widespread local council corruption ("searches") - housing market
johnna...@yahoo.co.uk
corrupt to the bone, but here is widespread example that will ring a
bell with practically anyone who has bought or sold a house in the past
year or two.
It concerns how "local searches" are done when someone is investigating
a property they want to buy.
You are supposed to fill in two forms, called an LLC1 and a CON29, and
get responses back from the council. Solicitors give the impression
this is difficult, as you'd expect. In reality, it means telling the
girl in the office "Send off the local searches for 7 Acacia Avenue,
would you?" Or more normally, all of the conveyancing work is done by
the girl (or boy) in the office anyway.
Government "guidelines" say local councils should get responses back
within 10 days. Yes, TEN DAYS. That would be no problem, and only 5-10
years ago, they managed to do this.
But owing to some mega-million-pound computer scam or other, supposedly
(you guessed it!) designed to "improve the service to the customer",
councils are actually taking up to TWO MONTHS.
You'll probably have heard the one where officials drag their feet (or
lose your application) unless you pay them a backhander. That's par for
the course in most of the world.
Well that's exactly what happens here.
Because there IS a way of getting them to send their responses back
sooner.
They call it a "personal search".
But, guess what, they
a) LIMIT the number of personal searches they allow each day
b) require booking ahead
c) "allow" big bookings by so-called "personal search" companies
d) don't give the info in an "assured" form. (Although it's exactly the
same info).
You guessed it again - it's the council officials, in league with
big-bollocked local solicitors, who are behind the "personal search"
companies.
They've worked out the whole system to the last tee, with various
"justifications along the way (e.g. "computers", "first come, first
served", "we're very busy with reorganisation work"), so as to line
their own pockets. How clever these filthy little moneygrabbers must
think they are. Much cleverer than "members of the public", eh?
These "personal search" companies can offer people searches within 4
weeks, or if you pay them a high price, within 2 weeks, or if you pay
them a VERY high price (e.g. £1500), they can get you the searches
within 1 week. They've booked all the slots, see.
When someone phones up who isn't from one of the companies, the Land
Charges section of the local council will tell them that the earliest
available slot is about 1-2 days before they would get a postal search
back anyway. I.e. it isn't worth it. TRY IT AND SEE. (I mean this
literally - if you think the above is a load of crap, please check it
out). The whole system is operated with the "personal search" companies
in mind.
Consider also that the bit of paper given out by the council in
response to a personal search isn't "assured", unlike what they give
out in response to a postal search.
However, it's the same info.
Have you got the point yet?
Solicitors will advise their clients not to proceed on the basis of
unassured info.
But when the companies (not unconnected with solicitors) step in, they
can give the assurance, as easy as anything, and at no risk, because
it's exactly the same info from the council as is given when a search
is done postally - as they well know, because it's council officials
behind the companies.
In any other country, this is called a bribe - a bribe to these cunts,
just so they'll do the job the taxpayer pays them to do. Paid to front
companies. Everyone expects them to "leverage" their public office to
make some money on the side.
Will anyone go to jail? Will they fuck!
And remember, the computer scam is an even bigger earner (on a national
scale), and it doesn't take a genius to work out that, Britain being
Britain, the new computer system won't work properly, and there'll be
whole hierarchies of bribes, in connection with that too.
That's the system, folks.
The sad thing is, whilst this type of thing is known to be the system
in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Rumania, Egypt, Israel, South
America, Russia, Asia, etc. etc. etc., in Britain people are so
brow-beaten that they're supposed to think everything is hunky dorey
and above board - mainly because officials either speak in posh
accents, or speak in fuckwit-bureaucrat dialect when speaking to
"members of the public", as they call punters, or of course both. And
many people actually do think this.
I'd invite anyone with similar info in this or any other field to post
it here. Let's start, bit by bit, to try to make things better by
bringing some of the shit out into the open, shall we, and letting more
and more people smell it for what it is.
John Nagelson
PS Almost all solicitors in private practice are consummate swindlers,
always adding on "extras" that they think dumb punters won't complain
about, looking for "remortgage" commissions, "introduction" fees, etc.,
and with their tongues hanging out for a chance to "manage
investments" for batty elderly people (i.e. rob them, but at least a
mugger with a baseball bat is honest), but in this particular instance
the big players are the kind of solicitors who hang out with
building-industry and property-speculator gangsters. Naturally, such
solicitors tend to be good mates with the council.
Mikein...@aol.com
Here's my little one.
For two years I tried to get the Halifax to stop sending letters to my
address for someone who had borrowed money from them and was clearly
not paying it back. A person I'd never heard of using a concocted
address. No reply to letters. Eventually I wrote to the CEO after
reading in the paper about someone else who got letters for scores of
other people for years until he went to the press.
It's now stopped. What I think happened was that managers do not want
to be exposed as having made bad loans but want to lend as much as
possible since that is their ticket to career advancement. So they
simply bung in the bin any letters like mine and go on lending money as
they did to the person using my address.
Tim
> .... Eventually I wrote to the CEO ... It's now stopped.
> What I think happened was that managers do not
> want to be exposed as having made bad loans but
> want to lend as much as possible since that is their
> ticket to career advancement. So they simply bung in
What do you suppose happens to them
after the letter is received to the CEO?
What sort of "career advancement" do they get then? ;-)
linkuk
"Tim" <m...@home.uk> wrote in message news:RrCdnZg4zID...@bt.com...
found twice recently when i had serious problems with british gas and ntl.
In both instances they were not only acted on quickly but resolved to my
satisfaction within a couple of weeks after (in british gas instance) many
months of total imcompetence and inaction.
Pity it takes a letter to a ceo for people to do thier jobs properly.
john2
> served", "we're very busy with reorganisation work"), so as to line
> their own pockets. How clever these filthy little moneygrabbers must
> think they are. Much cleverer than "members of the public", eh?
>
Exactly who is lining whose pockets?
Your cheque is payable into central funds only so its not possible for
anyone to line their own pockets.
john2
Mikein...@aol.com
> >> .... Eventually I wrote to the CEO ... It's now stopped.
> >> What I think happened was that managers do not
> >> want to be exposed as having made bad loans but
> >> want to lend as much as possible since that is their
> >> ticket to career advancement. So they simply bung in
> >> the bin any letters like mine and go on lending money ...
> >
> > What do you suppose happens to them
> > after the letter is received to the CEO?
> >
> > What sort of "career advancement" do they get then? ;-)
> >
Being a helpful chap I attached to my letter to the CEO copies of the
past letters I had sent which received no reply.
JOHN BENNETT
"linkuk" <li...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:fm9ng.75181$rC1....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
Just tell the jobsworths you are going to write to the CEO, watch the fur
fly:-))
johnna...@yahoo.co.uk
The money isn't grabbed via the cheques paid direct to the council. In
fact, the amounts paid to the council are actually smaller for personal
searches than for postal ones. The bribe money - for that is what it is
- is grabbed via fees paid to the personal search companies. To get
things moving within a reasonable time, these companies charge much
higher sums - sometimes up to 10 times what you'd pay for a postal
search. The council officials (or on paper, their spouses, the usual
story), along with well-connected solicitors, are involved in those
companies. The companies only exist because the council drags its feet
unless said companies are used. It's the same story - pay us
backhanders and we won't delay processing your application. In most of
the world, everyone is familiar with this sort of corruption.
Incidentally, the money paid to "personal search" companies is usually
collected from the buyer's solicitor on behalf of the company, who then
bills the client (or docks it out of any of the client's money he may
have passing through his hands which is available for the purpose -
which is not unusual if the client is selling a property as well as
buying one). The buyer doesn't usually write a cheque to the personal
search company (or indeed to the council either).
John
Frank Booth Snr
that they get as as far as the CEO's personal secretary, who then gives
you a standard fob-off response.
SloopJohnB
<johnna...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1151140565.0...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Every aware person knows that local council officials in Britain are
(rest of the rubbish snipped)
You make a general point allegeing all council officials are corrupt -
where's your evidence, pal? If you know a corrupt official, name him/her
and their employing council. Nah,..... thought you couldn't. You're
talking complete bollocks without a shred of evidence. No different to
saying that all people on newsgroups with a yahoo account are drug-dealing
reprobates. No evidence to support that either.
John Burke
On the contrary.
IME it's impossible to know anything about a local council's management
processes, it is an entirely non-accountable entity to a member of the
public.
The dubious business methods and character of council officers local to me
would certainly suggest to me a gravy train somewhere.
JB
John Burke
> "linkuk" <li...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
[...]
>> I have to say that writing to CEO's do seem to get thier attention
>> as ive found twice recently when i had serious problems with british
>> gas and ntl. In both instances they were not only acted on quickly
>> but resolved to my satisfaction within a couple of weeks after (in
>> british gas instance) many months of total imcompetence and inaction.
>> Pity it takes a letter to a ceo for people to do thier jobs properly.
> Just tell the jobsworths you are going to write to the CEO, watch the
> fur fly:-))
Won't help the OP much though if his local council is anything like mine.
The dodgy lot here are led from the front.
JB
SloopJohnB
"John Burke" <dac...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4g6t5eF...@individual.net...
> john2 wrote:
>
> On the contrary.
>
> IME it's impossible to know anything about a local council's management
> processes, it is an entirely non-accountable entity to a member of the
> public.
>
> The dubious business methods and character of council officers local to me
> would certainly suggest to me a gravy train somewhere.
>
> JB
>
to see relevant decisions/documents if you think you have a case. The FoI
Act has far-reaching implications. Council officials and elected
councillors are accountable for their actions/inaction. Let's have some
evidence?
johnna...@yahoo.co.uk
uk.finance,uk.media,uk.d-i-y
Brian G wrote:
> >> Why don't you make the same allegations in person or by writing to
> >> the parties that you are accusing?
What a stupid question.
> >> If someone takes offence at this, they may well apply to your
> >> Internet Service Provider - (Energis UK
> >> ) for you address and take action against you.
Oh really?
> To be quite frank, if I was one of those called corrupt etc by the OP, John > Nagelson, I would damn well be chasing his ISP to obtain his address to ask
> him for the evidence - via a court order if need be.
I haven't named anyone. But if it is of any help to you, Brian, this
particular scam is being done all across the country. Specific areas
include COVENTRY, HUNTINGDONSHIRE, CHESHIRE, and almost everywhere in
DEVON and KENT. It will come as no surprise to anyone who knows what
local councils are really about - which is actually quite a lot of
people.
It might be more useful if someone could mention an area where this
scam is NOT being done. I don't know of any.
But anyway...taking up Mike's idea of going to the media, I am about to
post another article explaining how anyone can verify the information
I've posted. I hope it doesn't give you apoplexy, Brian, and I await
your further "threats".
John
Sue
<1151231624.8...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
johnna...@yahoo.co.uk writes
>
>I haven't named anyone. But if it is of any help to you, Brian, this
>particular scam is being done all across the country. Specific areas
>include COVENTRY, HUNTINGDONSHIRE, CHESHIRE, and almost everywhere in
>DEVON and KENT. It will come as no surprise to anyone who knows what
>local councils are really about - which is actually quite a lot of
>people.
>
I actually work for one, and you can't get a penny out of it.
We even have to bring our own teabags, and cook our own Xmas lunch -
I've never had that in a private sector job.
At one time some of the bosses of one particular division (Arts &
Infrastructure, strange bedfellows) were taking backhanders from private
contractors. Guess how long that lasted before a dispute with a
contractor led to the sacking of all concerned and the Chief Exec?
(Not very long - you can't have contractors without a lot of tedious
disputes.)
--
Sue @ Darkside Borough Council
Local government: whenever we look like making ends meet, Blair moves the ends