The Facts, as they present themselves #1

“There is no asbestos in the building.”

Now…

I’m not a fancy, big-city lawyer…

I’ve got little grasp of the law.

But I have been unable to find any part where negligence can be used as a defence.

The problems with the building the apartment I own? I was negligent, so it’s not my fault, so this has nothing to do with me. I don’t go to the building meetings. I don’t even open the post from the building board. I know nothing.

I have never heard of that as a viable legal excuse.

It’s a bit like

I was drunk and half asleep when I was behind the wheel of the…

I’ve spent a lot of time looking for something, anything that would allow wilful negligence as an excuse.

I keep stumbling across

Ignorantia juris non excusat

which is the Latin for “ignorance of law excuses no one”. It is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because one was unaware of its content.

I mean, from what I hear, Peltonen, Ruokonen & Itäinen Attorneys at Law Ltd whilst they existed, were one of the most important and famous law firms in Finland in the last forty years.

I keep checking through various defence structures fo negligence, but I can’t seem to find one that says

Example:

Just shrug and claim no knowledge of the matter and say it has nothing to do with you because you did not manage your own property and deliberately ignored anything to do with it.

Besides that, you’d think, after near thirty years as an attorney, time as an auxiliary judge and a wife who is the ex-head of the bar association. That…just perhaps, wait now, remember, I’m not a fancy, big-city lawyer or anything of the sort. I mean…I can barely spell my own name.

But…

You’d think an attorney with that level of business and taxation experience, that Ignorantia juris non excusat would apply double or so to an attorney of such storied experience.

But that’s just a hunch…

I have to remember I am in a country where the law states the prosecutor may ignore breaches of law by advocates if its negligible or small. At the same time as never giving clear definition of what exactly counts as negligible or small with any definite clarity…at least, that is how it reads…to those of little law…

The facts are simple.

If Pekka Ruokonen, an auxiliary judge and ex-attorney with over thirty years experience is allowed his claim that negligence is a legal excuse for his breaking the law, where the law states a landlord is legally bound to inform a tenant of coming changes to the dwelling. Then the building is in breach of the law for failing to notify Pekka Ruokonen.

For starters…

The last asbestos test was ordered and never completed. According to the city and that was many years ago. Of course, IF they just decided to do the tests, then this is them doing them whilst people are living in the building and they are doing them as they tear the asbestos out. No one would do that, would they?

“Just leave”

This matter would be lovely if it were that easy…

Because if Pekka and co are not fighting my exit with my deposit tooth and nail.

Then when I try again to leave, Pekka Ruokonen will sue me. He will do this after refusing to furnish rent receipts to settle rent matters. In return, as per consumer law when goods are defective and receipts are refused, rent is halted with clear explanation as to why and the various laws in question. Pekka Ruokonen having stated he is refusing to cooperate with my being able to settle up rent and leave as punishment for my speaking up and back to him, will then sue for eviction and damages. That’s right, when I do try to leave peacefully, if he’s not blocking deposit discussion or refusing to settle up rent clearly, I am to be punished for complaining about Pekka Ruokonen’s fraud. What a lovely member of the judiciary we have here.

Rent receipts? What the jiggins do they mean? You might be thinking. There’s a couple of reasons for this. As Pekka had been previously asked what if any arrears there were and had given two differing answers and had failed to account for an overpayment elsewhere, this was felt necessary. It was also necessary as representatives of Vuokraturva had previously told me they do not look at my applications because I am “foreign” and as a previous landlady had said if the government ever asked if I had paid anything, she would tell them I had never paid. Rent receipts from the landlord had become rather essential.

I mean it sounds like a form of economic imprisonment…but you know…I’m not a fancy, big-city lawyer…

So…

The facts, as they present themselves…

1. I did not know the pipe renovations were coming. I did not know the flamenco school was coming. I never go to building meetings, I never open post from the building.

This is Pekka Ruokonen’s main defence, his negligence.

Here is audio of one of the owners, stating in Finnish, that the upcoming plumbing renovation was discussed back in the shareholders assembly in 2013. The same meeting where they decided to accept flamenco school as a tenant and decided that building would take care of some renovations for them. See below the clip for direct translation.

“And then there is this one thing I remember from that meeting, there must be a note or record of this in the meeting minutes, but one of you, younger folks asked of the upcoming plumbing renovation and these renovations (flamenco school) whether they could pay their own share of the renovations in one bunch? And the meeting chair said bluntly no and banged the table with the meeting gavel.”

2. Illegal construction

Sadly, this matter is ridiculous and a brief (ha) overview of the facts will show how ridiculous and toxic and bigoted it is.

2. ) The construction was and is illegal. This has been stated and proven. Even when threatened with the police, the XYZ building board did not follow the instructions as given to them by the city. See Fig1

Fig1.

Here the city states “illegal use of the space have caused daily constant noise disturbance to habitats in the building for over two years according to the information we have”

Fig2.

that whether the flamenco doesn’t stop completely after 10.06.2016 the department will issue a 5000e fine, and probably also report the matter to police

These comments from the city come long after the fact. Long after they were pleaded with to intervene. At the very end of the strange journey of the illegal flamenco school.

3. The confounding mystery of the asbestos

3.) No asbestos safety tests have been done. We have contacted the city, they say the last one ordered was years ago and that there is no record it was completed. We phoned the companies involved, they denied asbestos then angrily refused any asbestos tests.

It would seem if there was no asbestos, the simple matter to put public minds at rest would be to provide the tests.

Around the same time, work in the building kicked into over drive and they now work weekends. This has probably got nothing to do with anything though, right?

3B.) As a sidenote:

The illegal Flamenco School, you remember right? The one they could not decide who built, one moment it was, as Pekka Ruokonen liked to refer to him, the shady or crook Timo Hagner, next minute it was the school, no one knew who was responsible for the sound proofing. As there has been no asbestos tests, all that work and drilling the basement probably did not expose any of them to asbestos and no one should inform them. Especially as asbestos has not been known to cause ovarian cancer.

After Laura Rintamäki of the illegal Flamenco School decided to make a series of false accusations of very real crimes against us. Including but not limited to swapping roles in an encounter we had with her. The pressing desire to warn the members the members of the illegal Flamenco School, waned quite considerably.

No safety inspections and the mystery of the safety of things that do not exist.

4.) No safety inspections. Fire or otherwise. A requested proper safety inspection request will get this.

The technical property manager was sick, so they had a walk around anyway. The vent he’s talking about, did not exist, it was also a continued deliberate misunderstanding on Mikko Koskensyrjä’s part, as he was shown photos of the vent outside, the vent in question. Pretending not to understand is a key element in Koskensyrjä’s arsenal of ignoring people’s concerns about safety. This, I imagine, is risk assessment.

Mikko Koskensyrjä will stress his expertise in being able to decide city regulation health and safety. He is an insurance broker.

4B.) One of Mikko Koskensyrjä and Pekka Ruokonen’s classical tricks is to keep telling the tenants that don’t worry the matter will be fixed when the plumbing happens. This is an asshole move that means nothing, they delay any safety or upkeep for a time when the tenant will not be there. It is smug and bigoted negligence.

It is a cosmic joke; safety concerns? Oh we’ll deal with that in a year or so whenever we’re renovating. If you strain, you can almost hear Perkele laughing.

4C.) Mikko Koskensyrjä, who is not my landlord, but rather a man who injected himself into this process. A process that should have just been between my landlord and I, tells me to close my windows. You see, as a foreign national in Finland, I apparently, have no rights, this is a man telling me I am not allowed have my windows open. He has no legal basis in this, he has no legal right to.

4D.) The important here, is that they just had a walk around. No measuring equipment and some of the things they say are safe, they never saw and other things like the vent in my apartment, do not exist.

Here is Mikko Koskensyrjä doggedly continuing about the vent that does not exist. Here is Mikko Koskensyrjä stating the old building manager made off with the building’s emails. Here is Mikko Koskensyrjä calling another adult cheeky in response to safety concerns. The survey he mentions was a couple of people who had a walk around the building. A simple walk around being the most accurate and scientific method to test and measure for safety known to man and dolphin.

4E.) When Mikko Koskensyrjä reads this and his own email fragments, and a summary of the facts, Mikko Koskensyrjä will likely feel that publishing his correspondence and stating the facts is defamation. Whilst, ordinarily I would think defamation had to be false accusations, it would appear for Mikko Koskensyrjä it can simply mean, stating what he has said and done with emails to back it up. But more on that, and risk assessment, later. (to the Finnish Poliisi reading this, hey guys, sorry…I know we thought there wouldn’t be any more reading…but you know how it goes when you don’t do your job…don’t worry though, I have carefully annotated this so you have easy points of reference to make your paperwork easier 4A 3B etc. I hope that helps. Anyway, if we don’t talk before the holidays, I hope you and your families have a wonderful Christmas.)

It is however, worth noting that there is audio of Mikko Koskensyrjä stating that it is enough of a safe and scientific test as to whether a vent is disruptive to stand beside it and see if it makes noise or is unsafe. That’s science folks, that’s risk assessment.

The Tenants Rights Lawyer, Leena Partanen

5A.) We go to the tenants rights lawyer, after all, Pekka Ruokonen says everyone else is to blame and he is just an old man and the crook Hagner and the crooked negligent building board are too blame.

5B.) We are told basically to grovel to Pekka Ruokonen in an effort to get my deposit and the by law tenants rights % of rent back for apartment not as advertised and agreed. When we do this, Pekka Ruokonen immediately changes tact.

5C.) Pekka Ruokonen will come to us saying we said things to Leena Partanen that we did not. We can only assume Leena Partanen put words in our mouth. We can assure everybody this has nothing to do with the fact Leena Partanen, also an auxiliary judge, had a undisclosed conflict of interest with Pekka Ruokonen and was and is in fact his Facebook friend. Partanen, ever the consumate professional will not reveal this until much later. Maybe a year or so or more later.

I’m pretty sure that’s okay, nobody needs to declare their friendship with someone they’re pretending to decide and advise against, right?

Sound diaries

6.) So we have a matter where an illegal construction is causing immense suffering to a number of tenants. Rather than the sensible and obvious and humane thing being to investigate thoroughly on matters of health and safety.

The actual response was to go to war with the people making the complaint.

Here’s a snippet from the website of the business that employs Mikko Koskensyrjä.

The text roughly translates that Mikko Koskensyrjä leisure purpose is to promote comfort and security in housing-based housing. This is freely available on the Internet, if you are thinking of complaining about its use, then you should not put things on the internet.

In the kaleidoscope cornucopia of tactics Mikko Koskensyrjä will employ to try and make the matter go away or to stall it until the pipe renovation. There is the matter of the sound diaries.

As it happens, I have sound diaries that are actually to the minute and the day. However, Mikko Koskensyrjä will pretend he cannot read these and keep asking for them again and again. It is a good tactic, it is some solid gaslighting from a group of people well versed in the tactic.

Sound tests #1

7) Upon the request for deposit and % of rent back so that I, the tenant, Pekka Ruokonen let to fraudulently. Pekka Ruokonen will drop the put-upon-old-man act and say he disputes the matter and wishes for there to be sound tests, as he is disputing that there is disturbance.

7B.) The first set of sound tests will be called off by the engineer who will say something about his professional reputation. This is because Timo Hagner is caught going downstairs to tell the dancehall to dance a bit louder when they are being a little too quiet to be real.

All other requests for deposit, observance of tenants rights laws per % return (10–15% basic before dispute or detail) will be based on the provision of sound tests.

7C.) When we try and organise private sound tests, Jouko Räisänen, Saara Suojanen, Mikko Koskensyras and the rest of the building board will refuse them.

Refusal is the first tactic.

Other times they will just ignore all calls from the sound test companies.

It’s worth noting that basic sound tests cost close to €2,000.

After a while, mysteriously, sound test companies in Helsinki will stop returning our calls.

Soundtests #2

8.) Mysteriously, whenever we try and organise sound tests with the city or otherwise, somehow, as if, magically, they were informed, the school will not have session that day.

I have to give a wonderful big up to the dancer who stood before the closed door of the school, about forty minutes before a scheduled sound test loudly exclaiming in to her phone that she did not know classes had been cancelled that day.

8B.) Helsinki City health inspector Anne Hernesmaa will first refuse our chosen date saying as it’s the October holiday no one will be about. The school is insanely busy that weekend.

8C.) Helsinki City health inspector Anne Hernesmaa will state she is unable to read or work the illegal Flamenco School’s website.

8D.) Mysteriously, shortly afterwards, the school will put their calendar behind a password for users. I am sure this has nothing to do with anything.

8E.) On any dates organised for Helsinki City health inspector Anne Hernesmaa to attend, the school will not be in session during the time she is supposed to be there.

8F.) Helsinki City health inspector Anne Hernesmaa will state the city does not measure low frequency or vibration and suggest we go to a private testing company.

8G.) We’ll also be told that apparently, our requests for matters regarding health and safety in the apartment we rent does not fall under their jurisdiction because…

The only thing we could glean from this and its further explanations was that the apartment Pekka Ruokonen rented to exists outside of time and space. This supposes our first hypothesis that it is infact a prison located somewhere in the negative zone.

8H.) Mysteriously, someone, not us, will phone the Helsinki City Health department and cancel our whole complaint. We will never discover what kind and wonderful person did this. If you’re out there mysterious caller, good job, you’re a good person and you deserve nice things to happen to you.

Sound Tests #3

9) Eventually, a sound test will happen. There will be much haggling over the days and an owner-engineer who worked in ships and vibrations (though this will never be revealed) will “attempt” to get the day hidden from the board.

9B.) On the day the acoustic engineer is to arrive for the test, he will mysteriously have not been given anyone’s phone number and will apparently be locked outside the building. After a time waiting with no answer from anyone, the acoustic engineer or as I like to call him, The Sound Test Man, will leave and go home, foiled as he was, in his attempt to measure the illegal flamenco hall.

9C.) On the day eventually he does come (late) to test, there will be little to no dancing. Which is a complete mystery and no one can ever explain this, even with the top minds at CERN.

I’m going to break this up into digestible chunks, or else it will become a giant sprawl vomit of information.

But you know, just for comedy value…

As the police and prosecutor state they’re going not going enforce the Finnish property laws that mean, by law, a building must inform a landlord of coming construction and that by law the landlord is then required to inform the tenant ( To the Poliisi and Prosecutor: not if they’re foreign, eh guys? amirite guys eh? ;) there’s one for your Facebook group :D …or are we not allowed to talk about that yet?)

And as Pekka Ruokonen has stood by the requirement of having sound tests to prove there is disturbance from the illegal flamenco school, but laughed as requests for sound tests were blocked. That is until the “mysteriously quiet” test that proved nothing that Pekka Ruokonen and the building are holding to. Because the continued to refuse sound tests and then quickly ripped out the school so none could ever be taken again.

And as Pekka Ruokonen is hinging a good deal of his legal defence on there being no disturbance.

Here’s audio of Pekka Ruokonen stating there is disturbance and it is without dispute. Even as he was then and currently is arguing that it is disputed and that he is stating it is disputed in the court case he has filed. Yenno, in between saying he had no knowledge of anything because he doesn’t open his post from the building he owns an apartment in.

Except it’s not as directly complimentary as that…

Direct translation:

Building board rep: The building is losing money as we speak if we don’t have tenant there…

Pekka: Well, just a notion here, in my opinion it is rather obvious that there is a noise disturbance… here we have three people, who aren’t any boozers or narc seemingly (haha laughing)…

Building board rep: We have no doubts about it either..

Pekka continues: so these people have have heard these noises and been disturbed by it and these statements and stories of it are very credible. They haven’t been made up. So isn’t there a some way we could try to settle this thing because going to court about this will take years and may not solve anything. And there is also the risk that the case won’t end favourably to anyone.

Building board rep: You talk about going to court with Hagner?

Pekka: I mean with anyone, I’ve been a lawyer for 30 years and I know that in most cases the lawyer is the only one who profits.

Coming soon: The Facts #2

• *****************************************************

You can support the struggle through this dangerous and unhealthy shit and the maybe asbestos poisoning and the bullshit, if you like, by buying Mooseville99 a ko fi or three or more ;)

Thank you for reading.

Buy Mooseville a Coffee. ko-fi.com/mooseville