Saturday, 4 March 2017

Train driver out of a train station

Its been quite a difficult winter here at the station. One of the tenants who i inherited with the building, decided that the heating system in his flat belonged to him. First he tried to use the heating system to extend his lease, then when that did not work, he took the insured boiler system with him, when his contract expired. It was a strange situation, the local police who i called when he started to take the boiler system out of the flat, said he could take it. Mostly as i understand when these heating installations are made, the tenant gets a reduction in the rent for the cost of the installation. The train driver had manufactured every document he could, to make it appear that the boiler belonged to him. And the police really wanted to believe him, and refused to acknowledge any of my contracts. Anyway, i still wait for the insurance company to give me a new one and make a decision. It did make it any easier that the police refused to give me an incident report, instead giving me a report saying they are investigating if I am the owner. On request of an incident report, they instructed me to go to the civil court. At the same time that the train driver left his flat, the septic tank lid was smashed and the tops of the bee's hives were removed, so all the bee's died. On top of that because the train driver took his boiler system out of that flat, all the pipes froze on that side of the building, so now many of those have to be replaced. Getting a tenant out of a building is not as simple as you might think in the Czech republic, at least for this foreign person.

Reply from March

So after many months, the Zbiroh police finally made the conclusion that the boiler was owned by the train driver using another companies archive, to that of the company I bought the station from. This works best for the company that sold me the property. the police, the train driver. Yet not the property owner. As i said to the Police, what if i had a very big man that worked for me, he took the boiler from that flat and put it in that room and locked it. What would you do then? This maybe explains a little how it works here.

Dear Zbiroh Police,


Excuse this email not being in Czech.

I would like to get to the bottom of this of this situation with theft of property from Karez 71. Building bought from in 2014.

Please note. You have communicated with the wrong the company with regard to ownership of property I bought. You have communicated with . I bought this property from  Document you have written to me, its attached. I don't think these companies have a transparent relationship with each other's documentation.

I have read the letter that I got from the Plzen office. Its attached.

Please read this link about complaints.

The police are demanding that I respond within 5 days to the issue, and it must be in Czech language. I think it's important that the Czech police are compliant with their own complaints page. For people that complain in English. What is worse is that email is bouncing.

Example. The page should say. If you want to complain about Czech police, you must complain in Czech language, if you don't write your message in Czech you will be sent a letter back that you have 5 days to respond to the message in Czech, or you complaint will be  discarded.

Dear Milan Kocourek & Czech Ombudsman office,

I wanted to ask if the Czech police are fault.

Here is the story.

I bought a building from , all my contracts indicated that the property with all its contents within the building belonged to me. When one of my tenants was moving out, he started to remove the boiler system. I called the police, the police arrived and told the man he could take the boiler, even though he could provide no registered proof of purchase. Example. Bank transaction (it was quite a large amount), sale contract dated by the Check point or contract from the seller of the building, or even a contract detailing the installation of the heating system, giving ownership to the tenant.

I complained to the police about this, and they said they would investigate the issue. I needed something for the insurance company. 

Eventually the police investigated the issue, they were unable to get any documentation from the company that sold me the building and the monuments company also need to give permission to remove fixtures (building is a cultural monument). The police contacted another company that had access to this companies records. 

My thoughts were that as soon as the police looked at this issue, they should have told the tenant that if he wanted the objects, he should take it to the courts, as he had no real proof. Also, I would have thought that another company giving details of property of sold, is not within the law. Especially when both companies are run by the state. I thought that was the reason why these companies were made separate, was to stamp out this kind of thing with contracts.

Is this situation democratic? Given the police response, I want get a payout from the insurance company.

I've attached a copy of the police response.

Post a Comment