Birmingham City Council's tenant Dis-involvement system


We are here putting the main documents of 2017/8 Judicial Review legal action challenging Birmingham City Council's illegal suppression of tenant involvement in Ladywood Ward .

- Note that some of the docs are omitted as less relevant.
- The docs (and this site) are anonymised not because there's anything to be ashamed of but just to protect personal privacy in contexts of which you are unaware.  Not everyone wants their personal information permanently stored on the everywherenet for everyone to peep at today and forever with no context.
- The docs are all at the Google Sites servers; hopefully you can access these and if not then contact us at autism@bk.ru.  (This has nothing to do with autism and none of us are autistic by the way....or Russian for that matter.)
- Further down you can also access the docs of another Judicial Review application challenging the maximal program of pretended improvements at Salisbury Tower, case CO/4617/2017. 

~~~~~~~~

Judicial Review application challenging abusive illegal suppression of tenant involvement in Ladywood Ward, case CO/5930/2017 (ongoing as of 5 June 2018).

Statement of Facts and Grounds (case 5930).

Exhibits to Statement

BCC's Reply (a load of rubbish)

My Reply to their reply

(My) Application to Set Aside Order (court's order that hearings of the two cases be at same time)

(My) Oral Submission re Prematurity (of my "improvements" case CO/4617/2017) (and the requested order of which was then refused without reasons)

(Back to HLB case CO/5930/2017...) Judge thereafter issued an absurd order that I had to submit a statement of specific details, even though they had already been perfectly presented in the original Statement, hence this proves that this judge had not bothered to read even the most basic document first before pronouncing judgment (and predictably refusing this HLB case as not important enough for her time).  Anyway, I went along with this as part of being allowed to have the case adjourned on health grounds, which would also hopefully mean she would no longer be hearing it either.)

(My) Specific Details

BCC's SECOND Reply (a load of mostly the same rubbish)

(My) (Draft) Skeleton Argument (not yet had a date for the hearing)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Judicial Review application challenging "decided"/"proposed" pseudo-improvements to Salisbury Tower in Ladywood Ward, case CO/4617/2017 (the "improvements" are currently stalled and NONE of the residents have a clue what is going on thanks to BCC's information blackout policy).

Statement of Facts and Grounds (case 4617)

Exhibits to Statement


BCC's Reply rubbish ("Acknowledgement of Service and Grounds")


My Reply to their reply  (demonstrating their impressive levels of squirming 'facts' and highly evasive drivel). 

Exhibits to my Reply

My Skeleton Argument and their Skeleton Argument (not included here; in which they still asserted "no decision made" despite all the indications to contrary detailed in my reply to their reply, hence my need to add at the last minute the next thing below). 

My) Oral Submission re Prematurity (of this "improvements" case CO/4617/2017) (and the requested order of which was then refused without reasons)

Three unanswered Freedom of Information requests:


https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/birmingham_city_council_illegal
 
There are more docs but less relevant.  END

. .

June 2018. Streets left unswept since before Autumn 2017 by BCC.
All the streets outside of posh areas have been left like this.