I have a problem with a former athlete (6 feet of pure muscle- the smallest one being between his ears). threatening a six months pregnant female living alone because partner is serving his country.

I dont have the physical capability of dealing with the individual and dont know his mental stability although his actions in my oppinion (level 3 psychology) seem a tad irrationnal. It appears he has a problem with a tennants lightbulb which doesnt work and therefore makes the property uninhabitable and he feels the need to stalk the landlord to make this point.

I know he reads my posts along with any other personal info he can get his hands on so in effect this affords him a right of reply or the chance to seek medical help if he feels he has a condition sparking his irrational behaviour.

Without knowing the residence of the individual.... is it still possible to take out injunction to protect the mother and unborn infant ??

Has someone changed the lightbulb? Purely from your description it sounds most like a landlord not doing his/her job (in which case he is perfectly entitled to be annoyed)

What threats have been made, for example?

There is no relationship between the parties or their bulbs - I cant explain the ramblings of a nutter - ive simply put what happened.

Im not sure its a landlords job to change a bulb......... more the role of the landlords agent if anything.

What threats have been made, for example?

Its not relevant - The vulnerable and pregnant individual has no desire to be stalked / tracked down to hear of the athletes neighbour bulbs arent working. She has enough on her plate which is why she employs an agent.

Should there be any sense or legitimacy in the ramblings then they should be put to the agent.

That would of course mean going head to head with another male and perhaps that is a deterrent to our former athlete.

It's not the landlords responsibility to change bulbs, and arguably not the agents - bulbs are considered consumables and if they go, it's the tenants job to replace them (unless they are at considerable height or somewhere where the person changing them may reasonably not be able to get to).

Its not relevant - .......

The nature of the threats will be totally relevant.

Your posts are rather vague, but maybe intentially?

Generally speaking, evidence of harassment will be needed to successfully apply for an order. This would normally take the form of police involvement.

For an injunction to take effect it has to be physically served on the person, and to that extent, some form of address is going to be involved.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/yorkslincs/series7/stalking_advice.shtml

Thanks.

The issue is one of stalking and bypassing of legitimate process due to an apparent obsession.

Im not going into the threat levels for reasons i hope you will understand.

The nature of the threats will be totally relevant.

Your posts are rather vague, but maybe intentially?

Generally speaking, evidence of harassment will be needed to successfully apply for an order. This would normally take the form of police involvement.

For an injunction to take effect it has to be physically served on the person, and to that extent, some form of address is going to be involved.

Pardon my ignorance but does that mean only the police needto know the individuals address for service of an injunction ? by the police ?

Pardon my ignorance but does that mean only the police needto know the individuals address for service of an injunction ? by the police ?

She would have to go through the police or pay for it as a civil case. She will need to keep a record of when this individual contacts her and how. To prove an offence of harrassment, she must tell him (best to record this in some way or have a witness/have someone else tell him) that she does not want him to contact her again. If he then contacts her on two subsequent occasions, he has technically committed an offence. At some point the police can also give him a warning under the harrassment act (whilst this stays on the system it isn't a caution). However, both proving the offence and getting the CPS to actually charge him would be an uphill struggle. It must go to court and he must be found guilty for the magistrates/judge to impose an injunction.

She could go through the civil courts to gain an injunction/restraining order but again will need some form of proof and will have to bear the cost.

At a wild guess, this bulb is in a communal space and/or in a sealed housing which should be taken care of by somebody other than the tennant

Agents do nothing besides collect rent and screw both parties for obscure fees - unless there is a maintenance contract attached to the arrangement

It would therefore be the landlord's responsibility to maintain the property. If the landlord is abroad fighting for Queen and country, he should have delegated his responsibilities clearly

I can understand exactly how frustrating an absent landlord who isn't looking after a property can be, but threatening other people isn't the way to sort a problem out (though employing somebody to sort out the problem and deducting it from the next rent payment may be)

She could go through the civil courts to gain an injunction/restraining order but again will need some form of proof and will have to bear the cost.

Wouldnt have a problem with the cost - just the address for serving the documents but cheers.

At a wild guess, this bulb is in a communal space and/or in a sealed housing which should be taken care of by somebody other than the tennant

Agents do nothing besides collect rent and screw both parties for obscure fees - unless there is a maintenance contract attached to the arrangement

It would therefore be the landlord's responsibility to maintain the property. If the landlord is abroad fighting for Queen and country, he should have delegated his responsibilities clearly

I can understand exactly how frustrating an absent landlord who isn't looking after a property can be, but threatening other people isn't the way to sort a problem out (though employing somebody to sort out the problem and deducting it from the next rent payment may be)

Thanks for response but i think you have missed the point...... it is a trivial issue for which the complainant (all 14 stone of muscle) has gone to great lengths to track down the landlady and brought his presence to bear in a doorstep rant having conducted detective work for which S Y Police would be proud.

The landlady has gone to great lengths to evade this person as she (rightly or wrongly) suspects him of being the driving force behind 2 bullet holes through her windows as discussed in an earlier thread.

There is no relationship between the complainant and any ot the parties - he has taken it upon himself to champion a cause for reasons best known to himself. (an adopted cause or excuse to confront the landlady)

His real motives (which are certainly not lightbulbs belonging to others) are as yet unknown because as a landlord himself he would have had the knowledge to air his lightbulb concerns to the tennant suffering the problem (who hasnt incidentally complained ) or the agent for the property or any of the official bodies whose addresses are well publicised.

He chose to ignore all the recognised avenues in order to "arrange" a personal stalking mission on trumped up trivia.

Hopefully someone in authority will pick up on the fact that a a vendetta is being conducted but on this occasion his victim and her unborn is in no condition to resist.

Hats off to the Agents and Environmental health officers who have intervened in a positive way.

Sounds like a good case for the Protection From Harassment Act to be used http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/ukpga_19970040_en_1

Quite easy to get a police warning against the subject, and with an independent witness of a breach of the warning, the second offence is arrestable.

I think landlords are only responcable for stip lighting in kitchens ect as its nessersary lighting and the rest is down to the occupier. correct me if Im wrong anyone.

Thats why the council are respocable for kitchen strip lights but wont have anything to do with the rest of the lights in the house concerning builbs. The fitting are another matter.

Sounds like a good case for the Protection From Harassment Act to be used http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/ukpga_19970040_en_1

Quite easy to get a police warning against the subject, and with an independent witness of a breach of the warning, the second offence is arrestable.

Thanks - much appreciated.

nvm this post

nvm this post

Eh?? :confused:

Thanks for response but i think you have missed the point...... I have taken a balanced view based on very limited information

I know the majority of threads on here are merely an invitation to indulge in some indignation on behalf of the OP, but myself and CGK have never been the type to jump on random bandwaggons

NOBODY behaves entirely randomly. If this bloke has a problem, there's a reason for it. You may not perceive this as your problem, and indeed the courts may agree with you, but that does not alter the fact that there IS a problem which needs sorting out, and had it been sorted out satisfactorily and promptly would presumably not have resulted in you being dragged into this

Wouldnt have a problem with the cost - just the address for serving the documents but cheers.
i think you may need an address ,the court have to summons him to appear in court before they take any action i think,he has to have the chance to contest the injunction

I have taken a balanced view based on very limited information

I know the majority of threads on here are merely an invitation to indulge in some indignation on behalf of the OP, but myself and CGK have never been the type to jump on random bandwaggons

NOBODY behaves entirely randomly. If this bloke has a problem, there's a reason for it. You may not perceive this as your problem, and indeed the courts may agree with you, but that does not alter the fact that there IS a problem which needs sorting out, and had it been sorted out satisfactorily and promptly would presumably not have resulted in you being dragged into this

Correct - but it is not for me to speculate on what his real problem is even though i have a very good idea and it is in fact nothing to do with the landlady and is in fact matters beyond her control (if my guess is correct).

That does not appear to be a good enough reason to stop him apportioning blame to where he thinks it should lie or where he would like it to lie - a vulnerable and defenceless female.

Quite obviously i have issues with the way he has chosen to vent his anger at his perceived problem and his perceived culpable party because i have a relationship with his victim whose safety along with that of her unborn i believe is being compromised as a result of his actions.

The reasons he has given for unsolicited contact / threats are obviously trivial if not completely bogus.

Even if the court were to decide the opposite then he still has no grounds to make the complaints except via legitimate procedures. He has no relationship with those on whose behalf he seeks to raise those complaints. He has not been instructed but has cavalierly adopted what he sees as a cause to champion for confrontation.

A bit like me complaining to the police that someone has urinated on my neighbours car and then tracking, stalking and eventually confronting the urinater to make threats on behalf of my neighbour who is unaware of the reprisal actions i am taking.

Im thankful to the contributions as they have been very informative,