Who Put The 13 In 2013?

Since July 2007, my menfolk and I have been battling for justice through the French Courts. It has been a long, very hard struggle, Tom has been dogged by failing health that we know has been compounded by the stresses and hardship associated with living in a tent through some of the harshest winters to hit Europe for at least a generation.

Our young grandson has been educated, to date – by his ‘nanny-teacher’! Thank goodness my own grandmother determined that I would embrace a teaching career, that has proved to be invaluable where grandson’s future is concerned. Good old nan, my maternal grandmother, she must have had a crystal ball!

It hasn’t been all doom and gloom, we have travelled the length and breadth of France. We have paddled with grandson and tiny fishes in the Mediterranean Sea. We have discovered peace and tranquility, sun, sea and pristine clean sand on the Atlantic beach of Saint Georges de Didonne. We have climbed the French/Italian Alps – albeit, without that intention! We have slept in the Pyrenees…er…we didn’t actually get any sleep! We have woken to find our tent ‘door’ barricaded by a two metres high snowdrift! We have sung silly ditties all night to stay awake – and alive! We have watched eagles hunt for food, we have also photographed the mating ritual of a pair of Western Whips! We have seen and learned so much about this beautiful country, my book will tell the whole story.

Most important, we have laughed as much as we have cried, and, despite all efforts by the French judiciary and bureaucrats to empty our cup – it is still half full, voila!  

However, I have digressed – today, we received a letter from the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, telling us that it’s all over, we have no right of appeal. Despite the hardships we have endured, despite the French Appeal Court judiciary ‘recognising the fraud’ committed by our sellers, it appears that we have lost our fight for justice in France. We’ll see.

This is the (reproduced) letter we received from the ECHR today, plus a translation for those who do not have adequate French language skills to translate for themselves. The letter is dated 14^th February 2013. As has been the situation throughout our hobo lifestyle, to date, we are not able to receive our mail as it arrives, we receive it as and when we can collect it, when Tom is well enough to drive, or when our neighbour in the village has a safe address onto which she can send the post she collects for us.

<<Madame, Monsieur,

Je me réfère à votre requete introduite le 8 juin 2010 et enregistrée sous le numéro susmentionné.

Je porte à votre connaissance que la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, siégeant entre le 24 janvier 2013 et le 7 février 2013 en formation de juge unique (………….. assistée d’un rapporteur conformément à l’article 24.2 de la Convention), a décidé de déclarer votre requete irrecevable. Cette décision a été rendue à cette dernière date.

Compte tenu de l’ensemble des éléments en sa possession et dans la mesure ou elle est compétente pour connaitre des allégations formulées, la Cour a estimé que les conditions de recevabilité prévues par les articles 34 et 35 de la Convention n’ont pas été remplies.

Cette décision est définitive. Elle n’est susceptible d’aucun recours que ce soit devant la Grande Chambre ou un autre organe. Le greffe ne sera pas en mesure de vous fournir d’autres précisions sur la décision du juge unique. Dèes lors, vous ne recevrez plus de lettres de la Cour concernant cette requete. Conformément aux directives de la Cour, votre dossier sera détruit dans le délai d’un an à compter de la date de la décision.

La présente communication vous est faite en application de l’article 52 a du règlement de la Cour.

Veuillez agréer, Madame, Monsieur, mes salutations distinguées.

Chef de Division’>>

TRADUCTION/TRANSLATION

<< (Dear Sir and Madam)

I refer to your complaint lodged on 8 June 2010 and registered under the number above.

I bring to your attention that the European Court of Human Rights, sitting between 24 January 2013 and 7 February 2013 a single judge (….name…. assisted by a (Court) reporter in accordance with Article 24.2 of the Convention), has decided to declare your application inadmissible. This decision was made on that date.

Given all the evidence in its possession, and in so far as it is competent to take cognizance of the allegations, the Court found that the conditions of admissibility laid down in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention have not been met.

This decision is final. It is not subject to any appeal whatsoever to the Grand Chamber or another organisation. The Registry will not be able to provide further details on the decision of a single judge. As of then you will no longer receive letters from the Court regarding this request. Accordance with the instructions of the Court, your file will be destroyed within one year from the date of the decision.

This communication is made to you pursuant to section 52 of the Rules of Court.

Yours faithfully. >>

Relevant to the decision:

Article 24.2 –

‘Failure to exhaust domestic remedies.’

Article 34 –

‘……..unexplained delays in supplying materials for correspondence and documents needed for application to Court.’

Article 35 –

‘The (ECHR) Court may only deal with the matter after all domestic remedies have been exhausted.’

Section 52 (now 52A, an amendment) –

‘Rule 52A1 – Procedure before a single judge

1. In accordance with Article 27 of the Convention, a single judge may declare inadmissible or strike out of the Court’s list of cases an application submitted under Article 34, where such a decision can be taken without further examination. The decision shall be final. The applicant shall be informed of the decision by letter.

2. In accordance with Article 26 § 3 of the Convention, a single judge may not examine any application against the Contracting Party in respect of which that judge has been elected.

3. If the single judge does not take a decision of the kind provided for in the first paragraph of the present Rule, that judge shall forward the application to a Committee or to a Chamber for further examination.’

So, what is the bottom line?

Well, contrary to the Court’s ruling that we did not meet the requirements of Article 34, we did submit all relevant documents to the Cour de Cassation Bureau d’Aide to support our claim for French legal aid. Come to that, we also sent copies of the said documents to the ECHR at the same time! The Bureau d’Aide has recently denied receiving any of the documents; the ECHR makes no comment about the copy documents received at the Court in Strasbourg. Strange, that!

Without the legal aid, or cash to pay the two avocats, we could not get our Case heard in the Cour de Cassation!

Therefore, we could not exhaust all domestic remedies!

Of course, the fact that we were not informed by the Bureau d’Aide that our application for legal aid had been rejected, not until we were ‘out of time’, was a major contribution to the ECHR judgement. But, that is no surprise!

We are not able to return to the ECHR using the same grounds, that was the risk we took when we filed there before obtaining a Cour de Cassation Judgement. But, it is possible that we may be able to return, with fresh evidence of breached human rights, if we can obtain that elusive Cour de Cassation ruling.

Of course, the legal bods acting for France at the ECHR would have been well aware of the facts, the laws, the requirements, the loopholes, the risks. It’s possible that rejecting our legal aid application was the only way forward for France!

Sheesh! How dare we consider conspiracy!

However, before we drink our ‘half full cup’ dry, we’re going to investigate the possibility of raising the money to bypass the Bureau d’Aide and have our Case heard in the Cour de Cassation. We don’t know if we can do that, but we will now pull out all the stops to find out the facts! If we can proceed, my dear old nan will have provided us with the means, I inherited a lot of her jewellery when she passed away. She was a game old girl, my nan, she would not have given up, her favourite adage was – ‘where there’s a will, there’s a way’!

Spot on, nan, Bless you, and Bless your crystal ball!

It appears that all members of our family, both sides, in the UK got together and wrote a letter to the ECHR about their concerns for, among other aspects, our health, safety and welfare. Sadly, the letter arrived too late, the ECHR Judgement had been made before the letter arrived.

2013 is not our year, methinks!

 

Chapeaux – Frederic And Family!

During the past 5+ years, my menfolk and I have learned about many other vice caché Cases across France. We have shared the pain, heartbreak, frustration, disbelief, stress and distress felt by others who have lived in limbo, as we have done, as they and we still do live!

Many families have given up, returning to their countries of origin with nothing left to show for their lives in France, with nothing left of what they originally brought to France to start their new lives and live the dream.

Of course, there have also been French families embroiled in vice cache proceedings, we have met several. Likewise, there have been families with mixed nationalities, eg French and British, American and French, British and Dutch, French and Dutch, etc.

Wherever possible, when we meet victims of vice caché, we try to help them. We always extend a genuine hand of friendship, we share our experiences, we offer support and guidance if we have already come through processes and difficulties that they must still face and overcome.

My menfolk and I are hobos! Across France, there are other hobos, people who exist in a similar fashion to us. Some of them still have their homes, but face losing their homes. Others, like us, have properties, but they have already become homeless through no fault of their own. Some are virtually penniless (okay, centless!) and exist on handouts given by caring and concerned family, friends and neighbours. Others, like us, have low, fixed income to sustain them at base level, but they can’t afford to rent on top of property taxes and other costs relevant to the upkeep of the property they own. Whatever, we are all hobos with a common denominator, vice cache, and a common purpose, to persevere until justice has been attained.

A little over one year ago, Paul and I set up a forum. The main aim of the forum was to attract other hobos in order to unite and support, guide, advise and help each other. Naturally, we also hoped other interested people, ie non-hobos, would join the forum, we set it up to include ex-patriots living in France and folks who were planning to move to or holiday in France.

Within a few months, several people had registered as members of the forum to share their vice caché experiences. One of those people was Frederic. Frederic and his young family have been battling with fraud, corruption and the French judiciary for the best part of eight years. Just before Christmas 2012, they were being threatened with eviction from their home. They had lost their Grande l’Instance attempt, lost their Appeal, and had not been given leave to Appeal to the Cour de Cassation. They were also virtually out of money and were unsure about how or where to apply for Legal Aid to get their Case heard in the Cour de Cassation. Avocats had proved to be, at best, inefficient – at worst, corrupt!

Well, the experiences of Frederic and his family have not been so far removed from those of my menfolk and me! So, comparing, sharing, researching and signposting was relatively easy and painless – although, the sword of Damocles was definitely hanging over Frederic and his family.

Today, Frederic posted some wonderful news on the forum, he and his family have been given 100% Legal Aid to cover the costs of having their Case heard in the Cour de Cassation. Here is an excerpt taken from that excellent post –

“We have been given total costs!!!!!!!!!

As you know, there is no automatic right to have your case reviewed by the Cour de Cassation, and an application for legal aide is subject to a preliminary review by a panel of avocat’s specialising in cases that may be placed before the Supreme Court. In other words, you have to show that you have a watertight case before the French government will pay for your specialist avocat.”

I take off my hat to Frederic and his family. They have suffered enormously, and I really do know how much they have truly suffered, I chat with Frederic behind the scenes, but they did not give up their fight for justice. They did not give up hope.

Frederic and family, I know you’re out there – chapeaux, dear friends.

For those of you who would like to know more about Frederic’s fight for justice, and about how we worked together to prevent that dreadful sword falling on him and his family, here’s a link, you are very welcome to access the forum as a Guest –

http://hobosinfrance.proboards.com/thread/2247/cour-de-cassation?scrollTo=24617&page=5  

 

Three Will Become Four Hobos – Again!

Proving habitual residence is notoriously difficult and it is not reliant on living in one country for 6 months or 183 days. There are several factors to be considered when a person needs to prove habitual residence. The factors include country of birth, location of the person’s main home, where the person’s main income originates, where the person pays income tax, which country provides the person with healthcare. This list is not complete, there are other factors, but the points I have listed are important. 

However, an even more important factor is where the person most wants to live, where s/he will feel safe and secure. 

Tom was born in Paddington, London, in the UK. His only income is a combination of UK State Pension and a UK private pension, out of which he pays a small amount of tax to the British Government. Tom is of no fixed abode, his last main home, in which he could live, was in St. Leonards on Sea, East Sussex, in the UK. France, through bureaucratic inefficiency at best, or unacceptably unjust reasons at worst, has prevented Tom from receiving healthcare here that has not been funded by his UK pensions. Tom became so ill and vulnerable that he desperately wanted to go home to his brother in the UK. 

So, the above factors beg the question, which country was responsible for Tom’s healthcare when he returned to the UK on Friday 1^st February 2013? 

I know what my answer was! 

On the Monday after returning to the UK, Tom went to his brother’s doctor to try again to obtain urgent medical care. He was told by the receptionist to go to a hospital ‘drop in’ centre, and that’s what he duly did, taking with him the French documents given to him by the doctors at the Limoges hospital. No joy. The doctor who saw him said, ‘I can’t read French, sorry.” 

On the Tuesday, Tom was running short of steroid medication, steroids taken in high doses can’t be stopped ‘cold turkey’ style. In desperation, he telephoned the DWP in Newcastle and started to clarify his situation to the lass on the other end of the telephone. She asked him a few questions, mainly relevant to his nationality, age and pension status, she then told Tom to go, immediately, to the nearest hospital A&E. He did. That’s where Tom was finally properly assessed and given appropriate treatment, he was in the hospital all day. 

Well, that’s not strictly true, he was given a letter instructing any GP to prescribe the correct medication for his condition, his condition was clarified in the letter. 

On the Wednesday, Tom approached no less than five local GPs for that prescription, he was refused by all five GPs. 

On the Thursday, Tom returned to the hospital A&E Department and advised them about the difficulties he was having, and the fact that he had taken his last dose of steroid medication earlier that morning. A hospital doctor immediately gave Tom the essential prescription and a local chemist filled that prescription. 

Tom has now informed the DWP, Newcastle, that he will be returning to France, he will not be going back to the UK and he has applied for an S1. In the meantime, RSI Aurillac have told me they will definitely add Tom to my carte vitale, RSI Clermont-Ferrand have not adhered to the rules. Voila! 

Three doctors who assessed Tom’s condition in the Limoges hospital advised me that he had a ‘mass’ in his left lung that was affecting the pleural cavity and exacerbating his COPD-related breathing problems. They couldn’t identify the ‘mass’ without further tests, they said it could be anything from an abscess or ulcer to a tumour, and they opted not to advise Tom directly as he was considered, at that time, too ill and vulnerable to be told. But, they concluded, they were treating it as a severe secondary infection, primarily to keep further infection at bay, and those tests were urgently required. 

The tests were carried out in the UK hospital and Tom is receiving intensive treatment for a severe lung infection that, ‘…was possibly caused by exposure to carbon monoxide over a sustained period of time.’ 

Throughout the past year, I have been affected quite badly at times by asthma – I hadn’t had an asthma bout since just after we moved to France early in 2007. 

The lads have had dry coughs, off and on, throughout the past year. We put that down to living back in a house environment following years of living out in the fresh air! 

Carbon monoxide? Very possibly. The lads are much younger and fitter than Tom and me, they don’t sit ‘on top of heat’ as we tend to do – old bones! Of course, Tom was always going to be the most vulnerable due to the COPD. 

We have lived in a couple of houses during the past 5+ years, where there have been open log fires. Carbon monoxide poisoning can be caused by open log fire chimneys that have not been swept as often as they should. That’s a very important fact for consideration by anybody who reads my blog and who has an open log fire – keep yourself and your loved ones safe, have your chimney swept as soon as possible if it hasn’t been swept within the past year.

Tom will be returning to France on Wednesday 20^th February, we will be waiting for him. We have all missed him so very much.

 

Four Become Three Hobos!

Tom’s health had deteriorated rapidly during 2012, following a bout of pneumonia just before Christmas 2011. In the UK, in 2005, he had been diagnosed as having COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease/Disorder) at stage one level. Emphysema and asthma were the demons, and he took early retirement in 2006 at the age of 60 years. He had worked and paid into the UK tax and National Insurance system for a fraction under 45 years, he felt he was entitled to real quality of life during his autumn and winter years. I wholeheartedly agreed with him. 

Prior to taking the first steps to selling our UK property, in order to purchase a permanent retirement home in France, Tom and I investigated the potential short and long term effects of COPD, it made sense to do that. The bottom line prognosis was that Tom could expect between ten and fifteen years of relatively good health, as long as he took particularly good care of his lungs.  

Initially, when we moved to France at the beginning of March 2007, we took out full private health insurance. The cost was shocking – in excess of €3,500 for one year’s insurance that covered the two of us 100% for medical care, including hospitalisation, but with less than 30% cover for dental and ophthalmic care. 

Hey-ho, I shouldn’t have worried about the dental cover, Tom has dentures and French crusty bread have removed a lot of my teeth without anaesthetic! 

When Monsieur Sarkozy’s changes to immigrants’ health care hit British ex-patriots in November 2007, Tom and I were relieved that we had the private insurance. Yes, we were already resident in France before the law changed, but we had also experienced a taste of French bureaucracy by then, we tried to steer clear of arguments and hassle! 

Anyway, moving on, my E121 came into play in May 2010 – nearly eight months late, due to British bureaucratic tardiness, by which time the legal fees had kicked renewal of private healthcare into touch. Off we went to CPAM in Aurillac to get the ball rolling towards obtaining our cartes vitales. A five hours car journey, followed by an hour standing in a slow-moving queue that inched towards the stony-faced lass sitting at a cluttered desk assessing claims, ended with a rejection! 

What? 

“Where is your bank RIB, Madame?” 

“Ah, I only have a British bank account at this time, our French bank account has been frozen by the Bank of France because our illegal hairdresser locataire hasn’t paid her water rates, the local Treasury wants us to pay the bill. We have refused to pay the hairdresser’s bill, and we don’t have the funds to pay the bill.” 

“You must give me a French bank RIB, Madame.” 

“I can’t open another bank account because we don’t receive household bills in our names.” 

Gallic shrug from stony-face. Then……….. 

“Why don’t you have household bills, Madame?” 

“Because we can’t live in the property due to………………” I briefly explained the situation. 

“You don’t live in your property, Madame, but other people do live in your property. You have no home in France, you must return to England. Goodbye.” 

Yes, I’m sure the bureaucrats would love to see us abandon our property, and our quest for justice, to jet off back to the UK with nothing left and, as we have very recently discovered, to find we have been abandoned by our country of birth! 

We vacated the CPAM office and drove for five hours back to where we were pet/house sitting. That evening, I registered on-line and started up an AE (Autoentrepreneur) small business as a ‘femme à tout faire’, ie a Jill of all trades, a handyperson. 

RSI took more than two years to give me a carte vitale in return for paid cotisations. Despite me sending several LRAR (registered) letters to RSI Clermont-Ferrand, Tom was never added to my carte vitale – yet, it was his right to be added to my carte vitale. 

So, we have paid cash for Tom’s healthcare in France throughout the lion’s share of our long period of homelessness, to date. Far from easy, but we managed it, just! 

On Wednesday 16 February 2013, Tom was admitted to the CHU (hospital) in Limoges as an emergency. SAMU and the Pompiers were wonderful, my family and I will be forever grateful to them for their efficiency, kindness and care. Although Tom was actually recovering from yet another bout of pneumonia, a secondary lung problem hadn’t responded to the huge doses of antibiotics and steroids he had been taking during the previous two weeks, his oxygen levels had fallen into danger zone. That secondary lung problem was eventually discovered to be the main lung problem. 

Following swift assessment and intensive treatment by super hospital staff, Tom was able to very briefly speak to me from behind his oxygen mask, he said, “I want to go home, Chrissie.” I knew he was referring to the UK as home. I nodded and replied, “Ok, love, I’ll sort it out when you’re well enough to fly to the UK.” Tom relaxed and slept, despite the constant bubbling of oxygen through the water pipe at the back of his hospital bed, and nurses checking his machine-monitored vital stats every few minutes. 

As long as he can breathe, he can sleep on a washing-line, my Tom! 

On Friday 1^st February 2013, Tom flew back to the UK. As his wheelchair was pushed towards the aircraft by a member of Limoges airport staff, he didn’t look back. I was so pleased, I was blubbing like a baby and that dismal sight would not have helped Tom! His destination was north London, to live with his youngest brother who lost his sweetheart of a wife to cancer last October. The brothers are very close. 

The following morning, Saturday 2^nd February, Tom kept an appointment at the surgery of his brother’s doctor, as he had been advised. He took all the documents given to him by the Limoges hospital doctors; one of those dated documents showed that Tom’s prescribed medication was running very low. 

The doctor’s receptionist told Tom the doctor would not see him.

Why not? That’s for another blog page!

 

Lies, Lies, No End Of Lies

Today, we received the latest kick in the teeth from the French justice system. Our forwarded mail arrived this morning, I was dreading its arrival and I make no secret of that fact! Well, once again, my dread was justified. Among the usual bills, ie property taxes, Social Charge, RSI demands, etc, was a letter from the Cour de Cassation Bureau d’Aide (French Supreme Court Legal Aid Office). The letter was accompanied by an application form for Legal Aid, and a demand for copies of all the documents we had submitted in 2010.

Eh?

Our good friend, Kay, with whom we are currently living until our next pet/house sitting project starts, took one look at my stricken face and held out her hand for the envelope and its devastating contents. I passed it all over without a word and Kay read through it – she speaks, reads and writes French fluently, doesn’t need Google.

Between cups of tea with lashings of (my) anguish, we determined a plan of action. Kay  telephoned the Bureau d’Aide and was advised that the person with whom she needed to speak would be in the office from 3pm, not before. So, Kay telephoned our avocat, Alexandra, who said she would need to recover our vice caché file from her archive, could we please email our request to her for documents we required. That was that.

Next, Kay telephoned the office of our Paris specialist Cour de Cassation avocat. No joy, the clerk couldn’t find our file.

By this time, I was in a real panic and, being in the throes of the second stage of a rotten ‘flu bug, was also feeling far from well. But, by far the most pressing stress was the thought of letting Tom know something had obviously gone drastically wrong. Tom’s health deteriorated rapidly before Christmas, he also has the rotten ‘flu bug on top of COPD, aka emphysema and chronic bronchial asthma. He feels worse than I do.

Several litres of tea later, Kay telephoned the Bureau d’Aide just after 3pm and spoke with the she-god she had been advised was ‘in the know’, or words to that effect. As soon as Kay mentioned our last name (it used to bear the description ‘surname’ before that seemingly became politically incorrect), the she-god’s voice rose alarmingly and she wouldn’t let Kay get a word in edge-ways, never mind an entire sentence.

The she-god told Kay we had made a new application for Legal Aid in October 2012. Lie.

Kay swiftly refuted the lie and the she-god told her we had not submitted any of the requested documents to support our 2010 Legal Aid application. Lie.  

Kay very quickly refuted the second lie and the she-god became louder and more abrupt by the second. The she-god also told Kay we had been sent a letter (by her office) in October 2012 telling us about ‘the decision’. She added that the letter had been sent LRAR (Registered post) to us at our house that’s not a home. 

Kay managed to get a few words in sideways when the she-god took a breath, and she told the she-god that we could not have received an LRAR letter at the house because we can’t live there – a fact that is known by all concerned, including the Cour de Cassation Bureau d’Aide. She then asked what we could do to further our Cour de Cassation Appeal. The she-god replied with an audible Gallic Shrug (they’re quite easily identified when one is well acquainted with them), ‘They’re out of time. What do you want me to do about it?’

Kay asked the she-god to send copy of the LRAR letter to us at her address. The she-god sounded quite panic-stricken when she virtually shouted, ‘No’. She then loudly hung up her phone and disconnected any opportunity for Kay to make further enquiries!

So, battle-weary but still determined, Kay again telephoned our specialist avocat’s office. Oh joy! They had found our Case file! From our file, the clerk determined that our application for Legal Aid had been rejected in July 2010 on grounds that we had not submitted the necessary evidence of income. Lie.

We were never informed, and we have been waiting for a Cour de Cassation Hearing date that was never going to materialise, as things stand.

Where do we go from here? Well, firstly, we need to know what the ECHR makes of these latest antics. In my letter to the ECHR, I have stressed that the documents sent to the Bureau d’Aide in 2010 were all posted LRAR, and I have also reminded the ECHR that they have copies of those same documents.

It would not be logical for us to make a new application for Legal Aid when we already had an application on file and had not received anything to suggest our application had been rejected. The she-god stated that we had made a new application in October 2012. Yet, when Kay asked her to send us a copy of our alleged request, the she-god angrily refused! Of course she can’t send a copy to us, a copy doesn’t exist, an original doesn’t exist!

Our letter to the ECHR will be posted tomorrow morning – LRAR, of course! In the meantime, Kay has emailed the specialist avocat to ask why he did not inform us in July 2010 when our Legal Aid application was allegedly rejected. She has also asked him why he had not challenged that decision as he was fully aware that we had submitted the necessary proof of income documents to the Bureau d’Aide – he (or, at least, his office) received copies of said documents.

Rather strange, don’t you think, that nobody contacted us about our so-called out of time Legal Aid application between 2010 and 2012, but the Legal Aid Office were happy to allow us to submit a new application in October 2012?

A very happy New Year to all who read my blog, I wish you good health and much happiness throughout 2013. Thank you very much for your continued support. 

 

Taking Responsibility

Taking responsibility is not usually difficult, although it is sometimes time-consuming, and I would think we have all thought at some time or other, ‘I wish I didn’t have to spend my life thinking of things I must do, rather than things I would like to do!’ Ensuring our grandson receives an education that fits his needs is our responsibility, ie the responsibility of the adults in our small family unit. Because our lifestyle does not allow for formal education, that responsibility falls on my shoulders, fairly and squarely. It’s no hardship, he is a gem who soaks up learning like a sponge, and I never really envisaged retiring from teaching, anyway!

So, on Monday 1^st October, Tom and I travelled to Aurillac to do what we had to do to ensure grandson’s ‘home education’ could legally continue for yet another year. During our journey through and along the perimeters of the wonderful, lush green craters of long since exploded, and still sleeping, volcanoes, we talked about our next steps to find out if we could continue to seek justice to atone for the vice caché. It seems to us that our (third) avocat and our specialist Cour de Cassation avocat are not interested in making sure we know what’s happening with our Case. In fact, as I commented to Tom, I believe we could all pop our clogs and nobody within the judicial system would be any the wiser or interested!

We decided to call on the legal expertise of an old friend in Aurillac, a French barrister, Maitre C. We were out of luck on the Monday, but Maitre C’s lovely wife asked us to return during the Tuesday afternoon, and we did.

Now, that was a revelation!

It appears that our Case will continue because Napoleon made provision for the disappearance of spouses when the law has not fully run its course. Simply, Madame T must complete the proceedings on her own. If Madame T does not survive the long drawn-out processes, her offspring must take up the slack, followed by her grandchildren if necessary! Does the same apply for the other foot’s boot, ie if Tom and I don’t live long enough to witness the final resolution? Yes.

So, there you go, it really doesn’t do to get on the wrong side of Napoleon’s laws, whether you are perpetrator or victim!

Although Tom was visibly tired, driving takes its toll these days, he wanted us to go for a drink in our village bar-tabac, to celebrate my 63^rd birthday. The Bar-Tabac-Presse is only two doors down from our house – moving in the direction that’s away from the Church, of course! As we parked outside the house, a couple of our friends were heading toward the bar-tabac and they joined us. We joined a larger group inside the bar-tabac and updated everybody about the day’s events. One of them reported to us what he had been told by one of our sellers’ sons, ie that if Madame T had passed away, rather than her husband, the family would have offered to settle out of Court. But, as things stand, the matriarch calls the shots!

Can we move back into our house that’s not a home?

No. The hairdresser left too much damage in her rush to remove fixtures and fittings, none of which can be repaired because Napoleon decreed that ‘….it would not be in the public’s best interests for repairs to be carried out on a property at the centre of dispute…’! Some of us take responsibility, some of us don’t.

Were we surprised? What do you think?

 

Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow – D’oh!

Tom and I arrived at the house just before 6.30pm on Saturday 29th September. We had both enjoyed returning to the sheer beauty of the Puy de Dome on our left and the long ridge of Puy Mary to our right. We really do miss the mountains of the Auvergne when we’re traipsing around France!

Mademoiselle S, the hairdresser, was still in the shop section of our house that’s not a home. The small square window-panes were steamed up and we couldn’t see the shop interior. It was all a bit Dickensian! Tom and I looked at each other and we could almost read each other’s thoughts. Ah well, it was always going to be too good to be true!

Tom pushed open the front door to the house. That was easy – the entire locking device had been broken, no key-turning necessary, just a gentle push and the door swings inward every time. That was a brand new, double-glazed, front door, to match the brand new double-glazed windows, fitted in November 2007 and funded by us. The hand-crafted door and windows had been ordered by us the week before we completed the property purchase. What could go wrong at that stage? Plenty, as it happens! Eventually, we had discovered that we couldn’t cancel the order because we had signed the devis. Oh la la, one must not renege on a signed devis!

We plonked our rucksacks in the first floor apartment lounge and headed for a welcome cuppa made by our friend and neighbour, Madame Z, she lives three doors away. Sipping steaming mugs of English tea, we listened as Madame Z told us the male half of our sellers, Monsieur T, had passed away. Tom and I were genuinely saddened by the news, but we were not at all surprised. We have never considered Monsieur T to have been responsible for the fraud. He was clearly suffering with dementia when we all met in the notaire’s office for the final signing. At one point, I stopped the notaire reading the documents to us and asked Monsieur F, the Immobilier, if the proceedings were legal. He translated my concerns to the notaire and she responded so quickly that I couldn’t understand what she had said. Monsieur F turned to Tom and me and told us it was perfectly legal, he added, “In France, this is normal.”

Well, the news saddened us, but the possible implications worried us! We wondered if that might be the end of our quest for justice. We also wondered why neither Courts nor avocats had informed us. After three days in the village, no fewer than seven people from seven different families had told us Monsieur T had passed away just under one month ago. Surely, the avocats will have been informed?

An hour later we headed back to the house. The shop windows had cleared of condensation and we could see the shop was empty – apart from a large heap of hair cuttings and dust in a single pile in one corner. We tried to open the door, it was locked. So, we went inside the main door to the house and we were able to open the internal door to the shop.

I’ll try to explain the layout of the house, it’s a little like a maze! The ground floor comprises two large town-house style garages, side by side but divided by a wall. To the left of the garages is the main house entrance into a long hall that stretches through the building, right to the back door. On the left side of the hall are two good-sized rooms, ie the hairdresser’s shop, accessed by an internal door to the front room of the shop. At the far end of the hall, on the right, is the door to the steps that lead down to three cellars. Outside the back door there’s a large yard that houses several outbuildings. Originally, we planned for those outbuildings – most of them are derelict – to be demolished to make way for our ‘green space’, a garden. One of the outbuildings contains a wc, a hand-basin, a shower unit, and space for a washing-machine and tumble-drier. Electricity and running water are supplied to that outbuilding. We had planned to keep that section and use it as a utility room.

On the first floor of the house, there’s a large apartment with two double bedrooms, kitchen, lounge and bathroom. The second floor contains a second large apartment with one double bedroom, kitchen, lounge and bathroom; Monsieur C’s apartment is also on the second floor, a bed-sitting room, kitchen and bathroom.

A loft extension would have given us another apartment with three double bedrooms, lounge, kitchen and bathroom. Although, the open plan aspect would have brought all the apartments together to create one family home.

Lots of space for our big family! Also a major point for the Courts to consider, ie the architect’s main renovation Plans are dated April 2007, before any purchase documents were signed. Copies were given to the Immobilier, to our sellers, and to the notaire. Everybody was made aware of our plans – those plans did not include two locataires, those plans were created with the letter of the law firmly understood, the house was for sole use and enjoyment by Tom and me, and our family, and that was written in the pre-purchase/sale Contract.

Back to the hairdresser! She had gone! However, she returned on Sunday morning, accompanied by her cleaner, and we retrieved one set of the keys to the building. But, her cleaner did not return the spare set of keys that we know she has in her possession, the keys that she doesn’t know that we know she has in her possession!

Tom changed the locks during Sunday afternoon! Yes, we’re paranoid!

 

Moving Back To The Cantal!

Since our house Case started, family and I have often wondered if our biggest error was made when we didn’t carry on down-country to settle in the Midi-Pyrenees. The Midi-Pyrenees was where we were heading to in 2007, but the mountains of the Auvergne were Sirens that persuaded us to end our house search there! However, in recent weeks, we have reached the conclusion that the Auvergne was, and remains, right for us, individually and as a family unit.

We miss the Sirens! Tom and I miss the relatively good health we enjoyed in the Cantal, and we all miss the space, soaring Golden Eagles, green lizards with blue heads, rural peace, crisp ‘dry’ snow that melts without leaving filthy slush for days on end, dry heat with relatively low humidity, spectacular storms that follow the meandering rivers and crackle and drum-roll below the top of the high plateau where our house is located. We miss the excitement of discovering exotic orchids that long ago disappeared from the British countryside – not just one or two orchids, but fields filled with orchids! We also miss the kindness of the villagers who made us feel welcome, valued and valuable. Only a handful of folks are responsible for our plight.  

The house we purchased was our primary home, not a holiday home, and we were the first British family to buy a primary residence in the village. We burned our bridges before leaving the UK, sold our house and most chattels, bought one-way tickets and moved to France – lock, stock and barrel!

Of course, those who have read my blog from day one will already know our house that’s not a home is the only property in the world that we own. But, other folks, who have cherry-picked – for whatever reason – when reading my blog, don’t know about that fact. In recent weeks, a couple of people have asked me why family and I didn’t just up sticks and return to the UK when we had to move out of the house in Champagnac. There are reasons, very valid reasons, as previously mentioned in my blog, but there are two extremely important reasons. The first is that we can’t obtain legal aid in France if we live in the UK, and we can’t obtain legal aid in the UK to fund this last step of our house Case in France. Secondly, we moved to live permanently in France for several reasons, those reasons still apply today, just as they did when we initially decided to move to France. Voila!

So, we will be returning to the Cantal. The hairdresser, Mademoiselle S, is due to vacate our property on Sunday 30 September, as confirmed in her formal Notice to us that was delivered by l’Huissier (baliff). Recently, the hairdresser sent a brief letter to us requesting permission to delay her exit from our property until March 2013. She told us (in her letter) her new business premises won’t be ready for occupation until then. She also asked us to ‘take pity on’ her business. Needless to say, we have responded to the letter with an emphatic “non”!

Copies of all relevant documents have been sent to the Cour de Cassation and the ECHR. Of course!

However – and, yes, this is the ‘but’ that tends to accompany most (all?) of our plans in France! Says she, rolling eyes! If Mademoiselle S decides to remain in our property until March 2013, leaving us out in the cold for another winter, our fifth winter as hobos in France, we won’t be able to do anything about it. Why not? I will elucidate next time!

 

Happy Birthday Tom

We’re waiting to receive a letter that was sent by one of the Courts to our house that’s not our home. The letter has been forwarded to us, at our current location, but La Poste doesn’t hurry where forwarded mail is concerned. So, this is one of those times when patience is of the essence.

Today, rather than updating by posting much of a sameness, I’m dedicating this post to my wonderful husband.

Tom turned 66 years old today, it is his sixth birthday in France, his fifth birthday as a hobo in France. Since 2007, Tom hasn’t celebrated two birthdays in the same house. In fact, he hasn’t celebrated two birthdays in the same French Department! Two of Tom’s last five birthdays were celebrated in our tent, one of his birthdays was spent in our ‘old girl’, the car, just driving!

Thank you, Tom, for always getting us from A to B during our travels, no matter how far we need to go. You have always enjoyed driving and, by golly, that is just as well!

Thank you for your persistence and courage, we have never once heard you say you couldn’t go on, even if you have thought those words and remained silent. There have been far too many times when we thought we might lose you. You have suffered dreadfully through the pain of gangrene, amputations, and severe chest infections associated with emphysema. But, you never complain.

Thank you for your love, care, and your stalwart support when I or one of the lads has been below par. Despite your vulnerability and your breathing difficulties, you have never complained about the long driving hours, or about searching for firewood with your foot swathed in gauze and bandage, or battling the sometimes bone-chilling winter cold, the miserable damp, the biting insects that love our tent and our blood!

Thank you for your humour, dry, sometimes not quite fitting the topic, often a one-off comment that throws us into howls of laughter and huge rolling tears of mirth! How do you always manage to do that when we’re at our lowest ebb?

Thank you for never comparing how comfortable we were in our house in the UK with how uncomfortable and unsettled we are in France. Comfort, of course, is not just about materialism and physical well-being, it’s also about peace of mind

Thank you for loving this beautiful country as much as we do, and for surviving our sometimes cruel lifestyle. Next year, Tom, we hope your birthday will be spent in our own home, your castle.

Many happy returns, sweetheart, you are a husband, father and grandfather in billions. We love, cherish and appreciate you more than words could ever say.

Now, we promised you a birthday treat, a decent square meal. We have the oxos in their square silver foil coats, 2 litres of bottled water, the hobo stove and a new bottle of camping gas. There’s an Aire de repos just 10kms down the road – let’s go! 😉

 

Monsieur C Is A Very Happy Bunny!

So, the hairdresser will be moving out on 30 September 2012, but what about Monsieur C? No! He will not be moving out any time soon! In fact, he’ll possibly only need to move out in a box! Then, we would have more problems as one of his children could step into his tenancy shoes. French law is marvellous, it is very protective, but not if you’re an existing victim of fraud!

As a starter, it appears that his tenancy has the highest level of legal protection in France, I will explain, and he is further opposing eviction on grounds that he is a resident in the property, his tenancy is not commercial.

To clarify Monsieur C’s tenancy protection. It was revealed during our recent visit to Champagnac that Monsieur C was ‘placed’ in the property by the Social Services. We have no more details as that would ‘breach his human rights’, but the fact was confirmed by the former village Mayor, Monsieur G. It appears that our sellers were not given opportunity to refuse Monsieur C a tenancy agreement, the Social Services rule the roost in such cases.

No wonder our sellers felt the need to resort to fraud to sell the property, Monsieur C had apparently informed them that he would not move out to permit them to sell the house without a sitting tenant comfortably in situ.

Where can we go from here, regarding Monsieur C? The short answer is ‘nowhere’! The Cadastre can’t evict him, it was made clear to us that the Church will not object to Monsieur C remaining a sitting tenant in our house that truly cannot ever be our home.

In addition to the above shock, we also received a letter from the local Trésor Public to say they will no longer be able or willing to receive the rents directly from Monsieur C and the hairdresser. We must receive the rental payments directly, and pay our building taxes directly. If we refuse to accept the rental payments (as advised by our first avocat), we are “…breaking the law, Madame, and you can both go to prison.’

Do French prisons have central heating? If so, that just might be an option!

Just before we left the house, Tom and I heard Monsieur C walking down the stairs. Then, less than 30 seconds later, he walked back up the stairs to his apartment and quietly closed his door. He was obviously aware that we were in the building, Tom has great difficulty getting up the stairs to the first floor, he doesn’t climb stairs quietly as his breathing difficulties render him sounding like a traction engine, Bless.

As we left the property, we noticed an envelope in ‘our’ mailbox. Inside the envelope, addressed to us, we found a cheque made out to us and the following note (exact words):

“Bonjour! Cheque pour le loyer d’avril 2012 plus 0,38€, ci joint pour solde de 2011. Bien le bonjour à tous.”

For those without French language knowledge, here’s the translation:

“Hello! Cheque for the April 2012 rent plus 38 cents to balance the 2011 rent payments. Good day to you all.”

Monsieur C is, indeed, a very happy bunny.

That’s not all, it appears that the hairdresser needed to move home a few weeks ago; she is now a tenant in the same Public Housing apartment that the former Mayor was going to offer to us, before he was ousted by the current Mayor. I suppose looking after one’s own is normal, in any country.