inspectorate ( in my opinion, the most shocking of all)


 Claims: The Care Inspectorate regulates and inspects care services to make sure they meet the right standards. It also works with providers to help them improve their service and make sure everyone gets safe, high-quality care that meets their needs.


(Reality: Ignored all the evidence including how CHA routinely falsifies reports and malicious intent to cause us and others harm and unlawful eviction etc, to protect their friends in CHA. Their lame excuse is in Ch.8).



The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman


Claims: We are committed to offering you a high-quality service. Our Customer Service Standards describe how you can expect us to act.

Commitment: We will communicate effectively with you

Commitment: We will work in an open and fair way

Commitment: We will carry out our duties competently and responsibly



Reality: The SPSO bosses along with the others, chose to ignore all the evidence of unethical, lawbreaking actions and criminal offences by their friends in CHA. see Ch.8  I was clearly wrong in chapter 3 when I thought the SPSO were misled over the facts concerning a neighbour who complained to the SPSO. I gave them a second chance to make CHA hold responsible and sent my website link to them. They refused to do what is expected of them.


They later attempted to blackmail me into ‘respectfully’ removing a decision makers name.They showed us no respect and are deluding themselves if they believe I would show them any!!



 If the SPSO decision was the right one, why would they worry about “receiving verbal or physical abuse”?  SPSO bosses chose to protect their sadistic, malicious, unlawful friends at CHA and turned their backs on the suffering of us and others. They have to take responsibility for their decisions and the reactions of the public, (along with anyone else who supports Caledonia Housing Association). They can’t have it both ways. You reap what you sow!



Respect is a two-way process. They cannot command it; they have to earn it. I gave everyone the opportunity to do the right thing. They all proved they too, are lacking any moral compass so they only have themselves to blame for the public’s reactions. Victims of CHA do not have any choices. So-called upholders of the law make sure of that. If the laws had been upheld earlier and our rights protected, my website would not have existed.


Those of us who have spent our lives respecting legislation, are being treated with contempt, like second rate citizens by all those who are paid their ill-gotten gains (salary) for dishonest and or illegal behaviour, acting under the guise of something else.


Nobody should take advice/orders from those who are participating in or covering for corruption, malicious intent to cause harm, fraud/falsifying information, or any other unethical or law-breaking activity.  I personally do not recognise the authority of anyone engaging in these behaviours. This is another reason why they have all been named on this website, so no-one will waste their time on them.



 Exposure will act as a deterrent to those who may consider engaging  in any of the dishonourable actions mentioned above.  Those spineless bullies who hide behind their authority and only use legislation for their own self-serving nasty, dishonourable interests, will all be named and shamed on this website.



 Any more harassment/bully tactics, from any source and I will respond in kind, that’s a promise. I was never a revengeful person before this, but as of now, my views have changed. If the legislation does not protect decent people, then we have to do whatever we feel necessary; to protect ourselves. After all those in authority, can all be named as are our role models. Lets see how that works out for them.