Ho, ho! News coming in that EVICTION PAPERS have been served on 44 Richmond Terrace, fast on the heels of news that Paul “Wolfie” Smith has been appointed Marvin’s “HOUSING CZAR”. (We suggest he avoids the Counts Louse basement with a title like that).

So our loopy housing director with the extraordinarily fragile ego and thin skin, Nick “Drooper” Hooper, is being allowed to SQUANDER over £170k of your money pursuing a pointless vendetta against an Avonmouth resident!

Had Hooper stopped LOSING THE PLOT and started engaging his brain, he could have ended the occupation of 44 Richmond Terrace TODAY and handed the keys of the property to its new owner tomorrow as he’s legally obliged to do. But oh no. Nick’s tragic little self-image and ego problems must come before anything as unimportant as public money (think you’ll find these type of psychological characteristics are generally associated with having a small dick and/or long term erectile dysfunction issues. Medical Ed.).

So due to Drooper’s long term untreated self-image problems, we the council tax payer, must stand A LOSS of £140k on the, now, unsold house; at least £14k in COMPENSATION to the buyer whose contract Drooper has broken plus we must FOOT THE BILL for Drooper’s civil court action to remove the occupiers.

Value for money or wot in the age of austerity?

Here’s further details ….

From: steven norman <s-norman123@hotmail.co.uk>
Sent: 17 May 2016 07:22
To: mary.ryan@bristol.go.uk
Cc: nick.hooper@bristol.gov.uk; mayor@bristol.gov.uk; The Bristolian .;
Subject: RE: MR ANTHONY PALMER

Dear Mrs Ryan

Further to our meeting at 44 Richmond Terrace Avonmouth yesterday, I am somewhat perplexed by your statement on behalf of Bristol City Council and Mayor Rees about wishing to find a resolution to the current occupation.

My understanding of a resolution is that something is brought to the table that both parties can agree. I personally do not think anything was brought to the table by you that can bring the current occupation to an end.

The HomeChoice policy allows the housing department the right to use discretion. Based on the matters discussed, the occupation could be brought to an end immediately allowing the buyer to complete the purchase by the completion on the 18th May. Thus avoiding Bristol City Council having to pay 10% compensation to the buyer, which I believe would be in the region of about £14,000 based on the selling price of £140,000.

You stated you would not be able to house Mr Palmer and his son as there were others in more need. As discussed, I believe the needs of Mr Palmer & Son are above what you currently have him assessed for.

I also think the statement you provided is a diversion away from the facts and somewhat ludicrous and bizarre given the HomeChoice policy allows you discretion.

I will now give you three cases of where this discretion was used: Miss X, a domestic violence case, was moved from St George private housing to Brentry social housing. This was a case I was personally involved in.

Mr X was moved from 13 Antona Court to Lockleaze alleging harassment last year.

Then there’s the case of the gentleman in Ashton Vale who removed his name from the Judicial Review against Bristol City Council over the disputed new ground for Bristol City Football Club. He never returned to his council home in Aston Vale and was re-housed immediately by Bristol City Council.

This current situation, I believe, is purely being driven by a personal vendetta and dislike of myself by Mr Hooper. He seems unable to make a sensible and rational decision and is prepared to cost the city tax payers £140,000 in a lost sale and £14,000 in compensation and deprive the buyer of the house she has bought in good faith.

Based on the statement given to buyers by both the auction house and the City Council. Bristol City Council officers have the ability at hand to bring this political occupation to an end today 17th May if it so wishes as allowed for in the HomeChoice policy and the word DISCRETION.

Without wishing to sound facetious, whilst council officers may feel that we – the great un-washed – are beneath them, you may rest assured we will continue to fight for social justice and the right for every individual to have a home irrespective of colour, sexual orientation or religious beliefs.

I also attach two of the photos to remind you of the current conditions you are prepared to see desperate homeless people live in while honouring the owners with vast amounts of tax payers money for providing slum and squalid living conditions.

Yours Sincerely

Mr Stephen Norman