camden-news-clearance

Publications by New Journal Enterprises

Home

Archive

Competition

Camden New Journal - By PAUL KEILTHY
Published: 27 December 2007

£1,400 for flat clearance neighbour

Man’s furniture taken away when dying pensioner’s home was cleared out

THE neighbour of a dying 92-year-old woman whose flat clearance by council staff caused a scandal has won compensation from the housing office for antiques that were removed alongside hers.
Parliament Hill resident Hillary Katz was awarded £1,400 in damages in a small claims court on Thursday for the furniture taken away by housing office workers from the Lissenden Gardens flat of Dorothy Robinson in January this year.
A nine-week New Journal investigation into the clearance of Mrs Robinson’s flat 10 days before her death prompted a drastic review of the council’s procedures for dealing with the possessions of the elderly and vulnerable.
Two members of council staff currently face charges of misconduct.
Although all the items in the flat were said to have been “disposed of in a skip”, Mr Katz, who had stored some of his furniture in the flat while Mrs Robinson was ill, found an antique commode from the flat on sale in a nearby shop 10 days after the clearance, he told the court.
Mr Katz gave evidence that clearance workers had told him that valuable items from house clearances were “a perk of the job”, and that although he had tried to stop the clearance on the first of its three days, only two of his belongngs were returned to him.
Camden lawyers denied that his furniture was in the flat or that it had been cleared improperly, and claimed the law gave them the right to everything in the flat anyway after they won powers to deal with Mrs Robinson’s estate.
At the Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court, the judge ruled that Kentish Town District Housing Office had been informed by Mr Katz that his furniture was in the flat and had not taken the opportunity to store it while they established its ownership. He found that the furniture was Mr Katz’s, and awarded him £1,372 damages and £230 costs, although he added that Mr Katz had been the “author of his own misfortune” in storing the goods without permission.
He said that allegations of dishonesty by both sides were an “irrelevance” and that he had heard no evidence that would lead to a finding of dishonest conduct.

Comment on this article.
(You must supply your full name and email address for your comment to be published)

Name:

Email:

Comment: