Rekha Patel loses her house

[daltontrumbno]

I don't know for sure but my recollection is that she was given strong, expert advice during the TV show that renovation works on a listed building needed to be very carefully managed in close consultation with the relevant authorities. She agreed that this was vital, sounding quite sincere.

Did she then deliberately hire a dodgy builder who would disregard conservation and deliver fast cheap results? Or was she a victim of a builder who promised conservation compliance but didn't deliver? What did the refurbishment contract say? Was the heritage/planning approval properly obtained?

Either way, it could have been easily settled through insurance and civil claims at the beginning. £10,000 at worst to rectify the damage, and then a courtroom settlement of liability. But Rekha couldn't get past "that stuck-up bitch next door isn't going to tell me what I can and can't do with my own house!"

It was a friend of the family who did the work, almost certainly not historic building registered, possibly not even insured. The original court order which included costs was £8200, the out of court the damage probably would have cost around £5000. The bulk of what Rekha owes is down to the vexious lawsuits and the unwinnable appeals she was advised to enter.

[He Who Knows]

From what I've read, the builder was a friend of her brother's. Someone commented that 'Princess Rekhaben Jerambhai Patel' fell out with this builder over payment. She also fell out with her architect over payment and two other builders who were employed later to finish the job. A fully-fledged Freetard, she clearly thinks everything is free.

[notorial dissent]

From what I've read, the builder was a friend of her brother's. Someone commented that 'Princess Rekhaben Jerambhai Patel' fell out with this builder over payment. She also fell out with her architect over payment and two other builders who were employed later to finish the job. A fully-fledged Freetard, she clearly thinks everything is free.

Why is this not even remotely a surprise or unexpected????

[The Observer]

From what I've read, the builder was a friend of her brother's. Someone commented that 'Princess Rekhaben Jerambhai Patel' fell out with this builder over payment. She also fell out with her architect over payment and two other builders who were employed later to finish the job. A fully-fledged Freetard, she clearly thinks everything is free.

Why is this not even remotely a surprise or unexpected????

I once read an advertisement where the mail-order merchant made a point of addressing potential customers whom he described as not ever having the intent of honoring a contract with which they have entered. If you were such a person, he requested that you do not patronize his business and go elsewhere. And I have seen such people throughout my life. I assume that there is some particular motivation for them in trying to chisel, lie and cheat the person they are dealing with, no matter how clear the terms of the transaction are. And it does not seem to matter how much expense, time, stress and whatever else is involved, they will pursue this until at some point they get completely slapped down by the law or wear the other party down.

And that is why we have courts...

[He Who Knows]

Rekha Patel has now started a petition against the next door neighbour and the conservation officer about her "unlawful eviction", plus the solicitors who "conspired to defraud" her extorting £90k "without proof", plus she's been "failed by the courts and police". So the whole world's against her and it's just not fair...https://www.change.org/p/lord-chief-jus ... rters_page

[notorial dissent]

Poor snowflake, wants to turn that £90k in to £180k, and I'm pretty sure she'll manage it.

[Hercule Parrot]

Rekha Patel has now started a petition ...

After the “trial”, I met the former owner of Rose Cottage (a time served builder who maintained historic buildings) who informed me that these alleged water-tabling features had never existed and explained that all that was cut off were roof slates that belonged to Patel Cottage.

In addition, having obtained a report from a Qualified Chartered Building Surveyor, Conservation Architect and chartered structural engineer, there is no doubt that the stone feature "thackstones" has never ever existed to the gable wall of Rose Cottage and that the claims made for damages were false.

Special Snowflake Rekha discovers an important life lesson. It is best to gather one's evidence before an important hearing than afterwards.

A sensible person would now ask their lawyer to advise on the practicability of appealing the judgement. If these witnesses, statements and reports are as Wrecker asserts (I am sceptical), there is at least a possibility. But the courts do not like going back to settled matters every time one of the parties finds a quibble, and res judicata will be a significant hurdle. But a sensible person would want to have expert legal advice about that.

A petulant and nasty idiot would not bother with any of that. They would just decide that the judgement was unfair so they don't have to comply with it, and make their 'appeal' instead to Facebook's self-appointed vigilante brigade. Call in the thugs, threaten and obstruct the bailiffs & police, denounce the justice system as corrupt, etc. This worked so well for Tom Crawford, after all.

I wonder how long it will be before someone makes a Professional Conduct referral? It seems feasible that Rekha's self-publicised behaviour might be regarded as "conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute".
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/teacher-mis ... profession

[notorial dissent]

I find it not only fascinating not to mention convenient that Rekha just happened to find these "experts" AFTER she lost the latest round in court. The most immediate problem I have is that I seem to remember the historic conservation survey specifically mentioned and documented the so called thack stones/"roof slates" and that she was specifically told they were a historic feature that could not be altered or removed without approval. The second problem I have is that she has been totally untruthful throughout this entire affair so I have a really really hard time believing her now.

[mufc1959]

The two relevant planning applications are here:

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=129339

This is Rekha's application from 2011 for retrospective permission for the work she started without permission.

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=141164

This is the next-door neighbour's application from 2013 for reinstatement of the thackstones, which she later withdrew.

From these you will see that the claims Rekha's now making - that the thackstones never existed - are lies.

[AndyPandy]

The two relevant planning applications are here:

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=129339

This is Rekha's application from 2011 for retrospective permission for the work she started without permission.

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=141164

This is the next-door neighbour's application from 2013 for reinstatement of the thackstones, which she later withdrew.

From these you will see that the claims Rekha's now making - that the thackstones never existed - are lies.

There's even a photo taken in 1989 that shows 5 of the 12 thackstones in situ, stupid woman!!

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... ame=164546

[notorial dissent]

The two relevant planning applications are here:

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=129339

This is Rekha's application from 2011 for retrospective permission for the work she started without permission.

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... KID=141164

This is the next-door neighbour's application from 2013 for reinstatement of the thackstones, which she later withdrew.

From these you will see that the claims Rekha's now making - that the thackstones never existed - are lies.

Kind of her stock in trade I would say.

[He Who Knows]

I agree, Notorial Dissent, it does seem feasible that Rekha's behaviour might be regarded as "conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute". There has definitely been "fraud and serious dishonesty" with her sale of the cottage for £2 to two companies owned by her parents, which were then sold on to Tunkashila Ltd for £100. the parents' companies were mysteriously dissolved on 4 July. Doubt there will have been stamp duty paid. Then there has been contempt of court where she has been in defiance of court orders and an injunction. Added to this the criminal offence of squatting for a whole year. Surely one of these reasons alone would be enough to strike off a teacher?

[Hercule Parrot]

This is Rekha's application from 2011 for retrospective permission for the work she started without permission.

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... ame=122150


http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... ame=122149

This is the next-door neighbour's application from 2013 for reinstatement of the thackstones, which she later withdrew.

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/ ... ame=164542

Oh dear... A lot of evidence explaining the presence of the thackstones, their destruction by Princess Snowflake's first builder, and the crude flashing installed by her second builder to cover that area. Filed, date-stamped and verified through local planning systems. And now she wants to say that none of this happened...?

[mufc1959]

Oh dear... A lot of evidence explaining the presence of the thackstones, their destruction by Princess Snowflake's first builder, and the crude flashing installed by her second builder to cover that area. Filed, date-stamped and verified through local planning systems. And now she wants to say that none of this happened...?

This picture shows the crudeness of the work, and you can actually see where the thackstones have been sawn off.

[Penny Wise]

[rosy]

When you are already in deep shit, do you:
1. double down by trying to relitigate matters already settled in court, increasing the costs you will eventually pay?
2. accuse everyone of treason?
3. rewrite history?
4. All of the above?

Rekha chooses option 4.

I imagine Princess Special Snowflake's employers are fully aware of her activities, but ISTR that she is signed off sick at the moment. She can be sacked while off sick but there will be some procedures to follow. What are the odds that if she is sacked by the LEA, she'll take them to a tribunal for more entertainment?

[TheNewSaint]

Rekha Patel has now started a petition against the next door neighbour and the conservation officer about her "unlawful eviction", plus the solicitors who "conspired to defraud" her extorting £90k "without proof", plus she's been "failed by the courts and police". So the whole world's against her and it's just not fair...https://www.change.org/p/lord-chief-jus ... rters_page

The ellipsis in the above link hides the most interesting part of it:

lord-chief-justice-stop-this-financial-rape

Yep, that's the title she gave the petition. You can see it in other sub-pages, like here.

[Gregg]

All well and good, but the matter before the court has nothing to do with home improvement projects, she settled and even paid that case years ago. The instant matter is her running up frivolous lawsuits and legal costs her neighbor paid to fight the loopy bitch off over the years. Any arguments about thackstones and builders is a total distraction, she owes her neighbor legal costs, and that's all that matters.

[He Who Knows]

The reason Princess Snowflake is bringing 'home improvements' back into the argument is because she is alleging fraud. She says the thackstones were her rooftiles. But any builder knows that rooftiles overlap each other by 50%. You can see from the sawn-off thackstones that these only overlap by a couple of inches. So in her mind, the 'fraudulent' neighbour/conservation officer/police/judges/everyone should be brought to trial before a criminal court and jury instead of mere civil courts.

[TheNewSaint]

In any event, no one is going to give a shit about a change.org petition with 375 signatures, the most popular of which is "bring back the Bradbury pound."