Case of impersonation - looking for advice

onekeano

Registered User
Messages
910
A friend of mine is a landlord and a tenant moved on a couple of years ago. Subsequently the landlord received a notification of an insurance claim which he is contesting as he believes it to be spurious.

Recently, the Council have written to him on a number of (separate) matters, all to do with Planning. In exasperation he submitted an FOI and unintentionally one document he was provided with contained the name and the address of the complainant.

He has now established that there is no such person at the address in question, however the former tenant who is making the claim does reside at this address.

My friend has asked the Council if they test the veracity of complaints before acting on them. The answer was "we couldn't do that" and when he told them that he had confirmed via the owner of the property that no such person had ever lived there he was told by the official in the council that that was "irrelevant".

I'm hoping someone can provide some advice for my friend as it seems that even though the council are aware that is seems this is a case of clear impersonation they seem determined to persue each complaint to the end.

Roy
 
I don't know, but I would imagine that if there was a breach of the planning laws and regulations it is a matter of act and so it is irrelevant who reported it.
 
I presume that the complaints relate to a planning application your friend has submitted. if so, I suggest he puts it in writing to the council that it his believe that the person making the complaint does not exist. Get it on the planning file.
 
I presume that the complaints relate to a planning application your friend has submitted. if so, I suggest he puts it in writing to the council that it his believe that the person making the complaint does not exist. Get it on the planning file.

No actually, it's in relation to a wall that was built about 20 years ago..........and he has put it in writing now that he has established the person doesnt exist......the answer (verbally is "that's irrelevant" :eek:
 
Good points Mrs V I had forgotten about that - it's incredible that in light of that fiasco DCC still dont both to even make a phone call to check the veracity of complaints but prefer to send inspectors out on wild gooses chases. If I was cynical I'd say the mileage must go some way to compensating for the inconvenience :D
 
it's incredible that in light of that fiasco DCC still dont both to even make a phone call to check the veracity of complaints

As Jim said

I don't know, but I would imagine that if there was a breach of the planning laws and regulations it is a matter of act and so it is irrelevant who reported it.

It's very important in the whole planning and enforcement process that people are able to make anonymous or confidential reports.

They go out. They see that there was no planning breach. They come away. If your friend has done nothing wrong, what does he care?

Brendan
 
Well for one reason, if the complaint is being made fraudulently by the same person who has taken an insurance claim against him - I think that could generally be considered harassment Brendan, would you agree? Given that he has established the name & address is fraudulent but the person taking the claim against him does live at that address, it doesn't stretch the mind too far to come to that conclusion.

Also if I have a disagreement with a neighbour or even say I fall out with a family member - then I send an email asking the fire officer or an enforcement officer to send out enforcement letters or engage an architect to get certificate of compliance without ever having setting foot in the house and sign it Brendan Burgess @ AAM.com ... is that ok? Should the Council follow that up and waste resources on that? No sure about you Brendan but I don't particularly want my taxes being wasted on that kind of thing.
 
Well for one reason, if the complaint is being made fraudulently by the same person who has taken an insurance claim against him - I think that could generally be considered harassment Brendan, would you agree?

Well first of all this is not fraud and secondly as you have already admitted your friend is in breach of the planning regulations.

Should the Council follow that up and waste resources on that? No sure about you Brendan but I don't particularly want my taxes being wasted on that kind of thing.

But they are not wasting money in tracking down the ghost, they are going after a breach in the planning regulations which is exactly what they should be doing.

Would you be making the same argument if in stead of beaching the planning laws you friend had been turned anonymously for a hit-and-run, theft or whatever comes to mind? The law is the law and if you break it you should not be surprised if you get held to account for it.
 
Jim - I find this extraordinary - can you please point out where I "have already admitted your friend is in breach of the planning regulations."?

You don't work for the City Council do you?

Roy
 
Back
Top