Tweet
Old people driven from their land by property speculators
District judge waves through judgment without evidence from the thus advantaged side of the case – how should the elderly in particular defend themselves?
Hello,
I'm new to this forum and am looking for a way to defend myself against bullying by neighbors of old people. I came across this message here about a dispute between old people, which is somewhat similar to the dispute I know about.
The neighbors' aggression against two very old people is probably not about a beautiful Christmas tree, but about
expulsion from their land (real estate speculation). They are threatened with financial ruin, moral attrition and even damage to their health.
Almost all of the four neighbors, two of whom are related and have assets, suddenly began complaining about the old conifers on the borders. Now these trees are only affecting the neighboring properties to a minor extent, and the use of the neighbors' properties is not being disturbed. Nevertheless, they have managed to get even state officials behind them with flimsy arguments, so that the old people are to be forced by court order to agree to the destruction of their most magnificent fir tree, which could even rank second nationwide.
The neighbors are behaving anti-socially, being abusive, defaming, insulting, and yet state actors such as a district judge, who has the reputation of having already ruined other owners, including old people, with his one-sided pro-construction industry rulings, are backing these indecent people. The press has apparently been gagged, and environmental organizations and even the Green Party are remaining passive. Associations with a long-forgotten past inevitably arise... What is going on here? How can the GREENS betray their clientele like this??? Democratic options have all been paralyzed and denied to the elderly - a kind of enforced conformity on a quasi-voluntary basis means that the senior citizens concerned have hardly any support.
The seniors don't know how else they can defend themselves, since their evidence, which refuted the complaint, was almost all swept away by this court. Inevitably, they have to go to the second instance despite a number of ineffective complaints in order to possibly get justice. The neighbor dispute is totally harassing, the care situation in the old people's house is not even addressed, let alone taken into consideration. One of the aggressive neighbors, who is also an authorized signatory in a real estate company, once said to another person involved in the bullying that it would certainly look nice if the trees were on fire. Protection from the state is obviously in vain, since it seems to be only about money and about getting the property of old people into the recovery soon. The municipal office responsible for nature conservation has presumably thwarted the protection of the tree and is apparently going along with it. The tree should have been placed under protection, which was denied. The fir is clearly characteristic of the town and aesthetically appealing. In addition, it would have to be unique in the federal state. All this does not count and should be covered up.
The tree is to be cut down and devalued in a similar way to a spruce, so that the financial burden of the felling could be placed on the elderly!
Legal action is being considered against the employee or his office, as there are other competent statements that evaluate the grove completely differently and much better.
In order to make it easier to fell the tree, the official classified it as a “transmission mast”. Transmission masts fall under the BO and are only exempt from approval up to a certain height. This is no joke! Basically, it's all a scandal, because some people know about it and do nothing, not even NABU, which was informed directly! NABU wrote an e-mail saying that it supports the assessment of the tree as a “transmission mast”. This is hard to believe, but this is how it works when nature conservation is no longer independent, but is run by people who are closely connected to industry, powerful medical corporations, etc.!
The two old people have the impression of moving in a labyrinth in which the rule of law has been undermined in favor of some private interests
- they are being bullied collectively and fear being ruined financially by legal disputes etc.
Furthermore, the fir is interwoven with their soul. Those who are aggressively taking action against it have erected ugly gravel beds and a row of shacks on the property line, which look absolutely awful – the tasteless property of this so-called plaintiff almost resembles a medieval torture court.
It is hard to understand how a court and a judge can make such a one-sided judgment! Perhaps someone else has a solution, because the crux of the matter is that the state has taken the side of the aggressive aggressors here. THANK YOU for reading! How can the two old people get out of this?
PS: The terrible dispute has been going on for over four years!
With the help of the state, time is obviously being played for, and the clock is only ticking against the age of the seniors, who would normally have won the legal battle long ago thanks to their evidence. But what are they to do when their evidence and arguments are simply not to be heard or seen?
The tree does not cast any shadows, it does not suppress plant growth, it does not hinder the neighbors, no roots, no cones and only a few needles occasionally fall -
apparently a dispute is being staged in order to get the land of the seniors - the state is participating! What to do?
District judge waves through judgment without evidence from the thus advantaged side of the case – how should the elderly in particular defend themselves?
Hello,
I'm new to this forum and am looking for a way to defend myself against bullying by neighbors of old people. I came across this message here about a dispute between old people, which is somewhat similar to the dispute I know about.
The neighbors' aggression against two very old people is probably not about a beautiful Christmas tree, but about
expulsion from their land (real estate speculation). They are threatened with financial ruin, moral attrition and even damage to their health.
Almost all of the four neighbors, two of whom are related and have assets, suddenly began complaining about the old conifers on the borders. Now these trees are only affecting the neighboring properties to a minor extent, and the use of the neighbors' properties is not being disturbed. Nevertheless, they have managed to get even state officials behind them with flimsy arguments, so that the old people are to be forced by court order to agree to the destruction of their most magnificent fir tree, which could even rank second nationwide.
The neighbors are behaving anti-socially, being abusive, defaming, insulting, and yet state actors such as a district judge, who has the reputation of having already ruined other owners, including old people, with his one-sided pro-construction industry rulings, are backing these indecent people. The press has apparently been gagged, and environmental organizations and even the Green Party are remaining passive. Associations with a long-forgotten past inevitably arise... What is going on here? How can the GREENS betray their clientele like this??? Democratic options have all been paralyzed and denied to the elderly - a kind of enforced conformity on a quasi-voluntary basis means that the senior citizens concerned have hardly any support.
The seniors don't know how else they can defend themselves, since their evidence, which refuted the complaint, was almost all swept away by this court. Inevitably, they have to go to the second instance despite a number of ineffective complaints in order to possibly get justice. The neighbor dispute is totally harassing, the care situation in the old people's house is not even addressed, let alone taken into consideration. One of the aggressive neighbors, who is also an authorized signatory in a real estate company, once said to another person involved in the bullying that it would certainly look nice if the trees were on fire. Protection from the state is obviously in vain, since it seems to be only about money and about getting the property of old people into the recovery soon. The municipal office responsible for nature conservation has presumably thwarted the protection of the tree and is apparently going along with it. The tree should have been placed under protection, which was denied. The fir is clearly characteristic of the town and aesthetically appealing. In addition, it would have to be unique in the federal state. All this does not count and should be covered up.
The tree is to be cut down and devalued in a similar way to a spruce, so that the financial burden of the felling could be placed on the elderly!
Legal action is being considered against the employee or his office, as there are other competent statements that evaluate the grove completely differently and much better.
In order to make it easier to fell the tree, the official classified it as a “transmission mast”. Transmission masts fall under the BO and are only exempt from approval up to a certain height. This is no joke! Basically, it's all a scandal, because some people know about it and do nothing, not even NABU, which was informed directly! NABU wrote an e-mail saying that it supports the assessment of the tree as a “transmission mast”. This is hard to believe, but this is how it works when nature conservation is no longer independent, but is run by people who are closely connected to industry, powerful medical corporations, etc.!
The two old people have the impression of moving in a labyrinth in which the rule of law has been undermined in favor of some private interests
- they are being bullied collectively and fear being ruined financially by legal disputes etc.
Furthermore, the fir is interwoven with their soul. Those who are aggressively taking action against it have erected ugly gravel beds and a row of shacks on the property line, which look absolutely awful – the tasteless property of this so-called plaintiff almost resembles a medieval torture court.
It is hard to understand how a court and a judge can make such a one-sided judgment! Perhaps someone else has a solution, because the crux of the matter is that the state has taken the side of the aggressive aggressors here. THANK YOU for reading! How can the two old people get out of this?
PS: The terrible dispute has been going on for over four years!
With the help of the state, time is obviously being played for, and the clock is only ticking against the age of the seniors, who would normally have won the legal battle long ago thanks to their evidence. But what are they to do when their evidence and arguments are simply not to be heard or seen?
The tree does not cast any shadows, it does not suppress plant growth, it does not hinder the neighbors, no roots, no cones and only a few needles occasionally fall -
apparently a dispute is being staged in order to get the land of the seniors - the state is participating! What to do?
Kommentar