…because they are an anti-social landlord.
The Drama Triangle: How Narcissists Use It to Manipulate People (insider.com)
“One of a narcissist’s favourite games is creating havoc for others”. By Lindsay Dodgson
CHA have charitable status. Charity commission OSCR | Home Caledonia Housing Association Limited, charity no SC013988
CHA claim: Purposes: “The relief of those in need by reason of age, ill health, disability, financial hardship or other disadvantage Beneficiaries: Older people, People with disabilities or health problems, No specific group, or for the benefit of the community.”
I guess the bullies at CHA, wants service users, who are easy to exploit and take advantage of just like any other professional con artist, because there is nothing charitable about how CHA conducts their business. The Caledonia Housing Association mantra ‘no evidence means no case’ is right across the board in everything they do.
CHA (just like their enablers) has social, moral, legal, and financial obligations, yet does the reverse of what is expected of them and in doing so, are promoting crime by prioritising, and protecting the interests of the anti-social tenants. It does not make the workload of the police, or the courts any easier, and is highly suspicious behaviour which warrants investigation. This formed the basis of my complaint sent to Business Service Director Garry Savage, but he omitted from his complaint procedure response (see chapter 6), to control the complaint by misrepresenting the facts. They do this a lot. It is fraud: Fraud – Crime.Scot by Andrew Crosbie
“Fraud is a dishonestly-made false pretence, in order to bring about a practical result”.
Article 8: Right to respect for private life, family life and the home
The response of social housing providers to incidents of anti-social behaviour is more likely to engage with the human rights of victims than with those of perpetrators. While there is no human right to expect a social housing provider to keep a resident safe and free from nuisance at all times, a failure to address or tackle the reported experience of anti-social behaviour may well amount to a failure to respect the private or family life of a victim or an infringement of his or her right to respect for the home.
Rent (Scotland) Act 1984 (legislation.gov.uk)
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.
The basis of my complaint to CHA was this: CHA’s housing officer Susan Stewart forced a 75-yr. old gentleman to remove his CCTV with a threat of “see you in court” if he did not comply. He had been advised to install it by the police and Citizens Advice Bureau, to protect himself and gather evidence against an anti-social tenant (a.s.t.). Along with her guest, they committed multiple accounts of harassment, violations of privacy, defamed his character on social networking, and damaged his property. CHA said the CCTV “violated her rights” and CHA implied to the victim, that they had more authority than the police. The real reason they ordered removal is because ‘no evidence means no case’ against the a.s.t or CHA, who behave like an anti -social landlord. The a.s.t.’s guest had issued the gentleman with a credible death threat, but CHA did not want anything recorded so instead they deliberately put a vulnerable man, in harm’s way.
Culpable and Reckless Conduct – Crime.Scot
“Culpable and reckless conduct is deliberate conduct that exposes an individual, or the public generally, to significant risk to life or health.” by Andrew Crosbie and Advocate at the Scottish Bar.
It did not occur to me at the time, but another reason why CHA wanted the CCTV removed, is because it would have caught evidence against the other anti-social tenants; whose ‘customers’ in cars would have had to drive past the CCTV, to get back out of the scheme and ‘No evidence means no case! ‘ The housing officer Susan Stewart turned up the next day with contractors to forcibly remove the CCTV, but the victim had removed them during the night. CHA did not care about his well-being. CHA has some of society’s most vulnerable people on their books, yet they are maliciously causing people unnecessary distress, which impacts on existing health issues; a fact they are fully aware of. Quite simply this lack of empathy and concern for service users is at the very least, tantamount to neglect.
The police said they have never known any other housing association do this (force removal of CCTV). Neither has anyone else I have run this by! CHA does not like evidence being obtained and even when tenants show them any, they deny its existence. The CHA mantra ‘no evidence means no case’ is because they cannot risk anyone looking closely into their affairs, which is the very reasons they need to be investigated; CHA has a lot to hide.
The gentleman asked the company’s Chief Executive Officer Julie Cosgrove for help three times, but she ignored him and instead CHA got even nastier. Chief bully boy (previously, the Operations Director) Tim Calderbank, paid him a visit three times and nit-picked over everything in this man’s immaculate home and garden area and harassed him, trying to make out he was the problem.
“Have you got permission for this or that? I might have to report this… Do you realise it is costing a lot of money for me to have to come to see you? You stay away from her next door and have nothing to do with the garden area… and why don’t you move out, there are plenty of people who would like your house…. you will never get the CCTV back up…. etc”, on and on until Tim ground the poor man down making sure he wouldn’t formally complain. They placed enormous pressure upon this gentleman and protected the a.s.t. It’s disgusting.
After CHA empowered the anti -social tenant, she and her guest started damaging his car. He reported it to the police and made the mistake of reporting it to Director Tim Calderbank. Tim told the gentleman he was having a word with the police and after this, despite a prearranged appointment the police did not show up. As usual CHA never visited the a.s.t.
From that point in time, whenever the victim needed the police to deal with his a.s.t. next door, they never turned up or were unsympathetic and just like Tim Calderbank, they tried to make out the victim was the problem. I guess Tim planted this idea into their heads. CHA has a history of manipulating people, so they can control the situation. They do not like anyone, helping those they choose to harass, and they regularly defame people’s character, behind their backs or perhaps they told the police they were dealing with it. CHA deprived this vulnerable man of vital police support, which he is entitled to receive in law and by putting obstacles in the good tenant’s way, it also reduces the risk of any evidence being recorded by the police and therefore again ‘no evidence means no case’
The a.s.t. violated his privacy most days; forcing him to keep his curtains shut as she stood right outside his windows, often with another person, staring at him for long periods, verbally abusing him and his guests, and continued causing criminal damage to his plants and property. Later more credible death threats were issued to the gentleman. Business Service Director Garry Savage (and staff) trivialise all tenants’ complaints, and when writing my reports, he described them all as minor wider estate issues, to deceive anyone the tenants complain to.
Whenever the gentleman complained to housing officer Cheryl Connelly about what he is having to put up with on almost a daily basis, she (sarcastically) asks “have you any evidence?” He points out how they forced him to remove CCTV and she replies with the usual response “well as there is no evidence, we can’t do anything about it”. When he showed Cheryl some evidence on his phone she said, “I can’t comment on that!” But CHA doesn’t need evidence when they act upon vexatious complaints made by this a.s.t. to harass decent tenants.
The police always respond to the a.s.t. because she is as manipulative as CHA. Along with CHA, she gets away with regularly ruining the peaceful enjoyment of this gentleman’s home and his property. She also has a paper trail with SSPCA, council, councillors etc and is known by the police in two other areas. These personality types (just like the sick, twisted people at CHA) do not have friends…. they just have people who they can use. This a.s.t. and her guest are happy to cause trouble and CHA is happy to oblige them; feeding off each other, to bring misery to tenants.
Another tenant had witnessed the first death threat to the gentleman and reported it to the police. This evidence was ignored by CHA, they then went on to harass the witness; with the same a.s.t., who made a vexatious complaint, ordering them to remove something from their garden area which had been in the ground for over 15 years!
When another set of neighbours dared to complain to CHA, about problems with a different anti- social neighbours, CHA gave them the run-around too by falsely claiming there was no evidence. The tenants reported CHA to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO), they said they thought this was their report when I asked them. Decision Report 201503760 | SPSO
CHA misled the (SPSO) by engaging in deliberate acts of deception to prevent evidence being revealed, about other a.s.t.’s. and their own maladministration. This included bullying representatives of a voluntary organisation, who gave independent advice to the ‘victims.’ CHA defamed and humiliated those making the complaint, implying they were liars and troublemakers, to the SPSO. CHA refused to acknowledge the evidence, the victims had spent months collecting and had sent to the landlord. CHA deliberately put a noise recording machine in the wrong house and as far away as possible from the a.s.t.’s twilight activities, to say there was no noise detected. It looks good on paper though and told the SPSO; “we have done all we can to find evidence but there is none!” and ‘no evidence means no case’. CHA are pathological liars!
Obviously the SPSO went against the tenants who brought the complaint because she based her opinions on the evidence which CHA made available, which was only their twisted perspective of the truth. CHA makes sure this is all what authorities receive. However, when I later sent my website to the SPSO, the rest of the regulators and the government, they ignored all the evidence shown to them see Ch.’s 6,7 &8. It strongly indicated they have been allowing CHA to operate above the law for years. There is a paper trail on the a.s.t. with the police (and court) and if this is compared to CHA’s twisted version, (and what they sent to the SPSO, unless they too are willing to falsify this evidence, to protect their buddies), it would reveal the truth.
CHA tried to get the tenants who raised the complaint, to move out to resolve the issues, when they declined, CHA then told them their complaint was resolved and not to bother them again. CHA obviously meant resolved to their satisfaction and that of the anti-social tenants, who were allowed to continue conducting ‘business as normal’, protected by their ‘guard dogs’ and CHA. I told Garry Savage he should not be driving good tenants out, so he responded by driving us out!
A.s.t.’s everywhere must think they have an amazing landlord who is willing to lie, harass and/or drive out decent tenants and falsify evidence to protect their unlawful interests! They must think they have died and gone to heaven. No wonder Scotland has the worst record in Europe, for drug related deaths! Scotland’s drug death crisis in six charts – BBC News
Other areas have tenants who said CHA did nothing about the a.s.t.’s and have turned their area into a drug haven, allowed homes to be used as brothels and have had burglaries, but CHA deflected, saying it is the police’s job to deal with it. The police did not cause the problem as it was CHA who chose to put a.s.t’s in their homes, refuse to deal with them and then make sure nobody obtains any evidence.
Tenants should put up CCTV to protect themselves which will also act as a deterrent and to get evidence to prove CHA are dishonest. Don’t bother with the CHA complaint procedure, they commit fraud and rewrite the facts sanctioned by regulators as seen throughout website.
Guidance on the use of domestic CCTV – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Updated 05.06.23 I wrongly believed until the video below surfaced, that CHA had coerced an MSP from helping any of the above tenants. Garry Savage lied in my complaint response (ch.6), stating we had cancelled a meeting with the MSP, which Tim Calderbank was supposed to attend with a group of tenants. He did not turn up as his outcome was achieved before we got there; to make sure the MSP would not help any of the tenants. So again, no paper trail and ‘no evidence means no case’.
I now believe this SNP who is currently a Cabinet Secretary, Mairi Gougeon (nee Evans) was complicit with helping CHA avoid accountability. She has been promoted several times since then, probably for being a good little sycophant. Another name to add to the SNP hall of shame and corruption.
Ring-Fenced And Missing! – YouTube by Silver Fox Takes MSP Mairi Gougeon claims she has no idea where £33M has gone!
At the time of the tenants complaints, the MSP told us that CHA had claimed the a.s.t.’s had lawyered up to stop CHA harassing them, but the real reason they had lawyers was because they are known to the police. Same lame excuse for both anti-social tenants.
Rent (Scotland) Act 1984 (legislation.gov.uk)
Not only does CHA break the law itself, but anyone it uses to harass the tenants are also breaking the law including the vexatious anti-social tenant and contractors. Yet Sheriff Jillian Martin Brown (Ch.2) was not interested in hearing any of this, she only had ears for CHA and their lying, solicitor. I wonder what she gained from this arrangement!
CHA then victimised my son and me for assisting the gentleman.
I told housing officer Cheryl Connelly she should be dealing with the vexatious anti-social tenant and not victimising the gentleman, by getting him to jump to her attention. CHA’s response was to try to get me to respond to a vexatious complaint generated by her (correspondence in ch.6). I had tried to defend this gentleman as any decent human being would do, but because CHA will not allow anyone to assist those they choose to victimise, they turned on me. You tell CHA they should not be doing something, and they respond by doing it again. CHA’s stance is that nobody is going to stop them from doing whatever they like, to whoever they like, because the narcissists egos believe they are entitled and due to their enablers sanctioning their behaviour. They too are then complicit and therefore culpable for the harm they cause and the laws they have broken.
Without any evidence, CHA, and their favourite anti-social tenant, claimed sun in October, was reflecting from the roof of my garden structure and disturbing the peaceful enjoyment of her home. I was expected to respond to her vexatious complaint.
Take note CHA breached the Data Protection Act by identifying the anti-social tenant. They did so over the phone too. They really do not have any respect for service user’s data, not even for their favourite a.s.t! Ch.5 proves how the ICO completely ignored all the Data Protection legislation too.
This huge structure in the photo above which CHA, repeatedly described as a wishing well or ornament throughout reports and back tracking file notes received from them, (to trivialise on paper). Although at different heights it is all one piece. It cost a lot of money and my sons hard work to build, and we had written permission from a different maintenance officer who had left.
CHA expected me to alter or move it; to appease their favourite anti-social tenant on the scheme. I had previously asked Cheryl Connelly not to bother me with a vexatious complaint, I knew the a.s.t would bring to them; after catching the neighbours son taking photos of my garden. Cheryl ignored my pleading when I was under stress and unwell, and acted upon it anyway, without any evidence to support anything the a.s.t. claimed, because Cheryl Connelly always acts upon the vexatious complaints. It serves as entertainment to the twisted staff at CHA.
By unlawfully driving my son and myself out of our home, CHA made sure we complied with them, and we lost all our garden/property, see CH.’s 6 & 7. Narcissists are prepared to manipulate and engage in criminal actions to achieve their result. Their enablers assist them in their dirty work.
I also believe 2 violations of my privacy ((with reference to the two unannounced visits to my home) I mention later, were probably generated by this same a.s.t. see chapter 6 under Violations of Privacy & Harassment.
I sent this response below, to CHA via their contact page. CHA sent multiple copies back to me via first and second SARs! They gave me email copies which had lots of symbols eg*!? mainly upside down, all over it and copies in paper form. So much childish and unprofessional behaviour, yet along with other facts, Garry Savage omitted the points I raised, out of his complaint response letter, (Ch.6) to water down my complaint.
16/10/2016 For the attention of All Housing/Maintenance Officers at Caledonia Housing Association.
It has come to my attention that housing officers/maintenance officers are responding to vexatious complaints from a well-known troublemaker; L J by harassing the victims of her complaints.
With reference to the phone call I received on 13/10/16, it would seem that as a result of my trying to defend a 75 yr. old man against her anti-social behaviour and the CHA’s stance of supporting the trouble makers, rather than the victim, I have now become a target of her maliciousness.
Caledonia Housing clearly are happy to be seen as pandering to this woman, but in doing in so, not only are you empowering her, but you are in breach of the Scottish Secure Tenancy Agreement/ Tenants Charter and the Human rights act 1998. These documents do not just apply to the tenants, ( a common misconception by some Housing Officers), but it applies to Registered Social Landlords too.
https://www.gov.scot/policies/social-housing/regulation/
updated 03.11.23 The above link is an updated version to the one I quoted from below and they removed the statement as I caught them out. I can still prove the original source as can many others.😛
“While we do not deal with individual complaints about a landlord, tenants can approach us directly if they believe there is a ‘significant performance failure’– that is, a serious problem which could have an impact on all the landlord’s tenants.”
Caledonia Housing cannot afford be seen to support troublemakers, especially when she and her boyfriend are engaging in anti-social behaviour towards at least one tenant.
“Social landlords perform all aspects of their housing services so that:
- every tenant and other customer has their individual needs recognised, is treated fairly and with respect, and receives fair access to housing and housing services.
SHR are an independent regulator of RSLs and local authority housing services in Scotland. They were established on 1 April 2011 under the Housing (Scotland) Act 2010. They have one statutory objective, to:
“safeguard and promote the interests of current and future tenants of social landlords, people who are or may become homeless, and people who use housing services provided by registered social landlords (RSLs) and local authorities.”
My observations and communications with victims of LJ, make me conclude that Caledonia Housing Association is prioritising the deviant actions of a known troublemaker, over the welfare of the rest of the tenants…
I went to great lengths to discuss how even the slightest amount of stress has potentially serious implications for my health, to Cheryl Connolly when she came to my home, yet a short while later I receive a phone call from Susan Stewart that there has been a complaint (from the very person I discussed with Cheryl )and I was asked (albeit politely)to cover a canopy I have to protect my plants. I have refused because I will not react to any complaint made by either L J or her equally malicious friend who lives next door to me. Caledonia can jump to her attention but I will not be bothered over some triviality concocted by anti-social neighbours to drive one of us out, so –LJ– can then move her boyfriend in to be close to her. Instead of encouraging respectable neighbours to move (I personally know of two tenants who have been pressurised in this way) by CHA, they should be ousting the troublemakers.
As CHA have demonstrated to me that they are ignoring my health issues and failing to recognise the needs of the law-abiding respectable tenants on this scheme, I will take my own action to protect my rights as a (disabled) tenant. I am therefore advising you any that complaints generated by either LJ, or her co-conspirators ——at no —, will be ignored completely. They will be deemed vexatious and not worthy of a response. Any genuine complaints CHA may feel the need to discuss with me, they can do so by writing only to my son at my address who will be acting on my behalf. If a visit is needed, then an equally mutual time can be arranged by asking my family for an appointment with me in their presence. I do not wish to receive any phone calls about complaints. If CHA does not respect this, then I am notifying you that due to my health- related issues I need to record any conversations between CHA officials and myself.
I reported to Cheryl around the 15th September 2016, when she came to my house, Mrs — son was leaning over the fence they put up before we moved in, stretching into my garden taking photos of my planter. (which just so happens to be the subject of complaint Susan Stewart relayed to me.)I was told by Cheryl that without evidence she was not going to speak to ——-, to tell her about my complaint and no further action would be taken. I cannot be accurate about the date Cheryl came to my house because within an hour of making the appointment for a visit she had changed the time 3 times. I do hope she is not playing games! as well as housing officers cherry picking which complaints they wish to uphold.
I also reported a repair for the 3rd time and it has not been done. L J does not have problems getting repairs done why am I being ignored. An explanation is required…’ (The rest was mainly about outstanding repairs/maintenance).
When the other tenants told me of their problems with CHA, I did some research because I knew the mismanagement would be echoed on other schemes. All the links from the articles below have now been removed from the source, obviously because the CHA narcissists did not like the negative exposure! But I still have copies of the originals.
Extract below was taken from the article in the Courier dated 09/07/14 “Anarchy on Ryder Landlord Disputes”.
“Locals have dubbed the Caledonia Housing development “Outlaw Court” due to the frequency of police attendances to the area, only a short distance from the £1 million luxury homes of Queen’s Crescent at Gleneagles. One neighbour said he had recently witnessed three men attacking a resident over a neighbourhood dispute.”
&
“Dundee residents hit out: ‘no one feels safe to go out” from Evening Telegraph by Connor McCann October 7, 2014, 7:00 am
“Tenants living in Densfield Court have reported incidents including drug deals, drug misuse, anti-social behaviour and even attempted break-ins to police and Caledonia Housing Association.”
“It is getting to the stage where no one feels safe to go out of their house”.
“The number of people you see buying, selling and taking drugs is shocking the place has turned into a drug haven”.
..The attempted break-in also spurred tenants to ask unsuccessfully, for burglar alarms to be fitted, because of the CHA mantra ‘no evidence means no case’ . Caledonia’s operations director Tim Calderbank said: “If a tenant raises a concern relating to a potential breach of a tenancy agreement, we will investigate and take appropriate action. “However, on this particular case, we have been in contact with a resident about their concerns and have offered advice about the situation, including advice about security”.
For several years CHA only had negative Facebook comments on their home page from tenants e.g., complaints they had not been able to get repairs done, CHA had turned their area into drug dens with brothels etc. They later updated their Facebook page by promoting their self-image, to deflect away from the facts!
Fact: Drug havens and brothels are created, they do not happen overnight. CHA put families into homes, then move criminals in beside them and then prevent the tenants from getting redress for what they suffer. They are meant to put up with it or move out. Making others miserable is empowering to narcissists and other toxic personality types who cover their backs. The reality is a far cry from the glossy brochure façade the CHA Executive Team and their enablers would want the public to believe.
When is the law not the law?
There are no laws, when those who are supposed to uphold the law, cannot even abide by it or uphold it themselves, and prefer to protect those breaking it. Do not trust them.
The current government needs to be replaced, as the SNP have had many years (elected 2007), to do what is expected of them but have failed miserably by refusing to work in the public’s interest, to solve any social issues. They are too busy spending public money on their own twisted agendas.
