WINTON INVESTMENTS LTD

A WIDE RANGE OF CRIMINAL OFFENCES COVERED UP BY LEWES DISTRICT COUNCIL PROVEN IN COURT

UNDER LANDLORD AND TENANT LAW

WHY

 -------------------------------------------------------------------

318 South Coast Rd Peacehaven.

Brief outline in 1987. The freehold purchased by Winton Investments IOM

 They Started standard harassment to get tenants out / not collecting rent / heavies threats/ car driven on pavement at Mr Cox. THIS WAS PROVEN IN COURT

 But what was unusual was that they went to great lengths not to be identified e.g. the BMW driven on to the pavement registration number place on a old Bedford Van as cherished number BMW as new plates can not find who was owner at the time. They spent a lot of money over an old building ???.

The council say we are making up a case of harassment We complain to Councillors who are told by Legal Services we are lying.

 Plus they delay repair - we start protesting and make a complaint to the Ombudsman this was a waste of time as the Councils report was a pack of lies

Over the next 6 years the Council did repairs but each time we had to rise hell.

We had the insides of our flats go green Mr Cox had to cover his bed with polythene sheets when it rained plus water came out of electric sockets wiring totally unsafe

It takes 6 years before Mr Neilson gets to court. As soon as L.D.C. knew Mr Neilson had a date set for trial he starts to get offered Council houses by LDC and Housing Associations (I phoned them and was told that I was top of the list from Lewes to be re-housed) I repeat told the Housing Association I did not want or asked to be re-housed they told me that on the list sent from L.D.C. I was top of the list to be re-housed.

PLUS CLLR. K. BODFISH OFFERS TO TAKE MR NEILSON TO LEWES AND ID TOLD HE CAN PICK ANY HOUSE HE WANTS ON THEIR BOOKS ?????

COURT HEARING

Someone did not want Mr Neilson and Mr Cox in court to get their day in court.

My Council Mr T. Sisley proved in court that harassment had been committed and Mr Neilson received an injunction against the Freeholder plus damages The case was before judge Merrick the other side not come to court as they did not want to be identified But harassment continued.

Mr R. Harries after the case told Mr Neilson Judge Merrick did not know what he is talking about and accuses Mr Neilson of perjury.

People on the council wanted us out quietly with no come back - reason unknown.